For the past two decades, there has been persistent debate around whether there is a difference between the fields of instructional design (ID) and learning design (LD). While differences in the two approaches are certainly apparent, there are cross-over points that can provide ID and LD researchers and practitioners with opportunities for dialogue about the purposes and remit of research-based practices for optimal design. Though potentially disruptive, initiating dialogues among learning and instructional designers could lead to more thorough and critical analyses of both ID and LD repertoires. Should boundary crossings occur, there is a potential for a "third space" for the contemplation, research, and practice of design. A goal of this article is to use the notion of Van Gogh's Yellow House as an anchoring metaphor for the third space -- a location for shared discourse, inspiration, collaboration, and challenge for a community of designers of/for learning. Using the impressionist and expressionist terminology to help elucidate the ways of thinking of designers of both traditions, this article examines the history, underlying philosophical approaches, methodologies, and design goals of ID and LD. We conclude that the emergence of a third space for design can help us move beyond the LD and ID dichotomies. We suggest that a socio-materialist perspective alleviates issues of incommensurability by acknowledging ontological multiplicity.