Serif.

I changed the type to a serif thinking maybe this would be a middle ground between the clean thin sans serif I started with and the monospaced courier I went to second. What does everyone think? Better solution?

Collection.

changing the type face, size, alignment and shape of the text helped a lot - the text matches the images much better now i think. an index would be nice at the end but do i have enough objects for that? this is ready to print soon. i'll print on cardstock and glue bind it.

Ulrich Response

I found this text different than many of the readings I've done about design while in school. This article took a much different approach than I was use to be describing design in a more industrial and engineering context rather than straight graphic design. I think that design has such a broad spectrum that using any niche in the design field as an example to explain the process of getting from problem to solution through exploration would have sufficed. However, I appreciate that in this case it was not in the context in graphic design, maybe it held my attention a little better to read about familiar concepts in a light that I don't usually see them in. I agree that this is a valuable text to read as a practicing designer because without the process - there is generally no solution. It's almost impossible to come up with the 'right' solution without any background understanding or trial and error. I believe that's just the nature of the field. I appreciated the way that Ulrich talked about drawing abstractly to get across the point of view for the purpose of exploring through representation and abstraction. It solidified for me that as a designer trying to come up with a solution - this type of drawing is all that is proficient for the process. 'Good abstractions suppress details that have little relevance for the central design decisions at hand.' p 41

Bauhaus, Artist Animal, Curation.

Bauhaus, Cramsie Ch 13

Overall what I enjoyed and took away from this chapter was an understanding of the history of the Bauhaus in more detail than I knew before. In art history classes I've learned a bit here and there about pieces that have come out of the institution but never quite all the phases the school went through over the course of its being. The following are excerpts from the text that stood out...

"The idea of providing a general introductory course to teach the fundamental aspects of art was not new, but it was through the Bauhaus that such a course became the standard feature of art education in Europe and the United States during the second half of the twentieth century ... He saw the main purpose of the 'Basic Course', as being to free the students from any prior learning so that heir own individual nature could emerge." 191

"They took up what, at that time and in that place, were highly unusual practices, such as fasting, acupuncture or frequent gargling and garlic eating." 191

"Gropius's socialist belief in community and the role of art in binding communities together required his students to engage with the world around them, not retreat from it." 191

"The primary aim for this new kind of design was for it to be functional, or, as he put it, to find the 'right form for the stated function'..." 192

"A new emphasis on commercial art and advertising, rather than fine-art printing, brought the workshop a new status, which was reflected in its new name: 'The Printing and Advertising Workshop'." 194

"Moholy-Nagy called this arrangement an example of 'typophoto', a form of design he considered to be 'the most visually exact rendering of communication' ... In typophoto, however, they should be seen, heard and listened to." 194


"It was born out of the twin recognition that the cold, hard purity of mechanical reproduction could have a special form of beauty of its own, and more than that, that by breaking free of the human prejudice and artfulness that plagued the painter's hand, these new methods of image making could come closer to revealing the world as it really was." 195

"Today, most adult handwriting is so unpracticed it looks primitive, almost childlike." 196

"Why is there for one sound, for example 'a', two signs 'A' and 'a'? One sound, one sign. Why two alphabets for one word, why double the number of signs when half would achieve the same?" 198

"...exclude from their symbols any 'details which do not improve the [symbols'] narrative character'." 200

"Over time he [Jan Tschichold] was t hone his mastery of this kind of dynamic, balanced asymmetry to such an extent that even the most free-form and minimal arrangements were suffused with a sense of harmonious equilibrium." 203




Artist Animal, Steve Baker

Baker made good points in his statements, however it's hard to completely agree or disagree with them. They seem to be provocative where as they are taking a firm stance on one end or the other of an opinion which is helpful to form your own opinions but it's a bit confusing to put into context against what we're taught in school and from past history. However, I do understand the points being made and their supporting details, I appreciate the way they turn my thoughts in another direction to consider what is at hand. These quotes from 'On Artists and Intentions' 90-91 and 'On Relevant Questions' 180-181 show what I mean:

"It is neither theoretically necessary nor desirable to make psychologistic assumptions concerning the intentions of the photographer; it is the pre-constituted field of discourse which is the substantial 'author' here: photograph and photographer alike are its products and, in the act of seeing, so is the viewer." 91

"...complex of texts, rhetorics, codes, woven into the fabric of the popular preconscious." 91

"intention is a word I should use as little as possible." 91

"...the word intention refers 'to pictures rather more than to painters'." 91


"There are no good answers if the question is not the relevant one." 181

"Art consists in the shaping of just such 'precious tools for thinking'." 181




Curating

What I plan to do over Spring Break for the curation project is to write a detailed but moderately brief description of what the space I've deigned is and is meant to teach you. I want to make a book with this description as well as the images I've chosen and show an example of how it would look in the room. My overall idea for this is to create a sort of catalogue for the exhibit.

close circles

What I was thinking here was to zoom in so close on the posters from chapter ten that you cannot tell what the bigger picture is and you are forced to analyze style, color and form without any distractions from text or figures. I chose to put the images framed in circles to also eliminate any assumptions made from the traditional poster format of a poster. The only text I included is the title, designer and date to give enough contextual information so that all the focus of interpretation and examination is on the image.

Phaidon: Ornament.

Flusser Response

Reading this article made me look at design in a way that I was certainly aware of but never wanted to use as a definition. Indeed design is a way of enticing the consumer or whoever is being communicated to, I agree with that. In fact I agree with all of Flusser’s statements but I don’t think of it all in such a negatively toned way like he does. And this idea of design as trickery is stronger in some areas than others. For example advertising can hold a great deal of showing off a product in a way that is a misconception to the consumer on the producers behalf. An unreliable product can be have an advertisement designed for it that makes the consumer believe it is a quality item. In this light, yes I can see design being flawed and a little ‘evil’ but I think it’s enough to justify it by saying it’s just the society and economy we live in to sell that way. In other ways, design is trickery on the other end of the spectrum in say branding a company. Branding will portray a company to be seen in a way that they want their consumer to understand them. For example, when I brand the textile line that I’m designing for seminar I want the branding to make the consumer understand my product as being quality, well designed, thoughtful, free, pure, optimistic, etc. And I know that this is okay because I truly do back my designs with all of these elements. Of course branding can go in the other direction and, like advertising, portray an image of a company that is very positive when really they are up to no good. It can all go either way. But I do agree with Flusser’s theory that design is trickery, I just like to think so in a better light.

Emblems.

UC Logo Response

I read the Christopher Simmons article first and these two quotes struck me the most from what I saw:

“There is confusion between having an opinion and having a relevant opinion,” said Correa. “This results in even less productive social discourse around everything — not just design; it’s a basic misunderstanding of democracy.”

“Design as a discipline is challenged by this notion of democracy, particularly in a viral age. We have become a culture mistrustful of expertise—in particular creative expertise.”

I think that since design in the world today is so accessible and accepted that people of any background feel that they are experts. I believe they feel this way because they feel that the design is for them and connected with it therefor they are entitled to it being exactly what they want regardless of if they really have any knowledge of the principles of design what so ever. I feel that people think that anyone knows what ‘good’ design is bases on the very vague, very uninformed basis of whether the person ‘likes’ it or not or whether they think it’s ‘cool’. From an outsider view the field isn’t taken as seriously as something that requires a lot of education and practice to do well like say something in engineering — people won’t make an opinion on something such as that based on whether they ‘like’ it or not. I think it’s important that before the general public forms their opinion about design that they understand what design is and everything that goes into producing a logo.

I found it interesting in Michael Bierut’s article when he stated: “As usual, no one had expressed much passion for the good old seal until it was threatened by the arrival of the new logo. Suddenly, people were lining up to testify to its virtues.“ In an alternate way of looking at it, people should realize that maybe they needed this kick in the pants to appreciate what was already there and be excited about something else new (since the old seal wasn’t going anywhere) rather than lashing out against it in a seemingly impulsive way.

And again when he says: “But all the UC logo dissenters remind us of how different designers are from regular people. Designers tend to overvalue differentiation and originality. We are taught this in design school.” This really is so true and on point, and explains exactly what I was trying to say above about the difference between the people who design the logos and the general public who think they’re entitled to have equal say and understanding of such a thing when really they don’t have the knowledge.

Perhaps we could also ask: what was the purpose? What was the process? Whose ends were being served? How should we judge success? But we seldom look any deeper than first impressions, wallowing instead in a churning maelstrom of snap judgments. Should we be surprised when the general public jumps right in after us?

It is great that in society today people are aware of what design is and all but in the biggest regard I’m not sure if its in a positive way. What this does is only make us as designers savvy up on our persuasive skills to sell our idea to the client and then to the public.