THOUGHTS IN TIMES NEW ROMAN By Ana Garcia
All essays written in chronological order. Designed and written by Ana Garcia. Composed in Times New Roman. GD353 Design Issues & History with Steve Bowden, BFA Maine College of Art Fall 2019 Copyright Š 2019 Ana Garcia
THOUGHTS IN TIMES NEW ROMAN By Ana Garcia
A collection of essays on design theory, practice, and culture
THOUGHTS ON... 6.
The First Things First Manifesto
13.
A Manifesto by Ana Garcia
32.
Cult of the Ugly
36.
Fuck Content
46.
Fuck All
Obsessed with how cool an ad looks, rather than with what it is really saying, or the meaning of the context in which it says it, these designers seriously seem to believe that formal innovations alone are somehow able to effect progressive change in the nature and content of the message communicated. Exactly how, no one ever manages to explain.
RICK POYNOR First Things First
6
“THE FIRST THINGS FIRST MANIFESTO OF 1964” offered a push past advertisements that help corporate sell a message or product. The Manifesto was a promise that the signed designer would try to offer their talents for a stronger visual communication that had lasting effect and meaning, instead of “selling out.” The First Things First Manifesto was published by Tony Benn in his Guardian column at the time. Then, the Manifesto was taken and adapted by other publications prompting a wider reach of the message: visual communication with a message. Things did not change. The Manifesto was updated and re-signed in 2000. History is repeating itself again after the resigning of the Manifesto — designers are still using their talents to promote corporate ideas.
As I was reading Poynor’s article, I saw the Manifesto published in larger and larger contexts. The manifesto’s message was reaching more and more people, which meant larger corporations were able to see the Manifesto spread, presumably even through their magazine’s own publication. When the people shift in thought, corporate follows to convince us they are on our side, because at the end of the day they want to sell product. That is what happened the first time the Manifesto was published and is still happening in today’s context. Corporate marketing and advertisements are likely recruiting designers in this manner —with a promise that their design will be the thing that makes a difference.
7
Navigating the design world is hard in this respect. Good designers with good ideas can easily be groomed by big corporate, turning them against their initial beliefs. That is why we see so many well designed ads and marketing ploys these days. The company’s values, products, or policies can be twisted, but they can hire good designers and receive tantalizing aesthetics that can give the illusion of a positive message. Can you dismantle the system without being a part of it? Is that how designer’s get trapped? Is it really that bad to enhance the color in a French fry ad?
8
IS IT REALLY THAT BAD TO ENHANCE THE COLOR IN A FRENCH FRY AD?
9
10
Maybe.
11
A MANIFESTO BY ANA GARCIA
13
I AM TIRED OF PEOPLE TRYING TO SELL ME:
MOVIES, TV SHOWS, TECHNOLOGY, CLOTHES, MAKEUP, SKINCARE, MORNING ROUTINES, NIGHTTIME ROUTINES, WORKOUT ROUTINES, FAST FOOD, HEALTH FOOD, SUSTAINABILITY, LIFESTYLES, BODY IMAGES, BEAUTY STANDARDS, POLITICAL BELIEFS, SOCIAL EXCHANGES, SOCIAL CURRENCY, POWER
14
I AM TIRED OF PEOPLE TRYING TO SELL ME:
BULLSHIT
15
TO MAINTAI INTEGRITY A BUY INTO CO PROPAGAND I PROMISE T 16
IN AND NOT ORPORATE DA, TO: 17
1.
To only buy into products I need by looking objectively at its function in my life
2.
To continue to value the materials I own until they present no further value
18
3.
To not compare myself to those around me
4.
To not compare my work to the work around me
19
To trust my own value in the face of doubt 21
6.
22
To trust I still have value when compared to those around me
23
7.
To always draw in my sketchbook
8.
To always draw inspiration from my everyday, average life
9.
To always make my everyday, average life is inspirational
24
10.
To help those around me with my knowledge
11.
To help designers around me design
25
12.
To always create with passion and love
26
13.
To always create passion and love
27
I WILL SUSPE JUDGMENT W VIEWING MY AND THE WO AROUND ME
END WHEN Y WORK ORK E.
WHEN JUDGING THE VALUE IN MY WORK I PROMISE TO CONSIDER:
EFFORT, TIME TAKEN, TIME GAINED, TIME WASTED, THINGS LEARNED, THINGS RUINED, THINGS FIXED, THINGS CHANGED, PROCRASTINATION, GETTING SIDE-TRACKED, MICRO-FOCUSING
30
THE CREATIVE PROCESS IS WHAT DRIVES MY CREATION, NOT END PRODUCT, NOT RECOGNITION EARNED.
I DESIGN, DRAW, COLOR, MAKE, CRAFT, SCULPT, SHOOT, AND FILM TO SIMPLY CREATE.
31
Those who value functional simplicity would argue that the Cranbrook student’s publication, like a toad’s warts, is ugly. The difference is that unlike the toad, the Cranbrook students have deliberately given themselves the warts.
STEVEN HELLER Cult of the Ugly
32
This definition of ugly, although elitist, is not offensive. It offers the chance for designers to ask themselves what are their intentions behind the moves they make. Is their radical choice offering a functional purpose to their design? Is it helping you convey a specific meaning or tone to the audience?
In his essay, “Cult of the Ugly,”Steven Heller discusses
the word ‘ugly’ by graphic design standards, using examples from Cranbrook graduate programs, the punk era, and post-modern design. Heller concludes that ugly design is when form does not follow function. He describes that when Cranbrook students, for example, use fragmented thought, preposterous layering, and “bad” fonts, it is not ugly design, rather a new standard of design. This is because the Cranbrook students still consider the function behind their choices in ugly design, instead of simply creating a chaotic form. Heller continues that ugly design is only harmful when people without the knowledge of its intentional ugliness take its form and apply it to other design, without understanding the function.
Yet, the average designer who is not trained may not be able to answer these question. They could be purposefully choosing “ugly” iterations, with no meaning behind those choices. But, they probably do not know what they are doing is “ugly.” In today’s world, in many cases, graphic design is being done by people who only have access to Microsoft Word and they genuinely think Brush Script is a font that will bring in viewers.
33
This is where us trained graphic designer need to step in. We have the knowledge to make good design choices, whether that results in pretty or ugly design. We have learned the rules and can now make these choices to benefit our design. If we have the knowledge, and are so easily offended by this notion of “ugly� design, then it is our duty to help. So, it is not that the toad is ugly, it’s just that its warts are not design choices.
34
35
What makes a Hitchcock film a Hitchcock film is not the story but a consistency of style, which winds intact through different technologies, plots, actors, and time periods like a substance of its own...His great genius is that he is able to mold the form into his style in a genuinely unique and entertaining way. The meaning of his work is not in the story but in the storytelling.
MICHAEL ROCK Fuck Content
36
MICHAEL ROCK’S “FUCK CONTENT” IS A RESPONSE to one of his previous essays, “Designer as Author.” In “Designer as Author,” Rock made an attempt to get designers to take authorship of their design work, yet Rock felt that he was misinterpreted. The designer’s response to “Designer as Author” was to create original content to become author as designer, whereas Rock was intending for design as author. Rock believes that through only form, we can still create content through the created communication. Rock concludes “Fuck Content” by saying, “Our content is, perpetually, Design itself.” In theory, I agree with Rock. The content we design is our own creation. This holds true regardless of who’s content it is that we are designing. In my manifesto, 37
OUR CONT IS, PERPET DESIGN IT
38
TENT TUALLY, TSELF.
39
I declare that all work is creation, and all creation is valuable. I take authorship in designing the content of others: I am doing them a service they are not capable of doing. There is value not just in notoriety, but in time spent, energy and passion, hard work and dedication, experimentation, and so much more. I take value in the act of creation, not just the creation, that way I can always take authorship of my work. “We are intimately, physically, connected to the work we produce, and it is inevitable that our work bears our stamp.” This notion that Rock lays out underlines the idea that our individual work matters and is valued, even if it is not the original genius that is noted.
are training to become problem solvers as well as content creators and artists. To say that designers should not be authors is to say that Colors magazine should have stayed a clothing catalog for Benneton. Without designers, Airbnb would not exist. So, Rock answers his own question of what he does as a designer in his essay “Fuck Content.” Rock designs content and takes authorship over that content. This is a valid solution to the problem, however, Rock maintains his simple thesis: fuck content. Rock quotes Paul Rand when he says, “There is no such thing as bad content, only bad form,” or simply said, “fuck content.” Rock again reiterates that designers are meant to shape content, not write it, and that the shaping can be a profound form.
Nonetheless, the notion that designer should not or cannot be author is limiting the scope of what design can do. As designers, we 40
So, where is the line drawn then? Is good content dependent on the design? Does bad design create bad content? Should we be creating good design for good content only? Is it bad to create good design for bad content? Is it really that bad to enhance the color in a French fry ad?
41
Is it really th enhance the c French fry ad
hat bad to color in a d?
Maybe.
Like it or not, our design, and our perception of it, says something about us. Design isn’t a glossy and empty abstraction of itself. It’s by and for people. Our content is, perpetually, ourselves.
KENNETH FITZGERALD Fuck All
46
“FUCK ALL” IS KENNETH FITZGERALD’S CRITIQUE against Michael Rock’s “Fuck Content.” As mentioned previously, “Fuck Content” is a call to design as authorship that puts form before content or message. Fitzgerald rebukes this claim in many ways but his main concern with Rock’s essay is the generalization of graphic design as solely client-based elite services as Rock pushes for, as does Modernist theory. Nonetheless, Fitzgerald does not shame this choice. “Commercial work isn’t at risk of being supplanted as graphic design’s primary manifestation.” Instead, Fitzgerald is angry with the idea that design is removed from ourselves and is instead used to make empty form with meaningless content. Fitzgerald ends his essay beautifully summarizing his message: “Like it or not, our design and our perception of it, says
something about us. Design isn’t a glossy and empty abstraction of itself. It’s by and for people. Our content is perpetually, ourselves.” “Fuck All” is named so not to necessarily mock Rock’s essay, but as a testament to the main idea of his critique. Fitzgerald is not advocating for nihilism and he is not insinuating that this debate does not matter. Fitzgerald says “fuck all” to the people who try to pigeon-hole design into one category or one way of communicating.
47
We cannot simply say that design is creating form through the content of others because it is bigger than that: content and form both matter. The choices we make with design, with clients, with content, with form, all define us. If we define ourselves as designers because of the form we create, we need to define ourselves by the content we design as well. To me it does not make sense to dismiss one choice over another. At the end of the day, the content I design will have my name attached to it, so why shouldn’t it say something about me?
48
49
OUR CONT IS, PERPET OURSELVE
50
TENT TUALLY, ES.
51