Author: AJ Grenader (Page 2 of 2)

Walter Gropius, Herbert Bayer and László Moholy-Nagy all believed that the education of designers were mostly influenced by economic and social standards of the nation they resided in. In the institutions, many of them believed that the education they received were merely one-track mindsets that only taught traditional design standards  to be used for propaganda or economic purposes. The Bauhaus was created to combat that and promoted various design styles and ideologies from various parts of the world, collecting information and creating new concepts. First Director, Walter Gropius explains that “With the rise of academies, genuine folk art died away. What remained was a drawing-room art detached from life”.  This was one of the major problems of the education of art prior, as many of the individual pieces of art were cast off and with the rise of industrialism. As Gropius states “Schooling alone can never produce art!” and for good reason. Gropius states that “Quality cannot be taught or learned but the foundation of creation can be…”, once again informing people of another issue with art in several institutions. Fortunately, when artists began attending the Bauhaus, it became a creative laboratory for many intellectual minds, analysing past examples, improving their work and even making breakthroughs of new original concepts either disregarding the traditions of previous design or referencing past art styles with a sleek modern feel that appeased many.

To some designers, Photography and Typography were both types of art that are necessary to be used in the art world. Bayer claims that “Typography is a service art, not a fine art”, going on to emphasize the importance of lettering and how typography is the key aspect in providing language to be seen for the masses. Bayer begins to describe why many forms of Font-styles are derived from the basic alphabet of languages and how each person sees letters differently and in order to make effective designs, typographers must consider ways to “improve” the alphabet while making it legible. László, on the other hand, discusses how printing became the foundation of the new world. He exclaims that printers are often overlooked for their achievements, but left a heavy impact on the world through their countless efforts and innovations. László informs readers that typography bridges the gap of comprehension between communication and the people. Throughout his lifetime, László began to realizeEvery period has its own optical focus.”, referencing electrical signs and film being a media source that brims with potential for designers to formulate new methods of typography.  Photography is the same way, capturing moments of everyday life with the photographer’s job to give it life and meaning in those frames. Film in itself, began to pave the way for silent movies and in doing so, allowed photographers to experiment with the focus of nature, society and man in several shots or rolls of film.

While the Bauhaus became a monument for graphic designers for experimentation and creativity, ideas such as futurism, constructivism and minimalism began seeping through the roots of the institution. Many either opposed or approved of such ideas but it resulted in conflict between the instructors and the students and often, there would be a power struggle between several ideologies on what makes excellent design. Several design eras reigned over the Bauhaus and often the majority of facilities and students would promote the most effective art forms at the time, either by intensive lecture, social reform or by immediate demonstration. In truth, it is not the idea that makes impactful design but the artist themselves that have been trained to do so. It is only with a combination of basic understanding of the art form and creative execution does it make for something truly beautiful. This is the reason why design theory exists and if the Bauhaus were to be relevant to this day, a major point would be to only give the information needed to understand art and leave the progression and execution to the students whilst helping them refine their skills.

Each of the authors mentioned all had contrasting ideologies on what the future of design would look like. Filippo Tommaso Marinetti founded the idea of futurism. He believed that tearing down the norms of typical design and reinstating a new design quota would be the most beneficial to the design world. He states that he wants to “demolish museums and libraries”, believing the information fed to them was incorrect and they must start from the ground up and to pass the new knowledge for the future generations. Another of Marinetti’s points is that he wants futurists to express rashness and danger, to glorifying war, as he puts it
“the only cure to the world” in their works they create. If you looked at a futurist work, you would indeed see the rashness and almost chaotic layouts and design
choices. Marinetti imagined a world where the public would revolt against tradition and would promote beauty through intense struggle as he sought beauty to only be effective had it shown signs of suffering or aggression. However, Marinetti wanted the people to not remain in the past and insisted to climb towards the future by creating a society that was not bound by time or space, but instead to breach the impossible and emphasized speed to be one of the main goals, besides aggression, to make futurism successful. For those reasons, his ideology emphasized extreme violence, denial of tradition and intensive focus on the future.

Alexander Rodchenko and El Lissitzky , on the other hand were constructivists. Constructivism was the idea that design should be used for industrial society and the general public. In other words, it is a tool used to help a country prosper rather than art as an individual. Normally, constructivism was used to promote propaganda and was often shown in the work force to accelerate production. Constructivism promoted innovation, not only by industrial machinery but designs that focuses on geometric scaling, abstraction, and consistency. You will also find that red and photocollage were one of the common tropes used in Constructivist work. Rodchenko explains that “Previously, engineers relaxed with art. Now, artists relax with technology. What’s needed is no rest” He believes that rest is not needed for the name of progress and stresses that art must be constantly processed and organized. El Lissitzky thought in a similar manner except he enforced the idea that there is no such thing as individual belonging or as he puts it “The private property aspect of Creativity must be destroyed”. Lissitzky also thought that evolution must be constant in design for there always is a time to improve one’s design from his previous works and predecessors. With such an instance, he would then go on to explain how hieroglyphs and letters helped invent the writing and how Gutenberg’s printing press was revolutionary, only seeking more innovation. He continues to state why the printed sheets must transcend space and time and why they are so important. His ideas along with Rodchenko created a system of continuous demand of improvement and steady design.

All of these texts shared the desire for a better future of design and modern society, though in contrasting solutions to attain such a thing. Lissitzky and Rodchenko were both Communists that shared the same views in design where people needed to focus on design for the nation. They implemented communist views into their work and laid the foundation or uniformity in printed works. However, Lissitzky focused on learning from past examples in history and preserving prior works as a timeline for vast improvement. Marinetti,
on the other hand was more destructive in how he approached design and propaganda. Unlike the constructivists, he wanted to erase the current knowledge and discover/implement new knowledge for designers to use. Marinetti focused on the people designing for themselves while demolishing and reestablishing society while Rodchenko and Lissitzky wanted to improve society for the State and so the people worked as one. These ideologies mostly are problematic in the present as Modernism and Post-Modernism design are chaotic, abstract,
rash and only process propaganda. It is indeed a fusion of negative attributes that run wild with no organization. The good that did come from these ideas were the signs of expression, organization and fluidity that is only shown in a small hand full of work and not in Modernism / Post-Modernism pieces. In sum, Futurism and Constructivism are two clashing ideologies that suffer massive radical differences yet were able to mold new ideas for design.

Language, by definition in the Oxford Dictionary, is a “system of communication used by a particular country or community”. Language develops from symbols, to writing and eventually words and speech. All of these aspects create a language for sentient beings such as humans to use. Of course Language has its outliers such as Jargon and Dialect which varies in different parts of a civilized country or world. In some rare cases, language can be used silently in the form of gestures such as sign language for the hearing impaired, dance and even chants for rituals or festivities. In ancient times, civilizations depended on symbols rather than letters to communicate via writing with such examples such as The Egyptians, The Sumerians and The Aztecs. These symbols or icons were called Hieroglyphs, a writing form composed entirely of pictures. This was the point were icons and symbols become extremely important as Hieroglyphs were one of the first forms of writing before humanity developed Phonetic Written Languages and thus was a way to communicate with other people in the most simplest way.

Some civilizations would often depict important events via murals, statues or scrolls to preserve it as history for future generations. In that same respect, designers create their designs as a means to symbolize the time period they came from and the common tropes found during its existence. According to Ferdinand de Saussure, he states that “The linguistic sign unites, not a thing and a name, but a concept and a sound-image.” With that logic, a sign would be the material in the current world, the signifier to be the details of that material and the signified to be the relevance it poses to others. De Saussure goes on to state that in order to understand a word one must have the concept of the word and the sound or image that goes along with it. For Graphic Design, the sign is the image shown the audience, the signifier is the details of the time period included in the work and the signified is the meaning or reason why it made in the first place.

Language shapes design in two ways, culture and perception. These two concepts are what ultimately either allow people to comprehend what is presented to them or not. In short, Understanding is crucial to form a connection between the facts of the time period or the thoughts of the writer. However, There are some things that Design does that Language cannot and that is simply, breaking the language barrier. Images were always the common thing most people understood and has been the core to create languages to this day. For instance, Some people may not speak Russian, Italian, German or Japanese but they all understand what a stop sign is based on the shape and color alone. In a sense, design is somewhat of a psychology that continues to be used in the modern era. Language and Design are both expressive, that much is true, hence the phrase “Culture creates civilization”. What is important is the way we express it so that is iconic and valuable,
leading to plentiful thoughts circulating upon viewing a work or be able to recognize it’s form, color or texture instantly with a glance. This is the connection and fine-line between language and design.

Helen Armstrong and Bruno Munari both claim that design has become an important role in the modern-day world. While it is true that Design mostly played a big part in business and identity, it went through a series of ideological changes. In Armstrong’s excerpt she states that “Early models of graphic design were built on ideals of anonymity, not authorship.” She then goes along to say that “Design is visible everywhere, yet it is also invisible—unnoticed and unacknowledged.” Back then, designers were not well-known for their work and often relied on concepts rather than creativity. As such, ideas such as futurism, constructivism, and Swiss-School were present and constantly stressed to many designers of several institutions and many students of design implemented those ideas only to
feed the concept to grow on a larger scale, rarely noticed for their efforts.

Munari supports this claim in his book saying that in today’s society “the artist must cast off the last rags of romanticism and become active as a man amongst men”, implying that there is no definitive way to stand out as a designer due to the fact society constantly seeks a tie between life itself and art, leading designer to be further submerged into the dregs of a dull and demanding world. Munari’s article also explains that in the past, art was held at a selective standard, where only the intellectual could understand and appreciate art. Now, art has become part of our culture and defines the time period we live in, accessible for the public. As Armstrong puts it, “Design is a social activity”, forming not only a relationship between the design community but also the viewers who glance at their work, creating an even greater community.

The field of design is different to other creative fields as you learn the history of the design, its impact on the world and how to differentiate between different design concepts. Design tends to be more informational than creative at times, gathering knowledge of past works and ideas while learning about the present’s values and thoughts of what makes good design. It demands discovery and
experimentation unlike practical fields like math or science that deal with facts and logic. It may be subjective at times but over all design is a lot of trail and error mixed with education estimation and strict justifications on peak design and performance.

Designers are often ensnared by unsolvable theoretical questions for two reasons. They are infinite possibilities to deal with design and there are equally as many designers and ideas to challenge said theory. There are many situations where someone can learn and understand a concept but no two people approach it in a completely 100% identical fashion. Interpretation is different from person to person resulting in unique works and theories being in to play. Some designers may agree with a theory and may add onto it while other disagree and follow a
different approach to disprove an original theory. In short, concepts are plentiful buts its the understanding and implementation that creates and internal debate between the design community regarding unsolvable design theories.

Technology plays the role of a bridge between designers and the people in the present. Communication is incredibly quicker than it was prior allowing ideas and design to reach people all over the world in a timely fashion. Armstrong quotes that “Digital technology puts creation, production, and distribution into the hands of the designer, enabling such bold assertions of artistic presence.” True as it is, it also means that designers and companies forge a bigger bond with one another, sharing interests in what they are looking for and how to promote each other in a symbiotic relationship. Technology is primarily part of our culture in this generation, making it a gateway for exploration to many people to either oppose or approve design choices made by their creators.

The most urgent problem for designers today is the fact they are unable to be recognized in this day and age. While we do have technology as a tool for many artists, it is difficult for artists to stand out amidst the immense amount of designers and their work that scour the net. Identity and Technique are crucial aspects of becoming a successful designer. Many designers often would struggle with gaining positions within the design industry as new art styles would be favored by corporations such as Post-Modernism or Modernism. The constant demand for over-simplification has made it incredibly difficult for designers to maintain relevancy as well as credibility, thanks to people plagiarizing off each other.

Designers are responsible to combat these issues but continuously mastering their technique and trade through various experiences and exercises they have learned or saw. In a way, it is the role of a designer to challenge ideas or create new ones, brining a fresh new look on a blank canvas. With each design, designers are tasked with originality as well as something that appeals to the eyes. In the same respect, it is the job of the designer to allure people and get into their heads, to make them think a certain way or see something entirely different than how they saw it originally.