Author: Clemson Brown

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/10JHlvUt6tVpJ5_hmm0mlV6cZqvepevOz/edit?usp=drive_web&ouid=117443179293312432696&rtpof=true

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NGGySgV_hRplbi5fWho7WSE2gJjC2nZGp3mAjeLWrsE/edit?usp=sharing

Based on the readings, each author had a different perspective on what the future od design should be and what is its true purpose. In the reading “Who We Are”, it seems in the first parts of the poem, the author initiates the idea that artists are the foundations of today’s inventions. Quoted as such, “We don’t feel obliged to build Pennsylvania Stations, skyscrapers, Handley Page Tract houses, turbo-compressors, and so on. We didn’t create technology. We didn’t create man. but we, Artists yesterday constructors today, 1. we processed the human being 2. we organize technology 1. we discovered 2. propagate 3. clean out 4. merge previously—Engineers relaxed with art now—Artists relax with technology.”. However, when you get into the last parts of the poem, it sounds like the author is giving a critique of today’s constructivist ideas. Even going as far as to entertain the idea that modern constructivism is oversaturated by the lack of creativity and invention.

There are mostly new designs of inventions that prehistorically existed, and that it’s rare to find an invention that is fresh and innovative. As quoted from the writing piece, “What’s the deal. Well, it’s simply—they were pointed out. they were announced. The square—1915, the laboratory of malevich The line, grid, point—1919, the laboratory of rodchenko but—after this The first working group of constructivists (aleksei gan, rodchenko, stepanova) announced: the communist expression of material constructions and irreconcilable war against art. Everything came to a point. and “new” constructivists jumped on the bandwagon, wrote “constructive” poems, novels, paintings, and other such junk. Others, taken with our slogans, imagining themselves to be geniuses, designed elevators and radio posters, but they have forgotten that all attention should be concentrated on the experimental laboratories, which show us new elements routes things experiments. —the demonstration experimental labora.”. This implies to me that the author wants constructivists to add more creativity and invention to the modern society.

In the very first paragraph of “Our Book”, the author has a supportive perspective on the idea of a invention versus the innovative creation stemming from an original idea. “Every invention in art is a single event in time, has no evolution. With the passage of time different variations of the same theme are composed around the invention, sometimes more sharpened, sometimes more flattened, but seldom is the original power attained. So it goes on ’til, after being performed over a long period, this work of art becomes so automatic-mechanical in its performance that the mind ceases to respond to the exhausted theme; then the time is ripe for a new invention. The so-called technical aspect is, however, inseparable from the so-called artistic aspect, and therefore we do not wish to dismiss close associations lightly, with a few catchwords.” Both artists imply likeliness towards technology being the source of new originality and design, yet it has slowly only hindered it over the course of time. This is relevant today because you rarely see a breakthrough that has massively popular amongst the globe. Even if there was, it usually is just a creative new way of handling a concept that already existed. The evolution of technology is making it more difficult for ideas that the people have yet to see.

When we use sound, images or feelings to communicate, they are all aspects of language. Each aspect relies on a specific human sense to convey a message or image. Those who can not see, often rely on being able to touch and feel in order to configure an idea on what they perceive. Those who can not hear, often have to rely on seeing an image or sign to understand an idea. Those same people also have to rely on using sign language which is another form of communication and is similar to signs, signifiers and the simplified.

Graphic communication is configured of designs with structural signs, designed to send a visual message to the reader. The Ellen Lupton & J. Abbot Miller essays demonstrates this idea by having both words and symbols set in between. One of the realizations that I have concluded from the reading is that I found myself understanding the vision quicker when given both words to comprehend and a sign that comprehends it for me. One of the reasons for that is unlike simple words in a language, a design places language into a vision. It’s not left in ambiguity of the mind when you are presented with the idea through eyesight.

Language and design are similar in a way where you’d be able use both as compensation, for the lack of a communication sense. If you look at an advertisement design for a cheeseburger, the first aspect your brain will see is the burger. Therefore, your mind will translate that visual into a sign of “food”, which is quicker than simply reading out that it was a cheeseburger. Both can be used to convey the same message using two different senses of communication, which would be the comprehension of a word versus an image/symbol.

There are many ideas and perspectives for what a graphic designer could or should be, it is a term left in ambiguity and defined by the designer. According to Ellen Lupton, “Design is a social activity. Rarely working alone or in private, designers respond to clients, audiences, publishers, institutions, and collaborators. While our work is exposed and highly visible, as individuals we often remain anonymous, our contribution to the texture of daily life existing below the threshold of public recognition.”. This would appear to be a straightforward answer, that designers are apart of a profession where the work is more recognizable than the artist. However, Helen Armstrong sheds light into an altering perspective through collective authorship, where she explores the challenge in whether graphic designers should mark an artistic presence within their work. Should that recognizable presence be credited towards the designer, and does it benefit the prosumer market?

As explained in the quote, “This assertion of artistic presence is an alluring area of practice. Such work includes theoretical texts, self-published books and magazines, and other consumer products. In 1996 Michael Rock’s essay ‘The Designer as Author’ critiqued the graphic authorship model and became a touchstone for continuing debates. The controversial idea of graphic authorship, although still not a dominant professional or economic paradigm for designers, has seized our imagination and permeates discussions of the future of design. And, as an empowering model for practice, it leads the curriculum of many graphic design graduate programs.”. Helen pitches the idea that a designer can have authorship and define who they are within their work, however the lack in notability of said concept can hinder or risk their profession. Designers usually work for clients, corporations, etcetera, so by adding a presence to a commissioned design, it could be against what they were paid for. Designers must find a balance between artistic intent and professional prosumer marketing, which is an occurring problem even for today. This is where technology comes into play because it is an important aspect of authorship. With designers having access to or creating new tools and recourses, the ability to have a unique yet professional stable in the community increases.

In the book “DESIGN AS ART”, one page thirty three, the author gives us a straight forward answer on what a designer is, “The designer works in a vast sector of human activity; there is visual design, industrial design, graphic design and research design. Visual design is concerned images whose function is to communicate and inform visually : signs, symbols, the meaning of forms and colors and the relations between these. Industrial design is concerned with functional objects, designed according to economic facts and the study of techniques and materials-.”. As explained, there are many types of designers who are tasked with equipping themselves to different objectives and problems. Most notably, a visual designer is responsible with being able to convey a message in the easiest and most recognizable way. If what they present isn’t clear, then it could cost someone their life as many are responsible for simple safety signs. It’s the little visual cues that can go a long way and the reason why it’s so important to solve a problem within a design. In this perspective, you could understand why having an artistic presence is not desirable, simply because it can be dangerous if someone doesn’t understand the author’s style. It all comes down to the task and deciding when it’s appropriate to have artistic intent and when it needs to be sidelined.

Don’t know what was going on with the audio but that’s what happens when you have an android. Also Password is Clem.