Month: November 2020 (Page 2 of 7)

My take on “the concept of mainstream vs. underground relevant in contemporary design” is yes, he does believe that mainstream vs. underground is relevant in contemporary times. The way he describes mainstream stealing from underground culture is like a necessary evil, for example near the end of the Heller reading he states that underground designers who eventually join the mainstream at their own accords, do so because it is where they believe they can make the most impact on the medium and possibly even culture. He also believes the relationship between the two is almost parasitic in nature as mainstream steals from alternative culture, and sometimes lines begin to blur between the two.

An example of how parasitic mainstream can be comes from a YouTube channel called wisecrack where they discuss Banksy. They state how he is a street artist, an anticapitalist, and antiestablishment. Yet his art can be worth 100,000 or even millions of dollars and are often removed, as well as being sheltered from the elements. Another example of how mainstream leeches of something underground or not mainstream comes from the article Into the mainstream: Shifting authenticities in art where art of African, Aboriginal, Native American, others of non-European origins were once seen as primitive, but are now being shown in art shows and galleries.

While I haven’t made my final decision on what my final project will be, I am leaning towards a series of pride subway posters and I think it fits between an odd middle ground of mainstream and underground. I say that because when the fight for LGBT rights began, it wasn’t widely accepted but as time went people began to accept LGBT people or at least be more open minded on LGBT people. But when it comes to companies, these corporations are hesitant to show full on support. They might sprinkle some stuff here and there up until pride month comes around and they go full on support mode then go back to normal. They do it because it’s “cool” or “fashionable” like when companies go full on gay during pride month.

Heller, Steven. “Underground Mainstream.” Design Observer, 10 Apr. 2008, designobserver.com/feature/underground-mainstream/6737. 

Price, Sally. “Into the Mainstream: Shifting Authenticities in Art.” American Ethnologist , vol. 34, no. 4, Nov. 2007, pp. 603–620. 

Scherker, Amanda, director. Is BANKSY Deep or Dumb? – Wisecrack Edition, Youtube, 16 Mar. 2019, www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLGW4e1rqig. 

To my understanding of Helen Armstrong’s “Introduction: Revisiting the Avant-Garde” she talks about how designers should have a sense of anonymity. Have the work be known but not the designer. This is something she states in the reading, “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.” Then she also states how in the early 20th century graphic design was built on anonymity and goes on to say that in the 50s and 60s “Swiss-style design solidified the anonymous working space of the designer inside a frame of objectivity.”

In the Bruno Munari reading, it seems like he is trying to say that art is mass & public affair and it should not be only accessible to the wealthy. He also mentions how artists should be humbled by getting down from their pedestal and design a butcher’s sign (if they know how to do it), and to cast off “the last rags of romanticism and become active as man among men.” He also mentions that an industrial designer is an engineer of sorts, but a designer in terms of graphics/art is a planner with an aesthetic sense, gives equal weight to each part. Which helps a designer play their role sufficiently as a communicator, someone who relays a message and informs the public.

One problem designers face is social responsibility, something that Armstrong talks about in her reading. She mentions how designers are being critical by using their designs. Instead of being complicit with corporations. Which dates back to when Rodchenko and Lissitzky where active. They were trying to bring about change, something revolutionary but when international style came into the scene, designers became part of corporate America. Then it began to change again as designers began to rebel, they began to critique society, they began to work with activists, they began to bring social changes. Basically, I think she is saying is that while yes we do need to make a living, there comes a point where are social and moral integrity does not get undermined by the corporations and clients we work for.

Language is a form of human communication that can be expressed verbally, be written down, or gestured. I think language is different from communication because it is a specific category (which can get even more specific) within the broader term of communication. It is like saying “all medicines are drugs, but not all drugs are medicines.” For example, we are able to communicate through imagery and symbols, which is a method that predates the concept of language we know today. In the past humankind has used hieroglyphs and pectorals to communicate with one another and today we use symbols on signs and designs like posters, and cards which are often paired with written language.

I believe that language is related to symbols and iconography because they are a precursor to contemporary language and that they can go hand-in-hand with one another. To illustrate, in the Saussure reading he mentions how an image of a tree has an associative bond with arbor, the latin word for tree, uniting a concept and sound-image (word) which creates a sign. Another example is when Saussure replaces concept and sound-image with “signified” (something that is expressed) and “signifier” (something that is used to point out another thing) which to me shows the close connection between imagery and language.

The relationship between imagery and language is also emphasized in the Language of Dreams section of the Lupton & Miller readings. An example they provided is airport-moji, a system in place of the Latin alphabet if it did not exist. It is represented with a chart divided in two categories, pictographs and ideograms. On the pictograph side they point out how pictographs can conjure up something literal and specific, like a key over a car can mean a car is dreaming about a key. While on the ideogram side, the symbols can represent a concept or idea (and something a bit broader) which is a bit more in line with the Saussure reading, except it is in reverse. For example, with the car and keys it can mean car key, parking, or “please lock your cars”, but it actually means car rental. In this case the car and keys is the “signifier” the interpretation as the “signified”, and its actual meaning as the “sign”.

mainstream is the art that is known to people, that is out there quite different from what underground is. Mainstream is what gets an individual’s consideration, making them believe that it is a fascinating phenomenon. On the other hand, underground is the total opposite of what mainstream is which really isn’t  “out there”. People are not familiar with underground. Personally, things like mainstream and underground remind me of the terms overrated and underrated. 

According to Heller’s The Underground Mainstream, “Mass marketers steal ideas from visionaries, alter them slightly if at all, then reissue them to the public as new products”. Basically mass marketers strategize to aim and appeal to a large amount of audience ignoring niche demographics and in that process they take away the visionaries concepts, change them around a bit then publicize them as new items. Contemporary design can be characterized as works that have been created since World War II up to the current day, and reflects what is presently in style. Adding to that I believe that contemporary design is mainstream, because till this day people still use contemporary design such as futurism, late modern style and so on and so forth. 

As for my presentation I am going to be doing a compare and contrast project of two famous graphic designers, Paul Rand and Paula Scher. I will be talking about their designs and their design theories, how different or similar they are from each other. Paul Rand has brought his gestalt theory and avant-garde to the design world here in America. He uses the combination of media and typography into his works. He has done many famous works that are still in use today, technically falls in the mainstream category as well as Paula Scher who created a lot of typography designs that used russian constructivism.  

–

Works Cited

Bhatti, Faizan. “Graphic Design Styles.” Medium, Medium, 2 Nov. 2017, bhattifaizan.medium.com/graphic-design-styles-fa85aff1ff69.

“Paul Rand, Everything Is Design! The Man Who Changed the Face of the USA.” Graphéine – Agence De Communication Paris Lyon, 3 Oct. 2019, www.grapheine.com/en/history-of-graphic-design/paul-rand-everything-is-design.

“Underground Mainstream.” Design Observer, designobserver.com/feature/underground-mainstream/6737.

        I think that the concept of mainstream vs. underground can be looked at in two different ways. Mainstream is art that is more known, where on the other hand underground art is art that is not as familiar. Heller believes that “Mass marketers steal ideas from visionaries, alter them slightly if at all, then reissue them to the public as new products.”  I think that most contemporary art is considered mainstream.

        The work of the designer that I will be presenting fits under mainstream because her designs were very popular and of a high standard. Paula Scher created many art pieces that fall in the category of “street art” which was not considered normal to be a mainstream artist. Although Scher was an underground artist, her posters for the Public Theater became mainstream.

         Paula Scher was into making posters with mostly typography. The posters for the Public Theater were done to bring more people into the theater. Scher’s Public Theater posters were influenced by Russian Constructivism.

        Paula Scher’s work for the Public Theater shaped the look and audience that would come to the Public Theater. I think that these series of posters made people pay more attention to the type of art that she created. I think that she also shaped the future for other artist to know that they should express themselves the way they want to.

Bibliography

Heller, Steven. “Street theater.” Print, vol. 50, no. 3, May-June 1996, p. 29+. Gale Academic OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A18614265/AONE?u=cuny_nytc&sid=AONE&xid=2bf5f143.

“Paula Scher: 25 Years at the Public, A Love Story.” ProtoView, May 2020. Gale Academic OneFile, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A624347506/AONE?u=cuny_nytc&sid=AONE&xid=283cad3b.

As we know it, contemporary art emerges from the complex issues that shape our diverse, global, and rapidly changing world. Many of the works of art consist of exploring any cultural or personal identities to refine art itself. During the process of creating, many artists raise questions without giving a solid answer which leads to curiosity. According to Heller, mainstream is somewhat derived from underground but is altered and folded into the mainstream. Contemporary design does the same to create vast art in different mediums that are far from mainstream all the while containing an underground aspect. This makes contemporary art unique and configured to what they think. Having underground ideas in mind makes contemporary art mainstream to a younger audience as well as the older generation.

Nike which is known for being a sports brand for sneakers and clothing, took a different turn by making an underground statement of controversy and huge risk for their advertisement to bring in revenue for the brand itself. Although Nike does propose mainstream advertising ideas, they have athletes to raise political awareness as well as through their advertisements. We can take Colin Kaepernick’s advertisement to be controversial with having him as the star of this Nike Ad. In August of 2016, Kaepernick decided to sit during the singing of the anthem, and then in 2018 he started kneeling, to protest for racial injustice and police brutality. Since Kaepernick had a platform to fight for social equality, Nike had Kaepernick bring awareness to what he was doing, and people had bought Nike products to show support. On the contrary, people also condemned his protest to be disrespectful to the military and country.

Nike took an underground approach that brought a negative response which was a huge risk for consumers as the hashtag #nikeboycott became a trend and motivated people to not purchase Nike products. The people that had been associated with a negative impact towards Nike have egotistical and stakeholder-driven motives. Despite the trend that had a negative impact, Nike’s online sales were up by 31% in the three day period after the ad was launched. Nike in general had come to terms with promoting political messages as it reaches out to younger audiences on a community and societal level. The people who had been associated with a positive impact towards Nike have value and strategy driven motives. Nike in the long-run has kept up with controversy and huge risks and will continue to do so in the future to build their brand and make revenue because any kind of publicity (regardless of negativity) is good publicity.

Citation

1. CNBC, “How Nike Turns Controversy Into Dollars,” Sep 19, 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yvkf88eSTrI&t=342s

• Ferrer, Joshua. Colin Kaepernick & Nike,2019

http://joshferrer.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/PR-Case-Study.pdf

• Public Relations Review, Volume 46, Issue 2, 2020, 101856, ISSN 0363-8111, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101856. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811119302590)