Month: October 2020 (Page 3 of 5)

Design is apart of everything. In order for something as simple as a chair to be able to be used for a comfortable seat (depending on the cushion, train seats are not comfortable!) many of us have in our houses, schools, parks and public transportation, someone had to design it. Function is something that distinguishes design from other creative occupations. If the chair is broken or doesn’t fulfill its proper use, the chair has no function and can’t be used.

One difference between art and design is functionality. Art is not necessarily made to function, most art is made from a personal motive and expression. Art is preceptive and emotional. Some may argue that design can be as well however, design has a priority of function.

In order for design to be successful a message has to be clearly communicated for to reader to understand or the object has to be used at is full potential. Bruno Munari who wrote Design as Art states “a designer tries to make an object as naturally as a tree puts forth a leaf. He {or she} does not smother his object with his own personal taste but tries to be objective. He helps the object … to make itself by its own means, so that a ventilator comes to have just the shape of a ventilator”.

According to Jan Tschichold, one should design with clarity and clearness. For example, “This utmost clarity is necessary today because of the manifold claims for our attention made by the extraordinary amount of print, which demands the greatest economy of expression. “ Jan Tschichold says the arrangement in old typography is on a central axis and as times passed it was overused and  we should not do that anymore. For example, “We believe it is wrong to arrange a text as if there were some focal point in the center of a line that would justify such an arrangement. “ Tschichold believes that designers should explore more and further beyond.

According to Karl Gerstner, combining art and science together is design. For example, he says “Designing means: to pick out determining elements and combine them.” He believes that one should design with what he calls the morphological box of the typogram.  “I have produced the diagram below in accordance with his instructions and, following his terminology, I have called it “the morphological box of the typogram.” In the short text it also showed images of his “box”.

Josef Müller-Brockmann says that design should be done with grids. For example, “The use of the grid as an ordering system is the expression of a certain mental attitude inasmuch as it shows that the designer conceives his work in terms that are constructive and oriented to the future.” He says working with the grid system will make it more organized and clear to work with.

Andre mercharles 

Assignment 2

Communication design theory 

Comd3504  

“Some people regard language, when reduced to its elements, as a naming-process only—a list of words, each corresponding to the thing that it names” (Saussure 65). Simply put, language is a form of communication, but it can get more complex than that. When speaking about written language, you have signs, letters, words, numbers, and a more recent innovation, emojis. Language can be spoken or written and differentiates depending on region, culture, and religion. Though language is a form of communication, they are two different things. Language is a subcategory in communication, while communication goes beyond the written language and expands to things like body language, gestures, emotions, music, etc. Communication can translate the same through all the different types of languages. 

Language in design is very important because it allows a message to come through. Without it, a designer cannot get a clear understanding of what they need to convey through their art, and the audience or client wouldn’t be able to pick up what it is the designer is trying to say. Language in design is used in a way that eliminates the necessity to verbally explain an idea. There are many pieces of art all over the world that speak through expressions and visualization and could be misinterpreted if there wasn’t the universal language designers use. This language consists of symbols and iconography. These two things relate to language because each symbol is known to have its own meaning. Most of these symbols are universal and translate to the same thing no matter the language. Symbols and icons are significant in languages as well because they can convey the message that you are trying to send without saying or writing words out, instead simply understanding what an image/ icon relates to. For example, the image of an arrow pointing left letting you know to go left without the need to spell out the words “turn left”. 

Signs, signifiers, and the signified are employed in general communication as a unit; a team working together to create communication. Sign is the designated term for what you see in your brain when you combine a sound with an image. As Saussure explains with the example of the word “arbor”, “One tends to forget that arbor is called a sign only because it carries the concept “tree,” with the result that the idea of the sensory part imphes the idea of the whole”(Saussure 67). The signifier and signified “ have the advantage of indicating the opposition that separates them from each other and from the whole of which they are parts”(Saussure 67). They separate the word from the image you have engraved in your brain of what it means. Designers use this to their advantage in graphics. If a designer were to work on an ad, and when you see it, front and center you see a cat, you would assume that the ad has to do something with cats; cat food, cat toys, cat adoption, or anything related. You would assume this without the need to even read the word “cat”. A designer is able to convey a message or tell you the reason for the ad without the need for words. Archaic numbering systems and rudimentary signage show us the process and evolution language and design have gone through. As Lupton-Miller explains, “A look at several early forms of numerical notation reveals a fluid range of forms through which human cultures have attempted to depict the order– numerical and linguistic– of the world”. 

Specifically for Italy, author Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, was looking towards the idea of futurism for the coming decades. He envisioned Italy stepping out its comfort zone of looking at art in museums and dwelling over memories and instead turning that rage that art made them feel into new creations. He wanted new art to turn into a representation of rage, courage, and aggression. Marinetti states, “To admire an old picture is to pour our sensibility into a funeral urn instead of casting it forward with violent spurts of creation and action” (Marinetti). And while Marinetti basket in the idea of futurism, constructivist Aleksandro Rodchenko did so in the idea of functionalism. When it came to new possibilities for art, Rodchenko hoped for artists to turn away from representational art and instead turn to utility. He wanted to see art in things such as a pair of boots, a mug or a magazine. For the future of the 20th century, Constructivist, El Lassitzky, on the other hand suggested one simple idea; books becoming international in language. He wanted both the representation of an image and the sound of a letter to mix in books and become something that transcends the language barriers. “The coming book must be both. The energetic task that art must accomplish is to transmute the emptiness into space, that is, into something that our minds can grasp as an organized unity”(Lissitzky 27). For all artists, you can say that the big question in looking into the future was, “Do you want to waste the best part of your strength in a useless admiration of the past, from which you will emerge exhausted, diminished, trampled on?” (Marinetti).

A “Constructivist” is an artist embracing technology to become a constructor and an activist. In the first couple of lines in his manifesto, Rodchenko makes clear that his vision for the future of the artist is the embracing of technology, one of his statements being, “previously—Engineers relaxed with art now—Artists relax with technology”. Though technology would pose a threat for artists, it was something they rather embraced and worked with rather than shy away from. Rodchenko admits to technology being the enemy, but not something that will overcome him by stating “Technology is—the mortal enemy of art. technology. . . . We are your first fighting and punitive force. We are also your last slave-workers”. Artist El Lissitzky saw technology moving the arts forward in a way called “dematerialism”. Dematerialism is essentially the decrease of materials used to make a process simpler and more innovative. Like the example he uses of mail, “correspondence grows, the number of letters increases, the amount of paper written on and material used up swells, then the telephone call relieves the strain” (Lissitzky 26). And that’s what technology will continue to do for the future, one innovation relieving the strain of another which was taking more time, effort, and resources. 

Artists Marinetti and Lissitzky shared a common view in believing that the meaning of a piece of art doesn’t evolve with it. Lissitzky stated that “Every invention in art is a single event in time, has no evolution… 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”. Like Marinetti stated at the beginning of his manifesto, both of these artists agree that the art seen in museums and places alike evoke a feeling, but don’t spark new emotions and creativity. They both believe that art has its time, but when it comes time to make new art, artists have to embrace that. While Marinetti put it in more poetic terms, Lissitzky put it in simpler terms; “The invention of easel pictures produced great works of art, but their effectiveness has been lost” (Lissitzky 29)

Rodchenko’s idea of turning to industrial and functional art is an element that proved a bit problematic. New artists soon began to use the label of constructivism to label themselves genius while still designing things that went against the foundation of what constructivism was. As Rochenko explains, ‘“new’ constructivists jumped on the bandwagon, wrote “constructive” poems, novels, paintings, and other such junk. Others, taken with our slogans, imagine 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” (Rodchenko 24). While Rodchenko’s idea of constructivism is a bit problematic for artists in the present, Lissitzky’s ideas about dematerializing seems to be thriving and truer than ever. In the past, present, and future, new inventions of technology seem to continue to replace older versions of themselves. 

In his book, “The New Typography”, typographer, Jan Tschichold, explains the difference between the old and new typography, which was a new idea for typography that came about in the 1920s. He explains that opposed to old typography whose goal was beauty, new typography aims for clarity. Tschichold explains that the reason for this change was that “This utmost clarity is necessary today because of the manifold claims for our attention made by the extraordinary amount of print…”(Tschichold 35). When it comes to typography, one should design with clarity in mind. With a market that’s growing in competition, the goal can’t be physical beauty anymore, it had to be clarity. Something that gets straight to the point and gives what is being looked for without searching too deep. Tschihold believes it is wrong to design a text in a certain way just for the beauty of it, completely ignoring the impracticality of it. For example, the beginning of the title of a book being larger letters and the rest much smaller right underneath it. He states, “We believe it is wrong to arrange a text as if there were some focal point in the center of a line that would justify such an arrangement” (Tschichold 36). One should design with function in mind, because “It is essential to give pure and direct expression to the contents of what- ever is printed; just as in the works of technology and nature…” (Tschichold 36). One should also design with the mindset that it is up to them to study how his work ought to be read. And lastly, with an objective mind and “Above all, a fresh and original intellectual approach is needed, avoiding all standard solutions”. (Tschichold 38).

Graphic designer Karl Gerstner’s idea of how one should design came from a simple thought; “not to make creative decisions as prompted by feeling but by intellectual criteria”(Gerstner 58). He wants designers to design with a rational, systematic approach. To him, designing is a specific group of selection that leads to an exact criteria and produces a specific piece of work. Wanting to have been a chemist before a designer, Gerstner combined his art with science and created a generating system for a range of design solutions. It was ultimately a cross between science, technology, and art that prompted this idea that one should design in a logical and systematic approach rather than be guided by feelings. When speaking about the program he designed for typography it can be seen exactly how Gerstner looks at design. He states, “There are many imperfections. But it is precisely in drawing up the scheme, in striving for perfection, that the work really lies”(Gerstner 59). Gerstner believes designing is full of imperfections, but the goal of it is to follow a process that will have you in the mindset of working towards perfection.

Josef Muller-BrockMann was a graphic designer that like Karl Gerstein, believed in following a process to turn work guided by feelings into something more rational and controlled. His main goal was to achieve a universal system of communication through typography, and just like Gerstein, a big part of his process was the grid system. Muller-Brockmann believed that “the designer’s work should have the clearly intelligible, objective, functional, and aesthetic quality of mathematical thinking” (Muller-Brockmann 63); both expecting art to transcend creativity and step into more structural fields like math and science. Like Tschichold, he also believed that designers should design with clarity in mind, stating, “Work done systematically and in accordance with strict formal principles makes those demands for directness, intelligibility, and the integration of all factors that are also vital in socio political life”. This means that one should follow a strict system that allows them to deliver all demands being made, which are essentially providing a clear and direct message. Muller-Brockman thinks that “Every visual creative work is a manifestation of the character of the designer. It is a reflection of his knowledge, his ability, and his mentality” (Muller-Brockmann 63), which is why he thinks the grid system is so essential. It allows a designer to manifest his character through a process that advocates for clarity, objectivity, concentration and technicality. 

Though the ideas were expressed differently, an overlap can be found in how these designers feel one should design. The main goal should always be universal clarity. All of them are looking for designers to step out of what traditional typography started as and instead embrace the new changes technology gifts them. Gerstner’s work with design systems reveal “How much computers change— or can change— not only the procedure of the work but the work itself.” One should design through the use of design generating systems in order to put their objectivity aside and provide clarity, rationality, and a form of universal communication through their work. 

Jan Tschichold’s book The New Typography teaches how typography should be about clarity and not beauty. Type should be about clearly deliverying a message. Ornaments, decorative elements are unneccessary because they dristract from the message. Text should not be centered because it doen’t make sense and it is hard to read for cultures who read from left to right. Centered text also creates uneven white space from line to line. Since text should not be centered, text appears asymmetric. Asymmetry is logical and functional because is natural order. Asymmetry gives unlimited variation and flexibility, which allows for a clear delivery of the message of the design. 

Karl Gerstner approach to design is to have a system when laying out design elements. Design elements need to be picked out for their purpose and not for the feeling the designer has towards them. Gerstner takes Fritz Zwicky’ scientific system and applies it to design. Elements are grouped in parameters and relative components. He considers a grid a system that can be used to proportionally laying out design components. He also talks about programmes, which I didn’t really understand from the paper. 

 Josef Müller-Brockmann popularized the use of a grid system as a design structure. A grid creates order when there would otherwise be chaos. A grid should be used to layout the elements of the design to deliver an orderly, functional, aesthetic, understandable work. Creative work is not just for delivering a message, but it also represents the designer’s creativity, knowledge, and ability. 

The Bauhaus was an art school, founded by Walter Gropius in 1919, just after World War II, in Weimar Germany. The main influences behind the Bauhaus were modernism, the English Arts and Crafts movements, and Constructivism. Gropius reconciled these disparate influences at the Bauhaus, where the reigning principles were unity form and function, the idea that design is in service of the community, and a belief in the perfection and efficiency of geometry. After reading László Moholy-Nagy’s Typophoto, it made me feel that he thinks that the new ways to create art like with the printing press, will cause artists in the future to lose and or forget the vision of how art was done in the past. Herbert Bayer sees that as time moves on, things start to advance and so does the way of typography. Typographers create and explore deeper in new art styles as the art world moves on.

      I think Bayer may feel that technology has taken away an artists ability to truly create inventions as demands for new inventions were made to make tasks easier to be done, as he also exemplifies Gutenberg’s printing press which was built and then advanced to do what itis programmed to do, and it had a huge impact and changes the typography world forever and it depletes an artists skill as the artists may even get replaced by a machine. I think just trying new things can bring out art more into the future because new ideas will bring you into the future. For example, Facebook, Instagram, Email, and Twitter bought us to the new future of contactless communication, and the creation of automobiles, public transfers, and air crafts bought us to the future of faster transportation and is still strong today which leads to improvements in sales and manufacturing.

       What I think Gropius,  László Moholy-Nagy, and Bayer think about typography, photography, and media in the new art world is that these are the most important key factors in an artists life and that the way they were discovered and the artists that came before, new artists should be taught on how typography, photography, and the media came to be and with technologies advancements, it should help keep the way on how these careers were discovered and done, not change them. For me, I can’t imagine a world without design, I see it everywhere I go. In my home, on my clothes, on street signs and ads. When I think of language I start to think about words and letters, and I can imagine the world with those neither. Language is important as it helps us understand one another and is an essential role for communication and those two are essential roles for design. 

     What should be taught about different fields of art in education is the importance of learning how to think critically and creatively. It’s important for young minds to learn how to think critically so that they can see that this is a skill not only for their own personal development but can be of use for their future careers as well. Of course, you’ve been told at a young age and still hear now that a high school diploma and a college degree can help you achieve many and better things in life or what life has to offer, and after that close friends and especially family expect you to work in jobs that are more looked up upon like a doctor, lawyer, and pilot mainly because of the money, and I just believe that a career in the arts is just as important and is treated with respect just as much as any other job field. The thought of art I think should be considered a main aspect of the 21st century in education because times are changing and the ways in which children learn will continue to grow, change, and develop. Therefore I think the school system and teachers need to incorporate opportunities for the arts within the classroom, where students should be allowed and be able to show what they have learned through design and even technology.