F.T. Marinetti, āManifesto of Futurismā; Aleksandr Rodchenko, āWho We Are: Manifesto of the Constructivist Groupā; and El Lissitzky, āOur BookāĀ are found in our main textĀ Graphic Design Theory: Readings From the FieldĀ by Helen Armstrong on pages 19-31.Ā
- These manifestos expressed an almost unanimous dismissal of ownership by prioritizing the importance of creating a universal form of communication & function. Alexandr Rodchenko altered the concept of authorship through a collective pride found in his self-proclaimed identity as one of the founders of Russian constructivism. He often referred to the pioneers of this design movement using the collective āWeā in his manifesto.
āWeāare your first fighting and punitive force.
We are also your last slave-workers.
We are not dreamers from art who build in the imagination:ā
By using we instead of I Rodchenko renounces individual ownership of the constructivist style & creates a guideline to structure his movement of like-minded constructors.
F.T. Marinetti touched on futurism’s social and political ideals and depicted its followers as having an unquenchable thirst for war, innovation, speed & hardship. Proclaiming in his first sentence, āWe intend to sing the love of danger, the habit of energy and fearlessness.ā
El Lissitsky took a deep dive into the concept of universal communication by comparing & contrasting the letterform & the hieroglyph – noting what linguistic or cultural barriers separate the two. Lissitsky predicted the evolution of literature from paper to digitized screens & alluded to similarities between the novel, the typographic poster, & the illustrated book. Broadly attributing literature, writing, & the then-declining processes of book-making to the evolving cacophony of visual expression.
- Alexandr Rodchenko & F.T. Marinetti share similarities in their intense call-to-action that rejects rest & embraces constant innovation. They also both believe in the irrefutable power & influence of technology as a means to serve the community & change the purpose design serves. However, a primary difference between the two is their preferred medium of expression. F.T. Marinetti structured his manifesto like a poem & directed many of his calls to action to other poets. All the while Rodchenko rejected the works of constructivist poetry, literature, & paintings. Rodchenko seemed to detest art forms that prioritized personal expression or failed to serve a direct purpose for the common good of the community. El Lissitsky & Marinetti related over their dialogues about avant-garde literature, but Lissitsky looked more towards the theory of the evolution of literature while Marinetti focused on the progression of industrialism & its impact on war & society. Laszlo Moholy Nagy advocated for the integration of photography into typographic design & emphasized the weight it held on communication by depicting typography as the noise between the message and the recipient. Moholy Nagyās ideals relate to Jan Tschichold & the New Typography movement by disposing of ornamental elements and preconceived type design, & emphasizing logic to communicate messages with the utmost clarity possible.
- Parts of Alexandr Rodchenkoās Constructivism Manifesto are still relevant today. For instance, highlighting the artistās role in advancing & applying technology. While artists may push the limits of technology out of pure curiosity rather than function or service there are still constant technological advancements changing the way we see & make art. A few instances of this are the increase of content curated for the virtual & augmented reality space & the increasing prevalence of artificial intelligence in art making. Many elements of F.T. Marinettiās 1909 Manifesto of Futurism contain ideologies that are very problematic today. For example, the glorification of war, the mass destruction of academic institutions, & the abhorrence for women are all outdated and problematic ideals. Marinettiās manifesto reminded me of the fascist ideals of Hitler during the Nazi regime. If Marinetti were alive today, Iām sure heād be canceled without a second thought.
- Communication has evolved countless times from the 20th century largely due to indomitable technological advancements. Smartphones & increased internet access have thrust creators & consumers into a period of constant communication. There is an influx of self-taught personal & professional artists with access to professional designing software incessantly pushing the boundaries of communication. Typographic design has taken a step further from photo integration & is now being used with 2D & 3D animation, 3D renders & models, & virtual and augmented reality. Newspapers have gone digital to keep up with this new era of mass communication, & much of current advertising is done through phone screens & billboard TVs. This massive shift into the fast-paced technological scape creates a deep divide between those with internet & tech access & those without. The subsequently oversaturated digital creative space has also created a much higher benchmark & reward for originality in message & execution since almost nothing is surprising anymore. With these international spaces to share & consume, navigating amplified feedback & claiming authorship have taken the forefront of creative entrepreneurial conversation. The necessity of branding oneself & learning to deal with endless criticism from consumers & creators alike applies more pressure on the creative to ensure the communication of their message is clear, fresh, and non-problematic. On the flip side, this new one-to-one relationship between consumer and creator can result in strong online communities and increased access to otherwise unattainable opportunities.
Annotation:
https://hyp.is/CmpFpDX1Ee2FplsvLxKRng/designopendata.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/graphicdesigntheory_helenarmstrong.pdf
Leave a Reply