OUGD401: Context of Practice: Lecture Notes

Visual Literacy

 Typography

Chronologies of Print

Chronologies of Animation

The Photograph as Document

Graphic Design in Mass Media

Post Modernism

OUGD401: Context of Practice: Task 5

Analysis of a Typeface

Beatrice Warde states that a good typography must ask of type not 'How should it look?' but 'What must it do?' which is wrong. Ok in her context of type for books, where large amounts of text are present I believe her 'crystal goblet' logic is sound but to state that it is the only form of typography worth considering is just a very dull way of looking at the world. 

My example of type is Franchise Bold- I love this type face, it shouts, it demands and it stands strongly out from the crowd, yet it also restrain itself before it becomes too overbearing. It's a transitional san serif type that appears to have begun it's life in the wood printing press, however this font is relatively new and still a baby, designed by Derek Weathersbee who states that each character was "meticulously drawn to achieve a unifomity without compromising style". It's decorative rather than functional, as all my favourite type is. Not all type should blend into the background, and certainly shouldn't be ignored.

So why is Beatrice wrong? I'll use the example of Franchise to defend my opinion. She proclaims that

"the most important thing about printing is that it conveys thought, ideas, images, from one mind to other minds."- Warde

Perhaps, but what about the tone? It's all well and good relying purely on content to deliver your message; and in the context of books and large amounts of body text this may be true, as mentioned previously, but for all other forms of type this cannot be the case. Surely type must convey something about what it's saying rather than just saying it? Isn't that simply mirroring language? In human speech when two people communicate what we say means little to nothing, it makes up about 10% of communication. The rest is made up of 50% body language and 40% tone of voice. 

I can say the words 'I love you so much' but if spoken sarcastically without eye contact and a body held away from the person I'm talking to do I really love them? If spoken maliciously with a strong and defiant body then surely these words become threatening and scary rather than loving. It works both ways, if I were to say 'You're such a stupid bitch' with a smile on my face, an open body posture and a tone of voice that conveys joking the words are taken in jest and humour rather than pure insult if they were read without context. 

Typefaces are called typefaces because they are the 'face' we look at whilst being spoken to and that face can change the meaning of words by distorting it's expression or setting itself in a new font. 

"A public speaker is more 'audible' in that sense when he bellows. But a good speaking voice is one which is inaudible as a voice. It is the transparent goblet again!"- Warde

Well surely this comes down to context? Yes a good speaking voice may be one that is also inaudible but if I were attempting to warn people about a fire that's broken out then I think bellowing it would be more suitable than using a good clear speaking voice. This is the same with typography, if I am trying to sway your opinion on a subject I don't want my voice inaudible, I want it as loud as possible. if I'm trying to sell you something or catch your attention I want you to hear me. Let's look some examples, three examples in the ever so legible font Baskerville and three in Franchise Bold.

Which examples jump to your eyes attention first? Which examples do you read first? And which ones seem more suitable for their contexts and topics? For each, Franchise Bold is the answer. There's a reason headlines are set in typefaces similar to Franchise Bold and not in Baskerville. If we were to 'hear' these phrases the tone of voice for each font in dramatically different. I can barely hear Baskerville but I can definitely hear Franchise Bold, it's demanding I do something right now, whether that's paying attention to it, buying something from it or saving the whales.

"When you listen to a song in a language you do not understand, part of your mind actually does fall asleep, leaving your quite separate aesthetic sensibilities to enjoy themselves unimpeded by your reasoning faculties. The fine arts do that; but that is not the purpose of printing. Type well used is invisible as type, just as the perfect talking voice is the unnoticed vehicle for the transmission of words, ideas."- Warde

This is so very untrue, if we are listening to a song sung in another language then we surely are listening to how it is sang to gain our sense of context and tone. If they sing harshly and sharply, strong defined consonants and spitting on P's and T's then we know the song must be about anger, frustration. If we were to hear it in the natural and monotonous speaking tone then we would derive nothing from the song at all. We don't know the words, we have no idea how it should be sang, and we are given nothing to fill in the gaps- it becomes empty, flat and useless. 

In the context of voice we look to actors, an actor would consider themselves unsuccessful if they weren't able to communicate to you their intended emotions through facial expressions and tone of voice; an inaudible, clear and empty actor is a bad one. How can you communicate to an audience if you don't use any tools of communication? The transmission of words and ideas come laced with persuasion and tone, these must be transmitted along with the words and without tone the words becomes meaningless jumbles of letters.

In conclusion type and fonts are voices, not wine glasses. They communicate to us as another person would and we rely not on what they say but how they say it, on the tone of voice they choose, the context in which they're speaking to us and the inflections used in language to keep our attention. Each typeface is another person, a different character, a different voice and it is up to the designer to find the appropriate context for a font or the appropriate font for a context.

If I am to view type as just an object then surely I want a beautiful object, I want an object that tells me something about the drink inside.

  Give me the golden jewel encrusted goblet anyday, I prefer to drink my wine in style. 

OUGD401: Context of Practice: SB2- Theory into Practice

'Certain advertisements, posters, packages, logos, books and magazines endure as sign posts of artistic, commercial, and technological achievement that often speak more about particular epochs or milieus than fine art ’(Heller and Pomeroy 1997).

This was the key inspiration behind  my publication. I thoroughly believe when it comes to the representation of culture and society that Graphic Design is the medium through which it can be viewed the most clearly. So to put this theory into practice I decided to produce a picture book depicting graphic design examples of a certain era- I chose the 90's as it's a decade close to my heart and one I remember with fondness- and also one that I feel is easily definable through design. 

The title of the publication is: Defining a Decade through Design.

The format I chose for my book was 89x148, the exact dimensions of the original game boy- which would also be the front cover. The images included and gathered would all be examples of 90's design. (originally I had wanted to include more clothing and toys into the book, however I felt these were examples of design and not specifically Graphic design and so most of my content was made up with packaging, posters, magazine and album covers.)

It was at this point that I decided to change the binding of the publication from a stitch bind to a concertina bind. I felt that this style of publication lent itself better to picture books and more 'arty' looking pages. Also it meant that each page could be appreciated individually as well as the publication as a whole when you fully stretched it out. 

For my inspiration into the look, layout and design of the pages I looked into 90's graphic design- mostly David Carson and, I really like his stuff. 

I found a lot of 90's design has a visual beauty to it that doesn't consider form or function, it considers personalty above everything and that spoke to me so much more than clean, dull and empty modernist design. What's the point of being a creative if you're not even going to try and make something look beautiful? 

I enjoyed creating a 'mess' in the background on which to place my images. It was a refreshing way of thinking about design, I didn't have to consider the practically rather the look and this appealed to me. 

For my fonts I only used fonts developed in the 90's -FF Tokyo and FF Gothic were my two choices. Both looked drastically different from each other whilst still remaining bold and unapologetic- characteristics I wanted to represent of the decade. 

FF Gothic

FF Tokyo

Final Publication

The front cover and format were inspired by a Game Boy, how cool is that?

The actual title of my publication hidden at the back: Defining a Decade through Design: The 90's

Evaluation

As a whole I really do like my publication- it may not be the most intense book ever produced but I do feel as a piece of design it is successful- it sums up the decade of the 90's through pictures and layout design. I really like the look of it, the slight chaotic beauty really appeals to the scatter brain in me. 

The production of this book could've been done better. The stock I printed on didn't lend itself too easily to being folded concertina style and the attempts to stick the font and back pages together resulted in some bubbling on a few of the pages- this really bugs me because other than that it worked out very well. I think this was due to the way I printed my pages as a continuous piece of paper rather than dividing them into sections to glue together. 

I believe this publication highlights one key theme I refer to in my essay- That Graphic Design is a better communicator and representation of particular times, epochs and decades than fine art. This is the driving inspiration and rational behind the entire book. The representation of the 90's through graphic design demonstrates that graphics can represent particular times and sum up the tone and feel of a certain decade. 

OUGD401: Context of Practice: SB1- Critical Analysis

Is art better than graphic design?

 Analysing what makes the two so similar and/or different and why this is.

   By art this essay refers to the disciplines of painting, fine art, sculpture and possibly conceptual art- the sort of art in other words that one might expect to find in a gallery. GD on the other hand is seen as a consumerist form of creativity existing as packaging, branding, publications and advertisements.

   Traditionally Graphic Design has been considered separate from the world of fine art.  Although many may accept graphic design as a creative subject alongside art or ‘different institutions, different organisations… practising the same for of creativity’ (Barnard, 2005, 177) it is clear that the two share some key differences, but also important to remember that they share similarities that tie them together.

   So how are the two similar? Both art and graphic design at their hearts serve the purpose of communication, they exist in order to pass on a message. In an article entitled Art and Communication, Rex Crockett describes art as a ‘certain kind of specialized communication’ (Crockett, 2006), he describes art as a quality of communication that possesses a strong enough level of craft to allow the object to transcend its original function.

 ‘Craft becomes art when it breaks away from mechanical functionality and begins to “emanate.” One’s personal appearance becomes art when it transcends the purely functional. One’s life itself becomes an art form when it becomes something more than mere survival.’ (Crockett, 2006)

   Pieces such as The Annunciation, (1672) painted by Luca Giordano (fig 1)  and The Vocation of Saint Aloysius (1650) painted by Giovanni Francesco Barbieri (fig 2) were produced in order to communicate stories from the Christian faith in a way that could be understood by a public devoid of the ability to read or write. Art also generates communication, for pieces that have no obvious meaning or no knowledge of the artist’s original message a gap emerges, leaving an artistic piece open for personal interpretation with an audience. A perfect example of this is Giorgione’s The Tempest (1507) (fig 3.), a masterpiece whose original message is lost to history and a painting that has been debated by experts of art.

   Graphic design is also communication; it is often referred to as a visual language. Every piece of good graphic design is crafted to convey a message spoken in the correct tone and targeted at the right person, all through the mediums of text and image. Usually the message is one of motivation, the Levi’s posters motivate us to buy Levi’s jeans and the recycling leaflets motivate us to recycle. No matter the medium or the context be it publication or packaging design, logo or layout, the communicated message an audience takes away from design is the driving force behind every design decision.

   There are a lot of cultural connotations attached to art; the first is that artists paint for the soul whereas designers produce for the pay packet. This is of course a misconception, both mediums have the same restrictions placed on them when it comes to money, an artist needs to eat just as much as a designer and in both cases what is produced has to, eventually be sold. The reason for this belief comes down to the second cultural connotation, and this one surrounds the artist. The artist is often portrayed as a ‘genius’ or a ‘visionary’, depicted as a tortured soul who lives rough, reads the world and translates it onto a canvas. Such classic examples include, Van Gogh, who supposedly lived in slums and squander, torture and torment and modern examples include Damien Hirst, who spent many years living in a squat.

    The aforementioned artists are considered geniuses because of these real world experiences. However these myths blur the facts of their situations, in reality Van Gogh was only able to paint because his brother financed him entirely. And with Damien Hirst, his biggest piece entitled ‘The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living’ (fig 4) (a tiger shark preserved in formaldehyde) was conceived with, paid for and sold by Charles Saatchi over a café lunch. The piece went for a hefty price before the gallery doors even opened (and Saatchi managed to spend a total of £56,000 of his own money producing the piece).  For both artists and designers,

‘What is produced has, eventually, to be marketable in order for the ‘artist’ to be able to live.  Even in the limit cases, there is something like a client and the ‘artist’ is constrained to produce something that ‘end-user’ will want to buy.’ (Barnard, 2005, 165).

 And despite the romantic, naive view of art and its supposed influence on culture, it has to be recognised and accepted that ‘no culture can develop… without a source of income.’ (Greenberg, 1939).

   When it comes to cultural significance art is known as the symbol of culture and cultural language, depicting religion, key events, people and opinions through varying mediums. In society, it is usually the fine arts that are considered to be the best way of representing a culture due to its expressive and creative nature. For example Franz Kline’s piece New York (fig 5) can be said to communicate the cultural attitudes of New York, its simple calligraphic strokes and sharp angles connote not only the modern metropolis that New York is but also the sharp and heated nature of what it is to live there. The roughness of the edges depict a world much darker when viewed up close and the suffocating closeness of some of the line work is a representation of the compact living conditions with flats, sky scrapers and people all squashed into a space far too small to accommodate them all. Be it through personal opinion or direct representation art is viewed as our direct example of cultural authority.

 ‘Art has been a way to communicate beliefs and express ideas about the human experience throughout all stages of civilization and in every region of the world. As cultural documents, works of art provide important insights into past and existing cultures, helping us to understand how others have lived and what they valued.’ (Art Through Time 2013).

   Graphic Design is also a medium through which culture, society and everyday life can be communicated, all be it a very recent one, and in my opinion it is a far better representative. Graphic design is everywhere and it is nearly impossible to go through an entire day without bumping into examples of it. We interact with it almost all the time, be it through products and packaging, layout and publications, web or media, posters or advertisements. As it becomes a part of our lives it also becomes a part of our culture, such examples as the Rolling Stones tongue (fig 6) or the Coca Cola Logo (fig 7) have been transformed from logos into fashion symbols; you can now purchase the Rolling Stones tongue on t-shirts and posters and the Coca-Cola logo not only has its own branded furniture for sale but also has recently released it’s own line of shoes.

  Some may say that this doesn’t make Graphics a suitable cultural representation due to it being so closely linked to consumerism, however at its heart what truly makes culture is choice and enough people choosing it. On it’s own taking a photograph of yourself and posting it online doesn’t seem like too great of an action but when done ritualistically by millions of people it becomes a cultural statement; it may not be pretty and it may not be sophisticated, but it is a genuine and real representation. Graphic Design is the same, not every design may be pretty or artistic or intelligent but it is real, it is used, interacted with and absorbed. Like it or not we all know brands, we all recognise logos and we make choices consciously or subconsciously which will go on to have a greater effect on public in general and the shape of our culture.

   Another way Graphic Design can be argued to represent culture is through the way design decisions are influenced; the key factor in any design choice is the preference of the audience you are targeting. For any piece of design to be effective the target audience must be considered and understood; the designer will not select colours, fonts or images based on what looks good but based on what clearly communicates the intended message and what audience he is appealing to. Attempting to communicate to a target audience requires the audience understanding your choices and the overall message and to do this designers rely on existing cultural connotations.

 If we want something to look fresh or environmentally friendly we use the colour green which usually connotes leaves, grass, health and freshness. A good piece of design relies upon previously established stereotypes and connotations to communicate a message or strengthen a pre existing one, in this way ‘Certain advertisements, posters, packages, logos, books and magazine endure as sign posts of artistic, commercial, and technological achievement that often speak more about particular epochs or milieus than fine art ’(Heller and Pomeroy 1997).

   Although both Art and Graphics share strong similarities there are also key differences between the two, which, despite them both being creative forms of visual communication, does make them distinctly different. The first is a question of inspiration over motivation, as previously stated, art and graphics hold communication at their heart: the out come of that message however is different. Good design is supposed to motivate you; every piece of graphic design has at its heart a purpose whether its attempting to sway your opinion in the form of a pamphlet or make you purchase a certain brand of cookies with an advert, they do this by relying on cultural connotation already existing within society, ‘The designer’s job isn’t to invent something new, but to communicate something that already exists, for a purpose.’ (O’Nolan 2009)

    If graphic design is produced and received effectively the audience response would be to do something, to buy this product, to go to this event, to sign up for this news letter, to choose Tesco over Asda. On the other hand good Art should inspire you, the artist does not want direct communication but rather considered, the point of art is to create an emotional connection and response with it’s audience and to allow intelligent interaction from its public through personal interpretation of a piece. The underlying principle of a good artist is to attempt to convey something new, to communicate in an entirely never before seen way

‘Many artists chose to stand apart from worldly life in order to critique it… Although [they] claim to address their art to the world, their method has been to take from the world only on their terms and give back as they see fit. This is definitely not the way of design, which considers the world's purpose first and fits the work to that end.’ (Brady, 1998)

   Next we must look at how art and graphic design are interacted with by their audiences. Art exists to have multiple interpretations: although an initial message may have been considered during the creation of the piece the whole point of art is that of personal meaning and self-interpretation, “art connects with different people in different ways, because it is interpreted differently” O’Nolan 2009) When we view art, the end goal is for us to develop our own opinion on what a piece is communicating and unlike design there are no rules that bind the craft. The reason an artist produces art is for a personal purpose, for the sake of creating beauty and for the sake of an audience member finding some form of personal truth (inward looking or societal) within a piece, it does not need to function in the way design does and it does not need to have an single message that everyone will walk away with. “Art strives to achieve beauty, which is truth… Practical success is not the hallmark of art…” (Brady, 1998)

   In contradiction to this, examples of Graphic design have one meaning and one message, they are not created to be interpreted they are created to be understood. Design is produced with the intention of doing a single job, be it informing people not to step over the yellow line at a train station or persuading you to go along to the Debenham’s Blue Cross sale, and throughout its production every design choice will have been made to further communicate this one single message. In the eye of artist if someone were to interpret their piece differently to how they intended it would probably be considered a success, in terms of design though if anyone were to take away anything other than the intended message, the piece of design is considered a failure.

‘Does the design serve the product? Does it accomplish an end--does it sell, inform, persuade, direct, or entertain? If it doesn't get the job done, the design is considered not good, or worse, not successful.’ (Brady, 1998)

This is something that can be said to be true of all design, it does not think of aesthetics first but purpose and can either be considered successful or unsuccessful, never good or bad.

   This leads us on to the next key difference between art and design, the difference of taste and opinion. The key factor in judging design is did it do its job? (Was it successful?) And how well did it do it? (How successful was it?)

‘A good piece of design can still be successful without being to your taste. If it accomplishes its objective of being understood and motivates people to do something, then whether it’s good or not is a matter of opinion.’ (O’Nolan 2009)

Although graphics certainly requires a taste or style, it is not the main function of a piece of design. Whether a designer likes a piece or not cannot take away from its success in communicating to an audience, he may not like it, but he can appreciate its function and the point it manages to achieve.

‘While design naturally involves an element of personal taste, it’s not the main criteria it’s judged on. Good design can still be successful without being to the personal taste of the creator or the beholder’ (Roper 2013)

   On the other hand art is a matter of taste, being a connoisseur of art doesn’t come with the assumption that one will like and appreciate all forms of art. A follower of the Impressionist movement may consider conceptual art a joke to the subject and an abstract artist may find photorealism far too confined and restricting. The key example that appears in many articles on the subject is the 1999 turner prize shortlisted My Bed (fig 8) produced by artist Tracy Emin. It was a piece that divided the opinion of the art world into two very contradicting sides on the one hand some saw it as an expressive and honest piece at the height of artistic thought, on the other hand the conservative traditionalist may view it as an insult to the artistic process and would never consider it as art.

   In summary, it is argued that art is a natural born talent, and rightly so. An artist certainly can develop his practice through teaching and through learning but when it comes down to it there must be a natural skill pre-existing to develop upon. And design, although it certainly takes a creative thinker and an ‘artistic eye’ to understand what looks good and what doesn’t, the process of design can be broken down into rules, into a list of objectives and is at its heart a taught skill.

In Craig Elimeleah’s article ‘Art vs. Design’ he compares the job of a designer to that of an engineer

 ‘A designer is similar to an engineer… [they] must not only have an eye for color and style but must adhere to very intricate functional details that will meet the objectives of the project.’ (Elimeleah 2006)

A designer has a point they must get across, whether communicating ideas about a product or attempting to influence and persuade his audience to do something, there is a pre set objective that must be completed and this will shape the final product/design. There are also restrictions applied to the final product, will it be a poster? A logo? A packet? An information booklet? A publication? And even once that is decided further restrictions continue to apply, what will its format be? How many colours? Will it need to work in colour and monotone? Where will it be displayed? Significantly, an artist however

‘doesn't have to adhere to any specific rules, the artist is creating his own rules…The artist is free to express themselves in any medium and colour scheme, using any number of methods to convey their message… [The artist] could never be given any specific instructions in creating a new chaotic and unique masterpiece because his emotions and soul is dictating the movement of his hands and the impulses for the usage of the medium. No art director is going to yell at an artist for producing something completely unique because that is what makes an artist an artist and not a designer.’ (Elimeleah, 2006)

           

   So is art better than design? Although design may be a skill that arguably anyone could learn and artistic skill is something you are just born with the fact that within the art world you can feel so passionately for one movement and dismiss another with little to no regard does not, arguably, make it superior. The same goes for interpretation and meaning, just because art can convey many messages and design should only contain one doesn’t make it better or worse (in fact in terms of communication design is arguably the most successful out of the two).

   In conclusion, although both mediums are creative, they both communicate and they both represent the social and cultural worlds they were produced within, they are two different creatures, two very different practices that may overlap in many key areas, but still remain different. Because of this one cannot be argued to be better than the other; its like attempting to argue which is better, maths or science when really both are of equal value in their own fields. Perhaps it’s time to attempt to combine the two worlds of art and design, to produce the equivalent of physics or engineering- design may be able to take something from art if a designer attempts to add artistic and personal flair to a piece they create and perhaps successful art could benefit from rules and consideration of the end result. Then again when it comes down to it they are equal because both produce works, be it art or design that can be ghastly and hideous or heart breakingly beautiful. I have seen art that makes me feel and design that can stir the same level of emotion just as I have seen art and design that leave little to no impression.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Bibliography

Barnard, M. (2005). Graphic Design as Communication. London: Routledge.

Brady, M. (1998). Art and Design: What’s the Big Difference?. Critique Magazine, vol. 11

Crockett, R. (2006). Art and Communication. Available: http://artandperception.com/2006/11/art-and-communication.html. Last accessed 28th March 2014

Elimeliah, C. (2006) Art vs. Design. Available: http://www.aiga.org/art-vs-design/. Last accessed 28th March 2014

Greenburg, C. (1939) ‘Avant-Garde and Kitsch’, The Partisan Review, vol. 6, no. 5 Autumn

Heller, S. and Pomeroy, K. (1997) Design Literacy: Understanding Graphic Design, New York: Allworth Press

Leveque, E. (2013) Art vs. Graphic Design: The Debate Rages On. Available: http://thedeependdesign.com/art-vs-graphic-design-the-debate-rages-on/. Last accessed 28th March 2014

O'nolan, J. (2009) The Difference Between Art and Graphic Design. Available: http://www.webdesignerdepot.com/2009/09/the-difference-between-art-and-design/. Last accessed 28th March 2014

Roper, C. (2013) The Difference Between Visual Art and Graphic Design. Available: http://speckyboy.com/2013/07/12/the-difference-between-visual-art-and-graphic-design/. Last accessed 28th March 2014

Unknown. (2013) Art Through Time. Available: http://www.learner.org/courses/globalart/about.html. Last accessed 28th March 2014