THE DESIGNER AS PRODUCER

ELLEN LUPTON

authorship

singular

producer

devices

production

structures

dissemination

autonomous

mechanical

reproduction

physical

proletarianization

materialism

reengage

body

things

practice

form

control

collaborators

authorship

structures

reproduction

physical

body

things

practice

form

control

collaborators

structures

body

things

practice

form

body

structures

body

things

practice

form

body

Production is a concept embedded in the history of modernism.

Production privileges the activity of the body.

Production is rooted in the material world.

...practice over theory...

...reader as a participant in the construction of meaning.

...the “means of production” are the heart of human culture and should be collectively owned.

Production belongs to the physical activity of the base, the factory floor: it is the traditional domain of the paste-up artist, the stripper, the letterer, the typesetter.

The proletarianization of design offers designers a new crack at materialism, a chance to reengage the physical aspects of our work.

...authorship is a provocative model for rethinking the role of the graphic designer.

...“production” is linked to the preparation of “artwork” for mechanical reproduction, rather than to the intellectual realm of “design.”

Ellen Lupton’s ideas of the designer as a producer are ideas I tend to agree with. I do believe that designers should feel grounded by the physical aspects of production. This idea of practice over theory, making over imagining, is pretty radical for many people who have spent so much time inside, either physically indoors or figuratively in their own minds, on the intellectual and cerebral part of design. It emphasizes activity beyond the walls of our minds, and recalls the traditional methods of design. The traditional tools and methods of design are humbling to designers like myself who grew up accustomed to such a democratized arena. And since design has been democratized thanks to technology, it provides designers with the opportunity to have a more tactile design experience. I think that the physical practice of production in design should not be taken for granted by the designers of my generation. The ability to realize an idea from conception to finished product is a process that should be experienced by all designers. To be able to have something more tactile is special, especially according to Marxism, in which the “means of production” are shared by the community. It becomes the effort of more than one person, which encourages collaboration and shared experiences. Production as a process and a concept allows designers to take more ownership and authorship of their work.

FUCK CONTENT

MICHAEL ROCK

value

manipulation

linguistic

style

source

shape

treatment

text

complex

storytelling

narratives

indexical

connected

reorganized

reshapes

control

poignant

themes

body

singular

value

style

shape

treatment

text

complex

narratives

control

poignant

themes

shape

treatment

text

narratives

poignant

narratives

shape

treatment

text

narratives

poignant

narratives

treatment

...pushing us to value the origination over the manipulation of content.

...we seem to accept the fact that developing content is more essential than shaping it, that good content is the measure of good design.

...the misconception is that without deep content, design is reduced to pure style, a bag of dubious tricks.

The designer’s purview is to shape, not to write.

…shaping itself was a profoundly affecting form.

...the things we make negotiate a relationship over which we have a profound control.

…that treatment is, in fact, a kind of text itself, as complex and referential as any traditional form of content.

...form itself is indexical.

We are intimately, physically connected to the work we produce, and so it is inevitable that our work bears our stamp.

The meaning of his work is not in the story but the storytelling.

I really enjoy Michael Rock’s idea that form and content imbibe meaning through treatment or manipulation, that the shaping itself can be considered content. It’s great to hear that your work as a designer is more than pure style, and that it can stand on its own as content, filled with textures and complexities. Rock suggests that most people too readily accept the idea that creating content is more important that shaping it, along with the idea that “good content is the measure of good design.” I agree with Rock that the designer’s reach does not include writing, only shaping, and that the belief that we should not value something as much because of the content’s lack of depth is a belief that is wrongly held. For too long designers have been led to value “origination over the manipulation,” even when origination is out of the designer’s reach. Meaning can be found in manipulation itself, as the description of Alfred Hitchcock suggests, “the meaning of his work is not in the story but in the storytelling.” And because designers have a hand in how the story is told, they hold a connection to their work that inevitably is controlled by the designers themselves and carries their own mark. But it is important to shape with a discerning eye, to consider the story being told, and tell it in an emphatic way. Designers communicate through their work, and it is natural that they develop ideas over the span of several projects. Only then can a designer begin to build a body of work available for analysis and critique.

RESEARCH AND DESTROY: GRAPHIC DESIGN AS AN INVESTIGATION

DANIEL VAN DER VELDEN

reflect

need

refinement

value

luxury

investment

redesign

invention

identity

commentary

desires

laborers

vocabulary

questions

knowledge

discourse

respect

problem

perspectives

rhetoric

reflect

need

investment

identity

desires

vocabulary

questions

discourse

perspectives

rhetoric

need

desires

vocabulary

perspectives

rhetoric

need

need

desires

vocabulary

perspectives

rhetoric

need

We no longer have any desire for design that is driven by need.

Design only generates longing.

Design is added value.

The problem is the problem of luxury.

…”an important graphic design” is one generated by the designer himself, a commentary in the margins of visual culture.

Graphic design is still not developing a vocabulary, and hence has not begun developing an itinerary to deepen a profession that has indeed now been around for a while.

The real designer then becomes his own client.

The title of designer exists by way of what it excludes.

…design should instead begin asking interesting questions.

A pioneering designer does more than just design—and it is precisely this that gives design meaning.

To some extent I agree with Daniel van der Velden in Research and Destroy: Graphic Design As Investigation, when he suggests that the only “design problem” is the problem of luxury. But I disagree with his idea that design is simply “added value.” I do believe that most design exists because markets have been created for them, holes have been carved for them, but I do not believe that design is “added.” I think the value of design is inherent, that it is not simply a topping on an ice cream or the side to an entrée. As suggested by Michael Rock, the treatment and application itself has value. I can sort of agree with the idea that there is no “design that is driven by need,” because of these problems that have been created, and did not exist before. It is true that design generates longing, but it also fulfills desires and yearnings. It does not serve true needs, only perceived problems. It is important to point out that graphic design has not “developed a vocabulary,” and so it has not tried to create an agenda with the intention of furthering the profession. It is difficult to be in an arena where there is so much perceived depth and lack the vocabulary to properly describe it. It is important for design as a discipline to generate a vocabulary in order to properly conduct discussions.

UNRAVELING

LORRAINE WILD

disciplined

understanding

context

history

legibility

subtlety

experimentation

language

solution

interpretations

default

platforms

democratization

individual

independence

DIY

complex

relevance

accessibility

variants

context

legibility

subtlety

experimentation

language

solution

interpretations

platforms

democratization

relevance

context

legibility

subtlety

experimentation

relevance

context

context

legibility

subtlety

experimentation

relevance

context

context

Graphic design could lay claim to a new, more reified cultural significance…an understanding of why they were doing it, and in what contexts—historical and contemporary, social and cultural...

…experiments were a critical step in broadening the visual possibilities and being more responsive to the instability and the subtlety of actual communication.

Design history, which often focuses on the form of the artifact, only increased the sense of value attached to form.

…direct the designer’s energy toward heightened capabilities of visual expression.

That I cited the work of several eccentric designers as critical examples was my vote in favor of work that…would reflect personal interpretations turned outward toward the audience.

…one needs to ask whether the thing we are still calling graphic design is an adequate description of what is being made these days.

…the question as to whether design can be art is no longer interesting, but where the independence of design practice is assumed to be a given.

…many young designers…imagine a mostly DIY future for themselves...

...time to get to work bringing these new scenarios.

…it does seem that we are faced with evidence of a possible renaissance in graphic design pointed at an audience…in which imagination and creativity are applied not only to the language of style, but also to the generation of projects themselves, how they live in the world, how they reach out, and which purposes they serve.

Context. Context is pretty much everything, as Lorraine Wild suggests in Unraveling. And I agree. It is extremely important to be aware of the context in which designers are designing. Too often the question of whether design is art is asked, and it’s no longer a relevant question. The more important question is how does graphic design become more culturally significant? Experimentation can lead to interesting discoveries, but designers must create work that project towards an audience, while maintaining their own personal perspectives. When design is directed at an audience, it has the possibility to provide a good reflection of how the designers live their lives. Experimentation is so important to designers, to explore subtleties, develop skills, and hone aesthetic sensibilities. I think this type of experimentation has also led to the “DIY future” that Wild suggests is what many young designers foresee. It’s definitely a prediction I see for myself, I do think that it is essential that I be able to maintain an experimental spirit in my work, and to answer only to myself as a professional. I suspect that it’s a future that many of my fellow peers see for themselves. There are few that dream of working at a large agency or studio. Another good question Wild raises is the issue of calling graphic design “graphic design.” She asks whether it is an appropriate or adequate description of the “graphic design” work that is being made today.

TOOL (OR, POSTPRODUCTION FOR THE GRAPHIC DESIGNER)

ANDREW BLAUVELT

power

evolution

skills

methods

craft

value

surfaces

postproduction

collectivity

projection

re-

crowdsourcing

transforms

solutions

demystification

tool

friction

empower

precision

experience

methods

craft

surfaces

postproduction

collectivity

re-

transforms

tool

friction

empower

surfaces

postproduction

re-

friction

empower

re-

surfaces

postproduction

re-

friction

empower

re-

...the tool in effect transforms our material and virtual realities and, by doing so, it transforms us.

We must learn to create tools ourselves.

…power of the individual to conduct his own education, find his own inspiration, shape his own environment, and share his adventure with whoever is interested.

The natural instinct for self-preservation on the part of graphic designers required a new story about the value of design.

Freed from production, the modern designer had to devise methods so that his intentions could be faithfully realized by others.

It is a culture of re-: remix, reformat, reshuffle, reinterpret, reprogram, reschedule, reboot, repost, recycle.

Nearly every definition of design starts emphatically by stating that the profession isn’t just about surfaces.

It isn’t about what is trendy (forms) as much as what is trending (topics).

…this is an aftermarket world of preexisting forms that are in effect remade by the designer who stands in the position of the user, which is to say as the recipient or consumer of an existing work.

…graphic designers are in fact producers of surfaces, millions of them.

I certainly believe the idea that the tools a designer uses have the ability to transform him or her, as suggested by Andrew Blauvelt in Tool. I have no doubt that the tools I use frequently have changed the way I work, my habits, etc. It is important for me to be able to have control over my tools. These tools empower us with the ability to create more tools. As a designer, I have the power to tend to my own needs, seek inspiration, and share my discoveries with others. It’s necessary to explore beyond my boundaries, in order to create lasting collaborations and relationships. But exploration is not possible without a discussion of the value of what we as designers are doing, which is designing. Self-analysis and self-criticism must occur in order to really evaluate the value and quality of what is being created, such as the realization that graphic designers are in charge of producing millions of surfaces. As Blauvelt describes, it is “a culture of re-: remix, reformat, reshuffle, reinterpret…” that has come to the forefront. The postproduction world is ripe for having things be rearranged and remade. Designers have the special ability to reinterpret existing works, in turn making them both a consumer/user and a designer at the same time. This postproduction era also encourages coauthorship and collectivity, allowing designers to become orchestrators and add another job to their already long job titles.