The more I think about it, the more I realize that well-known American graphic designers are so clique-y. You got Sagmeister, Bantjes, Debbie Millman, Steven Heller, Bierut, Armin/Bryony.
I am happy for Debbie Millman’s TV pilot, though.
Flush.
Glance Review: Seventy-nine Short Essays on Design
A few days ago, I received this book from my wonderful friend Angela, to whom I referred to my wish list. Just looking at it up close, I am already excited to be reading it in the next few months. I enjoy that the essay titles are on the cover, much like How to be a graphic designer, without losing your soul by Adrian Shaughnessy.
I also like how they’re all in different typefaces, which makes them fun, and funny. What’s even more cool is that each essay is set in a different typeface as well. And what’s cooler than that is that the appendix, it lists what typefaces they are. That is awesome, because for those who know me, I like to recognize typefaces, and I probably can’t recognize 90% of them in this book, so it’s going to be fun learning about type while learning about design.
I just took another quick look, and saw the title “Graphic Designers, Flush Left?” I remember seeing that for the first time at Borders in Union Square in SF, and that’s when I started considering titling this blog “Flush Left,” which eventually reduced to just “Flush.” I took a quick read of that essay at the Borders, and it turned out to not be about designing flush left, but politics.
So it’s going to be fun reading and re-reading this. I’ll probably discuss a few essays here on Flush if I have something to say.
Flush.
Ugly and High Graphic Design
A few weeks ago, I read a post on Design Observer by Michael Bierut on “how to be ugly.” In it he used the magazine 032c’s recent design to talk about the aesthetics of intentional ugly design by a good designer. He cites sources that more or less declare that ugly is back and it sounded like we’re re-entering a Dark Age of some sort in design aesthetics.
That got me thinking: is there an “upper-class” of graphic design, where only the well-known graphic designers like Bierut and Paula Scher can appreciate and allow, and anything else is just crap? And that the “lower” designers and the general public can’t understand why it’s good except that it’s designed by famous designers?
Analogy to Clothes and Food
I mean, I feel that graphic designers already have this reputation for being an arrogant class that cannot stand the “regular” people using Photoshop filters or outlined type or motion tweens and 0% alphas, so it’s kind of unfortunate to think that within this “class” there’s another hierarchy of judgment that split us up even more. I feel that this exists because the other mainstream arts have this, like fashion and cuisine, for examples. Sometimes I don’t understand some of the wacky colors and materials that models only wear in shows but not on the street, or why there’s a dinky yet expensive piece of steak on a large white plate that certainly won’t get me full. When I see this stuff, I keep telling myself that it’s for the sake of experiment and medium exploration, which I totally support. So in that case, should graphic design be like that too?
But unlike fashion or cuisine, graphic design is so democratic. Yes, even though not everyone can use Photoshop to the best of its abilities, an amateur can still design a crappy flyer and get paid for it. But not everyone can design and mass produce an outfit that people would want to wear outside, nor can he or she cook a multi-course meal and serve to customers without fearing that they might throw up or get food poisoning. With graphic design, everyone can participate, and very rarely will a poorly designed book jacket and poster directly harm the customers. While there is still a certain level of aesthetic rules that good design follows and designers evaluate against, like typography, color harmony, structure, etc., there really isn’t a “high graphic design” class that is supposed to define the trends for all of graphic design for Spring 2008 or whatever. That’s not what graphic design is about.
Ugly Design
“High graphic design” talk aside, I can see what Bierut’s talking about with ugly coming back. As I was a couple of paragraphs into his post, the word ugly began to remind me of the I Knows Me Some Ugly MySpace Showdown competition that Ze Frank hosted on “The Show” in the summer of 2006. The Internet has further spread this democracy that is graphic design onto the public, resulting in a lot more amateur, straight-up ugly design (even in the eyes of non-designers) in the world. (I recently learned that these wonderfully ugly MySpace sites had paid help from entrepreneurs taking advantage of this new medium.)
This Whole Thing with Wolff Olins
To be honest, I was not a fan of the 2012 Olympics logo when it first unveiled. I’m still not a fan now, but at least I understand where Wolff Olins was coming from, to a certain extent. I keep telling myself that this is going to get better as we see more of the supporting branding materials; everything will fall into place when 2011, 2012 come around. We just have to wait and see. Because if this still looks like crap when the time comes, I will probably lose hope on all that is good and pure about humanity, because that’s what the Olympics means to me.
Based on Wolff Olins’s reasoning behind the 2012 Olympics logo, I can tell that he wanted something really different from the past Olympics logos (which I find good enough for the context of the host city/nation, but whatever) where people are encourage to participate in the conversation, which goes with the current trend of community interaction, especially on the web (or Web 2.0). Despite the “wacky” Wacom identity and the fat NYC logo (which I actually think is not that bad considering the branding possibilities that Olins had pointed out), I want to quietly inform you all that I am a semi-closeted Wolff Olins fan (Armin Vit shares my view, I think, via that “NYC logo” link). “Semi” because I don’t know where exactly he’s going with this, but I can see the potential for something great.
All in all, I think that ugly is inevitable, but it’s not necessary a bad thing. I believe that like almost everything, the world needs balance, and without the ugly, there’s no beautiful. And without the ugly, there’s no need for designers decorators.
Flush.
Tibor, Steven, Louise, and Debbie: New Additions to the Family
Thanks to a particular financial institution in the world which shall remain anonymous (which is also related to why I haven’t posted in a while: relatives visiting from afar resulting in a decrease of the usual access of my room and computer), I was able to add three books to my Design Library: Tibor Kalman, Preverse Optimist edited by Peter Hall and Michael Bierut; Stylepedia: A Guide to Graphic Design Mannerisms, Quirks, and Conceipts by Steven Heller and Louise Fili; and How to Think Like a Great Graphic Designer by Debbie Millman.
Why I Got These Books
Tibor Kalman, Perverse Optimist
I had probably heard about this guy here and there but never really paid attention to it, until I saw this interview of Stefan Sagmeister where he mentioned that he had worked for Kalman and praised him of his work as if he was an influence. And if you haven’t figured it out, I am currently obeying to Sagmeister’s words on design and life, for he seemed like the ultimate “do-gooder” of design ever since I read the Nov 2006 CommArts article on him and his “touch people’s hearts” class. But yeah, I felt that Tibor was Sagmeister’s Sagmeister, so it’s like “doubled the good.”
Stylepedia
I heard about this book on Sept. 5 from the Core77’s 2007 Hack-2-School Guide according to my GTD notes. It wasn’t really one of my first choices of books to get, but I couldn’t find any other first-choice books in the store (again, little respect). I figured that it would be a book to acquire once I get the philosophical/conceptual side of design down, when I have more experience in design where I could get more inspiration from this collection of styles. But I guess it’s still good to have around.
How to Think Like a Great Graphic Designer
My first choice in this book shopping spree was Debbie’s book, and I was fortunate enough to find it the second (more like fourth) time I looked in the Art section at Borders. (By the way, I feel that not even major bookstores respect design as much as they should.) I heard about it on design blogs about the book release party and on the BADCast when the guys in the Midwest interviewed Debbie about the book. And from how Debbie describes the interview process, it should be pretty interesting to read.
I read the introductory e-mail that was replied to Debbie about the idea for the book, and I feel a little guilty for wanting to buy a book where I am “‘fishing for a recipe for becoming a successful designer’” (Geissbuhler qtd. in Millman 1). But then again, I don’t think it hurts to learn from the masters.
I am glad to have added these three books to my collection free of charge (except for the anonymous financial institution), and I predict a great enrichment of design knowledge for my noggin over the next few months.
Flush.
P.S. No, I did not steal money from the anonymous financial institution.
P.P.S. Yes, I MLA cited that quote. I am that nerdy.
100 Pieces and a Star
Last night was probably the first time where I went to an AIGA event without any of my design friends. I went to the 50 Books/50 Covers Opening Reception at Chronicle Books in SF. I went with my friends from home because I don’t think I’m confident enough yet to go by myself to an event which I don’t know anyone. And besides, it’s always nice to just go to an event with someone you know.
The reception was nice; there weren’t any exceptionally great pieces on display. But there was this one children’s book called Art by Patrick McDonnell (who does the comic Mutts) that I really like. It was about a boy named Art and he does many different kinds of art. It was sweet and rhyme-y and I think it’s a good introduction into the arts for kids. And that made me realize that it’s really simple ideas like this that just gets the message across and touches people’s hearts. It’s nice sometimes, I think, to bring out the inner child of the designer and the audience when appropriate.
The reception last night made me realize that 1) there’s so much out there in the design community that I don’t know about and 2) I need to get out there and start learning about it and find out what being a designer means, socially. And the event gave me that chance to get a feel of what it’s like to be in the “design community.”
And I definitely felt that when I saw Eric Heiman from Volume Inc. at the reception. I learned/heard about Eric a year ago in Davis when he came to talk about his work and design in general. His suggestion for design students to work on non-class projects together sparked the formation of The Collab, started by my friend Milan, and a bunch of us Davis kids put together a week-long design/art show last May. So Eric’s probably the first “design stars” whom I’ve seen in person. (More about my wish to see/meet “design stars” in a later entry.) And while he may not be as well known as Michael Bierut or Paula Scher, he is special on my list as one of the people that was there as an influence from the beginning of my design career.
Flush.
Comments:
No Comments Yet »