Problems with Pioneer Modernism

The Modern Movement began in the 1900’s and consisted of two phases. The Pioneer Phase began at the start of World War I. As the first phase, it was concentrated on a set of ideas, “a vision of how the designed world could transform human consciousness and improve material conditions”. This modernist view was expressed through manifestos, prototypes of objects and buildings.
However, the Pioneer Phase had problems leading to its inevitable demise, becoming nothing more than the precedent International style was built upon. The main issue was that Pioneer Modernism was not unified; the artists all had very different intellectual views from one another. Designers of this era had, “to create an appropriate design for the industrialized world of the 20th century”. The unifying goal was the same but there were many different ways and opinions on how to reach the final product. There were too many contradictions through out their theoretical process. Technology, Abstraction and Internationalism were the three principles that were unaltered in the 1930s, when Internationalism took over. It was not about style but a new way of seeing the world. Design would be very different today if Pioneer modernists hadn’t challenged the industry. Modernists may have failed but they asked the right questions and the design world has benefited from all their exhilaration.

First Things First 2000

In 2000, designer and commentator Rick Poyner has once again challenged graphic designers reinstating Ken Garlands 1964 manifesto. Poyner expands on Garland’s previous idea of “rejecting crass and ugly commercialism” when he states, “ It is no exaggeration to say that designers are engaged in nothing less than the manufacture of contemporary reality….”. He discusses many key beliefs designers are imposed with today. As truthful some may be, are they comforting to graphic designers? I don’t believe so.
The market may reward you when your book or publication reinforces your design per say. But, once again, what is the meaning behind the design? What purpose does it serve? Is there any meaning behind the design or just money to pay the bills? Commercial work has become what designers do. The world doesn’t see the capabilities, the time or energy, the skill. It just sees the product. The world uses the product, not the label or idea in the ad. Marketing, advertising, branding and commercial messages are inferior to larger issues designers can solve. There are important messages that should be concentrated on such as culture, education, social groups and charitable causes that would benefit from design expertise as well as make a difference in our world. Consumerism can’t continually be the only focus of designers. Other perspectives need to be explored to give design meaning and more of a broad and diverse audience.

First Things First 1964

Ken Garland's "First Things First" manifesto was signed and supported by designers, photographers and students; that searched for the meaning of visual communication. They believed consumer selling pushed their skill and imagination aside, contributing little to our “national prosperity”. However, I don’t believe that is the case at all. When designing these products to meet consumer demand, a lot must be accounted for. The product must draw a person’s eye and when a brand has superior advertising compared to other brands, the successful companies flourish and improve our economy. Commercialism isn’t the problem but design without meaning is. I believe design strengthens commercialism, but I’m not saying design should only be used in commercial form. Design should exist as an art and should affect us everyday on the hour, every minute of every hour and every second we communicate.
I agree with Garland that designers can help create a greater understanding and awareness of our world. Through media, such as signs, posters, books, magazines, photographs, and films, designers can recreate an idea and portray their own point of view and message to the audience. I think what Ken Garland is really focusing on is capturing a feeling and representing it in a way that will influence the people either directly or even in subconscious thought. If a viewer was effected in anyway by a design piece, it’s successful. If they hated it, that’s great, if they loved it, even the more wonderful. The fact is that it kept them thinking after the first look.

NO LOGO

In the Chapter 29, excerpt from No Logo, Naomi Klein discusses the negative effects of brand orientated corporate activity. Peter Schweitzer points out that the products are made in factories, however it's not the product the consumer buys but the brand. Walter Landor expands on this idea when he considers the psychological hold branding has in the mind. "The brand is made in the mind"; it begins to associate with an idea or feeling representing much more to the customer than the non branded products. The shift in corporate priority over the years has resulted in higher concentration in sponsorship, packaging, expansion and advertising. It's no longer about production, "Machines wear out. People die. But, what lives on are the brands" (Hector Liang).

Market driven companies no longer believe they're responsible for their workforce and see production as a chore. The branding status of the company is high priority while the production and producers suffer. Companies such as Vans, Adidas, Gap, General Motors, and IBM have followed Nike's "no limit spending on branding" technique, in turn resorting to "sourcing". These "product free" brands' outsourced production turns to contractors mostly located in third world countries to supply the goods for CHEAP, in turn doubling ad spending. These super brands now own little and sell more. The main shift in production is more about how to produce than where. The orders are placed and passed around from contractor to subcontractor to workers at home,or in factories across the world. These large companies simply claim to be "bargain hunters" and continue to flee the job market. These super brands now own little and sell more.

Designers make up a large part of the marketing and advertising industry. They're work influences consumers brand preference through media. The commercial you saw on tv, was also on the radio, on the giant billboard down the street, on the poster at the bus stop and now in your favorite magazine. Consumers can't escape brands being sold to them in every direction. Branding links associations in the consumers mind between products, logos, and brand names using tricks such as catchy phrases, celebrity spokes models, and eye catching designs. The main goal of these large super brand companies is to become the dominant force in their respective field of business and the best way to accomplish that goal is to have the most and the best advertising. However, these large distributors should make sure to steer clear from false advertising and be sure to create products with quality as well as in quantity. No part of the process should be sacrificed. If a compromise can be made such as in "production outsourcing" and the brand still hold true to it's product so be it. With all the affluent campaigning and advertising consumers withstand on an everyday basis the brand and it's merchandise should always be of "true value": the idea, the lifestyle, and the attitude.