AMERICAN APPAREL

The marketing of American Apparel is unbelievably misogynistic, and not wholesome in the slightest. Is this ad serious? I didn't realize how soft core porn American Aparel was until I just googled it. Basically every company has a human representation of their product, Nike has the athlete, Macbeth has the punk-rocker, American Apparel has the half naked adolescent who may or may not have an eating disorder and their models all have droopy drugged up looking eyelids. This image and what it represents is what is wrong with our gender structure in North America. This picture is in no way empowering to the adolescent, it is kind of hypocritical American Apparel would do this, I mean they are supposed to look out for people abused by western power structures. They rely heavily on the perception that they are an ethical and socially responsible company which at some points overshadows the controversial aspects. Ethics is central to their production and not their promotion. I’m going to be bold and simply state that American Apparel is Not Fair Trade, sure their shirts are made in America but they go against everything the fair trade movement is trying to promote– giving people a voice once silenced by corporations.

ARTIST, DESIGNER, or .........both?

After reading a variety of works regarding the relationship between art and design, it has become very clear to me that one cannot exist with out the other. The border is permeable from both art to design and design to art. Art and design exist in different forms and possibilities. Some works are clearly design orientated while others exist as art, yet some stand in neither category or should I say stand in both. Designers and artists need to realize how close they really are. Designer engineers have gallery shows which makes them artists. "Art can be seen as the production of objects, concepts and activities intended to function within specific infrastructure; this production can be definitely seen as a form of design." An artist's creative process is similar to the process of a designer and although differences in individual works are prominent, art and design stand hand in hand most of the time. Surely design is sometimes more engaged in society and functionalism and art isn't always sensible, living in it's own exclusive world; but there are always exceptions. Through similar thought processes and techniques these works are made and they influence their audience all the same. Who's to say ART or DESIGN? If some art is as bad as design and some design is as good as art, maybe the historical, modernist link between design and art will continue to restore itself and artists will overcome this rift in their relationship.

Helvetica

We recently watched Helvetica, which is, yes, an hour and twenty minute documentary about a font. But this film is about so much more than that. We are so aware of different fonts these days, with computers and all. Times New Roman. Arial. Helvetica. Veranda. So it is hard to imagine the revolutionary qualities of Helvetica. It is also difficult for us to think of fonts as Modernist, Post-Modernist, Humanist, san script, but that is how we as graphic designers should describe a font.
In Helvetica, you hear the thoughts of what can be called pro-Helvetica Modernists, those who found this font a clean, sophisticated aesthetic in opposition to the younger generation even our generation, discuss how Helvetica was reacted against but how they now have found its value. I think this film as more to say about us and our relationship with design. How prominent Helvetica as a typeface really is so prominent in our everyday lives and how as designers however outdated or overused it's still successful and shouldn't be so quickly dismissed.

Brands are a Battlefield.........

A war for your heart, mind and money......
Companies aren't concerned with their goods, factories or employees; but rather the real value, the power of the brand. Brands advertisements project feelings of happiness, freedom and benevolence while they use their power to dominate mass media, limit diversity and exploit cheap labor. However, the superbrands glamorize or camouflage their actual operation their market oriented mission is being undermined through "subvertising" using techniques such as "culture jamming" and "media terrorism".
As an interchangeable designer and consumer, I'm fascinated with the influence design has but I don't believe the message should be misleading. I think the "subvertising" that Adbusters and other organizations has created is just as important, if not more important design. In some cases the truth is more controversial, especially if its coyly handled. The public eye is being drawn to the issue with the product and the pieces are put in to conversation with the brand from a consumer point of view. I believe great design was made in that designers have challenged other designers and as this rejection of brands flourishes it will be guerilla warfare or rather more guerilla marketing to come. I'm looking forward to seeing further more superbrand reactions to this change in the public opinion.

The Impotence of Being Earnest.......

Do you think design has been lacking the power of seriousness? As I have written in my previous blogs, the manifesto First Things First published in 1964 and again in 2000 sure does. However, Matt Soar, doesn't necessarily agree or disagree. The "usual suspects" that originally published First Things First made a statement concerning designers commitment to social responsibility opposed to product marketing. What I find interesting is they omit the fact that they are representing the upper class, professional elite, that can afford to stand by this "moral high ground over advertising." The middle class majority is not "uninspired" or "uninformed" but have insufficient funds. Advertising and marketing, the implicit "enemy", well they pay the bills. Design doesn't always reflect the designers morals but the designer's chosen life style. Sure "resistance", "rebellion", and "revolution" are words associated with products in today's designs but that doesn't mean political movements are less important.If only at the very least Soar believes designers should begin to see the audience as citizens rather than consumers and become less concentrated on marketing strategy. For then maybe morals, can emote through the fluff.

Pleasure Seeker or Victim ?

As I have grown rather familiar with this article, the idea of the consumer and different types of consumption is increasingly interesting. As both a consumer and designer, this articles hows the relationship and the influence one has on another. The consumer can be depicted as a pleasure seeker or a victim while "consumption is either a tool for the 'invention' of self or a process that strips away our individuality."In either case, branding provides individuals with ways to belong especially those in their teenage or young adult years. The search for personal identity and individuality is clouded by advertising and marketing. Self discovery is replaced with a need for social acceptance.
The clothes an individual wears, the car they drive, the products they buy all begin to define them as a person. As a consumer, I'm constantly persuaded with branding. Everywhere everything from the grocery store, to the mall, to my closet has a label. Although it's shallow, society sometimes clouds my vision and leads me to succumb to brands rather than the actual product. I forget that "the success or failure of brands is at or fingertips" and let the brand define me. As a designer, it's important to take all of this into consideration when creating an advertisement. Designers have to be careful of the message we promote especially with such a such easily manipulative audience of consumers.

DONT BE A SELL OUT

The article, "Bad", published by Print addresses a problem I've been dealing with daily in graphic design. If designers want to save the world shouldn't design be more open minded. Should we be so focused on the rules of design or the client? Artistic goals should be more important than financial goals and designers shouldn't just be worried about being good. "Good is normal," who wants to be normal?
I don't want to be apart of this normal majority, I want to be bad, I want to create my own design that's "truly different, distinctive, individualistic, and interesting." If you don't take risks as a designer, "everything everywhere will look the same," eventually. To me successful design shows attitude, expresses strong emotion, and even stirs up controversy. The power that design has over it's audience is underestimated. I highly agree that as designers we're "here to inject art into commerce."
I think it's important for designers to read this article and realize it's ok to be bad. It's important to step out of the box because "every rule about what is appropriate narrows what is possible." As a designer, you can portray an idea with your perogative and can greatly affect the audience, the world.

Media, Gender, and Identity

Victims or individuals? I believe we are all victims of advertising, branding, and media to some extent. As an interchangeable designer and consumer, it has become evident that design has a significant relationship with an individual’s “sense of self “. I believe that images are socially constructed and we model ourselves after what we consciously or unconsciously see in the media. Finding yourself is a process, and when views of gender and sexuality, identity and selfhood, masculinity and femininity are socially defined it’s easy to get lost. The concern with social acceptance is a struggle between media power and audience power. The media relays messages to the audience and their feelings also have impact on the issue and it’s influence.
I find it interesting when David Gauntelett discusses popular culture ands it’s view on role models. Later on in his essay he goes on to say, “popular culture offers a range of stars, icons and characters from whom we can acceptably borrow bits and pieces of their public persona for use in our own”. Magazines, music, movies, and ads all show these stars or role models, as an implication on who you should be or how you should live. So in other words, you can be yourself but only with in the LIMITS.