September 6, 2014 § Leave a comment
Excerpts from Logocentrism
Originally published in The New Republic, December 29, 1997
Graphic design is easily the most ubiquitous of all the arts. It is everywhere, touching everything we do, everything we see, everything we buy: on billboards and in Bibles, on taxi receipts and on web sites, on birth certificates and on gift certificates, on the folded circulars tucked inside jars of aspirin and on the thick pages of children’s chubby board books. It is the boldly directional arrows on street signs and the blurred, frenetic typography on the title sequence to E.R. It is the bright green logo for the New York Giants and the staid front page of The New York Times. It is hang-tags in clothing stores, playbills in theaters, timetables in train stations, postage stamps and cereal box packaging, fascist propaganda posters and junk mail. It is complex combinations of words and pictures, numbers and charts, photographs and illustrations that, in order to succeed, demand the clear thinking of a thoughtful individual who can orchestrate these elements so that they all add up to something distinctive, or useful, or beautiful, or playful, or subversive, or in some way truly memorable. It is a popular art, a practical art, an applied art, an ancient art. It is informed by numerous disciplines, including art and architecture, philosophy and literature, politics and performance.
Simply put, graphic design is the art of visualizing ideas.
More than any other designer of this century, Rand is credited with bringing the modernist design aesthetic to postwar America. Highly influenced by the European modernists — Klee and Picasso, Calder and Miro — Rand’s formal vocabulary signaled the advent of a new era. Using photography and montage, cut paper and what would later become known as “The New Typography” — asymmetrical typography that engaged the eye and activated the page — Rand rallied against the sentimentality of stolid, commercial layouts and introduced a new, sharper, cleaner, and forward-looking vocabulary of the kind that he had observed in such European design magazines as the German Gebrauchsgraphik and the English Commercial Art. To look at Rand’s work today — work that dates from half a century ago — is to see how an idea can be distilled to its most concentrated and salient form. The style is playful, the message immediate, the communication undeniably direct.
Rand was a modernist not only in the reductive vocabularies of his design, but also in the intellectual curiosity of his writing. His books typically consist of short, staccato-like essays in which he considers the fundamental factors that shape our understanding of visual communication. In each of his books, he scrutinizes the relationship between art and design, between design and aesthetics, between aesthetics and experience. At length, he examines the role of intuition and ideas, the balance between form and function, and the universal language of geometry. He believed these topics to be timeless. “My interest has always been in restating the validity of those ideas which, by and large, have guided artists since the time of Polyclitus,” he wrote. “It is the continuing relevance of these ideals that I mean to emphasize, especially to those who have grown up in a world of punk and graffiti.” There is a personal, almost spiritual quality to Rand’s work. The promises of modernism, in which the harmony of formal relationships gesture to a higher order, and seek to embrace a purist ideal, must have held, for Rand, a kind of divine appeal.
A lifelong advocate of the axiom “less is more,” he was often criticized for his rejection of a more contemporary design idiom. Rand scorned what he saw in his later years as a postmodern free-for-all, in which sentiment and subjectivity supplanted logic and clarity. The teacher in him saw an opportunity to redefine and to restate the great lessons of the modernist legacy; his writing is tireless in this regard. And the artist in him saw the necessity of promoting the same exacting standards that he used not only to evaluate his own work, but to assess the quality of any great work of art. “The quality of the work always precedes everything else,” he explained in an interview not long before his death. “And the quality, of course, is my standard.”
Throughout his books, Rand sustained his arguments through repetition that sometimes verged on dogma. He wrote in the rhetoric of the manifesto. Written primer-style on such topics as “The Beautiful and the Useful,” “Design and the Play Instinct,” and “Intuition and Ideas,” his essays were extensively illustrated by visual examples from his own portfolio, and footnoted with citations from his equally extensive library. In Rand’s writings, design became a humanist discipline; and his insistence was amplified not only by references to, say, Leger and Albers, but also to Kant, Hegel, Dewey, Whitehead, Bergson, James, and others.
“To design,” Rand writes in Design, Form and Chaos, “is much more than simply to assemble, to order or even to edit: it is to add value and meaning, to illuminate, to simplify, to clarify, to modify, to dignify, to dramatize, to persuade, and perhaps even to amuse. To design is to transform prose into poetry.” For Rand, design was an orchestration of rhythm, contrast, balance, proportion, repetition, harmony, and scale — a philosophically sophisticated vocabulary of simple form, specific function, and symbolic content. In his vision, a circle could be a globe, an apple, a face, a stop sign; a square became a gift-wrapped box (the UPS trademark), an Egyptian frieze (the IDEO trademark), or a child’s toy (the Colorforms trademark). Over the course of a career that spanned more than six decades, Rand produced a prolific body of work that included advertising and posters, books and magazines, illustration and — perhaps most important — a host of extraordinary trademarks for such corporations as ABC, IBM, UPS, and Westinghouse. It is for these ubiquitous icons that he is best remembered.
A trademark is a company’s signature, an emblematic stamp that establishes its name, and firmly communicates the qualities with which it seeks to identify itself publicly. Its ends, of course, are very concrete: it must furnish a company — and its public — with a visual, material presence in a culture. It is the principal task of the designer to mediate the relationship between the practical demands of the corporation and the formal requirements of its trademark. For Rand, it was an ideal task, which showcased his greatest strengths. It demanded a serious faith in intuition (visualizing the logo that must be recognized instantly by millions of people) and an equal faith in analysis (isolating the idea that must be distilled into its most salient, germane form) .
By Jessica Helfand
August 4, 2014 § Leave a comment
“Rules?” said Roark. “Here are my rules: what can be done with one substance must never be done with another. No two materials are alike. No two sites on earth are alike. No two buildings have the same purpose. The purpose, the site, the material determine the shape. Nothing can be reasonable or beautiful unless it’s made by one central idea, and the idea sets every detail. A building is alive, like a man. Its integrity is to follow its own truth, its one single theme, and to serve its own single purpose. A man doesn’t borrow pieces of his body. A building doesn’t borrow hunks of its soul. Its maker gives it the soul and every wall, window and stairway to express it.”
“But all the proper forms of expression have been discovered long ago.”
“Expression–of what? The Parthenon did not serve the same purpose as its wooden ancestor. An airline terminal does not serve the same purpose as the Parthenon. Every form has its own meaning. Every man creates his meaning and form and goal. Why is it so important–what others have done? Why does it become sacred by the mere fact of not being your own? Why is anyone and everyone right–so long as it’s not yourself? Why does the number of those others take the place of truth? Why is truth made a mere matter of arithmetic–and only of addition at that? Why is everything twisted out of all sense to fit everything else? There must be some reason. I don’t know. I’ve never known it. I’d like to understand.”
– Howard Roark, the visionary architecture student tell’s the Dean in the book Fountainhead by Ayan Rand
July 16, 2014 § Leave a comment
To celebrate the elegant geometry of the world’s finest urban architecture, Israel-born and London-based designer Yoni Alter choose landmarks he admires in 35 cities and distills those landmarks into their basic shapes. Read more >>
June 29, 2014 § Leave a comment
When Graphic Design embraces many design disciplines like architecture, interiors and landscape, they shape the idea of a place. These graphical elements are not merely for beautification, but define and discipline the space. All forms of graphic elements that exist in the environment, also called as Environmental Graphic Design (EGD) concerns with the visual aspects of communicating identity and information. This includes a signpost, bulletin boards, graphic ornaments on a building, the name plate on wall and all forms of writing on two and three-dimensional objects for eg. store displays, interiors and architectural facades.
Creative window displays will stop anyone in their tracks. As a mix of art, fashion, design and marketing, these displays have to quickly grab th comsumer’s attention and compel them to enter the store. A composition of design elements used as a backdrop, sets the mood and creates an environment in that little rectangular space.
In interior design, while spaces talk to its viewers, celebrating a unique language, making the walls a participant in the process. In architecture it interacts with the materials of the structure, creating an environment outside the building, thus contributing to the character of the street. Hence it affects the urbanscape.
Graphic design displaying information, helps identify the purpose and navigate within the public space. EGD is not only to inform but also to engage, entertain and beautify the environment. If not for graphic design, Times Square is merely an intersection.
In some cases, graphics can create optical illusions. Anamorphic typography is letters intentionally distorted from one surface to another. The user can have an immersive experience, being able to touch, feel and interact with type. Space is three-dimensional. It can be empty or filled with objects. It has height, width, and depth. Graphic design has the power to define and alter it and in some cases, create an illusion.
This concept challenges what some people consider to be conventional graphic design. Because ‘It is always more than just print.’
May 29, 2014 § Leave a comment
10 years ago, The Art of Looking Sideways by Alan Fletcher was published, a seminal book contemplating the differences between pictures as words (and vice versa), the pleasing incongruities and “serious science” behind perception, process and the imagination that fills in the gaps.
The passage that follows is taken from the book relating to a few of Fletcher’s original materials, but they are just a minuscule cross-section of the prolific references – a personal compendium of visual language. The late, very great graphic designer could draw literally, rationally and metaphorically on the history of all humanized communication to excellent effect, one such quote from Goethe used by Fletcher states quite appropriately: “He who cannot draw on three thousand years is living from hand to mouth.’”
“As his most famous statement had it, Klee took a line for a walk. It snaked, looped, wandered off, and turned back on itself as it made its fitful journey through the worlds of his invention. A line can run dead straight, be wildly crooked, nervously wobbly, make sensuous curves or aggressive angles. It can meander, wander, track or trace. Be a scribble, doodle, scratch, hatched, dashed, dribbled or trickled. It can be precise or fuzzy, hard or soft, firm or gentle, thin or thick. It can be smudged, smeared, erased – or just fade away. You can push a line, drag it, manipulate and manoeuvre it, make it delineate, accentuate, attenuate, emphasize. A line may be imperious or modest, authoritative or servile, brutal or seductive, passive or active, weak or strong, thick or thin. A line is born, and dies, in a point.” (Frank N. Furter, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, 1975)