Alan,

Apologies to all if this is wandering too far off topic but:

On Apr 23, 2004, at 8:08 PM, Alan Murdock wrote:
> I've had students read John
> Calvelli's article on this year's AIGA conference
> http://design.umn.edu/go/knowledgeCircuit/current.Calvelli.AIGA and
> discuss it in relation to ethical considerations of design.
>
> The conference, according to Calvelli and others, brought to bear
> William McDonough's ideas, but faces a number of problems.  These
> include the problem of selling a progressive concept to industries and
> audiences that respond primarily to "cool type" and repayment on
> investment.

The AIGA conference had many problems that Cavelli didn't get to. This
sort of "progressive concept vs. cool type" comic book view of the
world [apologies also to comic books] is a conceptual problem that
Terry Irwin and the other organizers tripped over.

Many of the speakers made the assumption that they were talking to
designers and the solutions to problems were just really big design
problems therefor they could just state the problem and say "You guys
solve this." They were not, however, talking to designers; they were
talking to graphic designers. Most of the problems they stated were not
graphic design problems. The audience was no more able to deal with
them than a conference for insurance adjusters or turboprop engine
mechanics would have been. So the primary message was "Save the world.
Stop being graphic designers and do something worthwhile instead."

There was, however, a secondary message that said "All graphic design
can aspire to is selling shit. We don't like the shit you're selling so
stop that and be propagandists for righteousness and sell the good shit
instead." Although I disagree with it, I find that to be a defensible
position. It runs counter to any aspirations for graphic design to be
anything but a service to the commissioner of graphic design, however.
(And while it may be viable for many of us to devote ourselves to being
environmental movement propagandists, if everyone in the hall in
Vancouver had taken up the call I suspect that we would be
underemployed and there would be no room left for anyone else in the
world joining us in our new career direction. I, BTW, already spend a
fair amount of my time as an environmental movement propagandist.)

That secondary message tosses out the possibility that graphic design
can be of wider service and of structural good to society. The
structural goods that graphic design can do require going beyond the
role of propagandist. Odd that people trying to make graphic design
better would alternate between reviling it and limiting its scope.

> or on the tongues of designers at Weiden +
> Kennedy next time they walk on to the Nike campus to propose a new ad
> campaign.
>
> "Are these shoes supporting the oppressor or the oppressed?  Oh, and
> this campaign will cost you...  where'd I put my calculator?"

Are there just those two choices? Was this part of the football
discussion and I skimmed too fast to pick up on it? Am I supposed to
sign up or wait to get drafted? What colors should I paint my face if I
want to root for the oppressed team?

Gunnar
----------
Gunnar Swanson Design Office
536 South Catalina Street
Ventura California 93001-3625 USA

+1 805 667-2200
[log in to unmask]