Hi Rob
Good points... Yes, perhaps what I mean is that the building blocks or
defining properties are 'inert' or something like that. One configures them
to create meaning, but invariably it is what one wants to mean/communicate
that drives the configuration.
I don't ever see graphic design as a vacuum. For me graphic design is either
> 'relational', or not. If it is, it is always connected, integrative and
> interdisciplinary. Its defining properties (things or objects, e.g. line,
> shape, tone, colour, texture, form) at a basic level exist and are
> configured to create and communicate meaning.
>
> For me, the process of configuration, as I described it in the earlier
> email, is always informed by more than just oneself. Isn't that an
> impossibility? No client ever issued a brief and then disappeared. The
> meaning of any drawing is never not seen. Even a choice of typeface (say
> Gill Sans) benefits from some kind of 'posthumous' interdisciplinary
> collaboration with Eric Gill. I think I prefer the view that graphic design
> cannot exist without content. Is it possible to draw nothing?
>
>
Cheers,
Alison
Dr. Alison Barnes
School of Graphic Design, LCC
University of the Arts, London
www.alisonbarnesonlineportfolio.tumblr.com
http://informationenvironments.academia.edu/AlisonBarnes/About
http://geo-graphic.blogspot.com/
|