Ken,
Six years ago, I sent you for free a rough partly typeset spring bound draft of a book that when finished was only going to print 100 copies, mostly for reference. It was at that stage typeset 10 on 12 at around 85 characters line length to keep page count down and I explained that at the time. For you, I printed it as is, and posted it to you for free because you wanted to read the content.
You have been publicly criticising me about that partly formatted book ever since (and it was a gift to you!).
I've felt it unprofessional of you. I haven't said anything until this point out of politeness.
Second, you have gone to some lengths to criticise that I am not an expert graphic designer.
I agree, I am not. I don't claim to be an 'expert' as a graphic designer. When I'm doing that kind of design work, I work as a journeyman practitioner mainly typesetting very long structured serious documents; although there is the occasional book cover, poster or pamphlet thrown in. This is the relatively boring and unexciting end of graphic design. As graphic design it involves organising large numbers of sub-documents, often with conflicting formatting, typesetting huge amounts of complex structured text (how many on this list have had the Word pop up box that they have exceeded Word's 450,000 word limit for a single document?!) , devising information hierarchies and document structures, creating diagrams, modifying photos, managing very large numbers of references of multiple types, managing colour compositions, planning page layouts, and configuring for print. The aesthetic standard is not visually stunning. Instead the things that come to the fore are document structure, legibility, information hierarchies, precision with multiple interlinked cross-referencing structures, font hierarchies, equation management, concurrent engineering (typesetting and document assembly while multiple authors are still editing), conforming to government guidelines etc. and making it readable for people whose business is to read a lot of technical material fast.
This all under tight price and time deadlines. One challenge is to make a profit from typesetting and printing books with a run of 100. It’s a different game than making things look aesthetically wonderful for simple books with print runs of several thousand. It is, however, typesetting and graphic design nonetheless, and it requires the same knowledge. In a sense, you could see that it requires a greater depth of graphic design knowledge because it requires also a detailed micro-knowledge of graphic design theory and software to ensure graphics, photos, typesetting and cover design are done in a tiny fraction of the time that graphic designers can take when working in more conventional settings (and even that is always under serious time pressure!). In many ways, the kind of graphic design I do is similar to that done by jobbing graphic designers at print shops, which is where a large proportion of graphic design students that manage to get a job finish up. A difference is that long technical documents demand more technical skill and incidentally, are almost impossible to do in InDesign or any of the Adobe software that graphic designers are typically trained in.
Your criticisms that I'm not an 'expert' graphic designer I accept no problem. Regardless, over 40 years of involvement in graphic design, along with a lot of design research and a variety of roles in design education, allows some insights. Some of these insights contradict taken for granted ideas of the field in general. When they do, I raise them in case they are useful. Please ignore them if they are not relevant to you.
Regards,
Terry
---
Dr Terence Love
PhD(UWA), BA(Hons) Engin. PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
Director,
Love Services Pty Ltd
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks
Western Australia 6030
Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848
Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629
[log in to unmask]
--
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
Sent: Monday, 15 September 2014 10:44 PM
To: PhD-Design
Subject: Ad Hominem Argument
Dear Carlos
In your response to Terry, you wrote: “I’m sorry if what I wrote was read like a criticism of your person. It was not. I don't know anything about you, and even if I did that would’t entitle me to do so. I feel I have no right to criticize anyone. Ever.”
Normally speaking, ad hominem argument is inappropriate. There are one or two cases where ad hominem argument, critique, or questions become relevant.
One case of legitimate ad hominem argument involves an individual who appeals to personal expertise and experience as the foundation of an argument. The person claiming expertise makes an ad hominem argument regarding his or her qualifications and skills. The response may therefore involve questions, critique, or ad hominem argument.
On two or three occasions in this conversation, Terry made an ad hominem argument to his own qualifications, expertise and experience. He claims expertise in graphic design as someone who has managed and designed conference publications, proceedings, and web sites. He also claims “experience as a publisher and graphic designer/typesetter of books.”
When Terry claims experience as the source of his comments, Terry brings his own person into the conversation along with his personal qualifications. In a court case or public debate, Terry claims the right to speak as an expert witness. Before a court accepts the testimony of an expert witness, parties to the case are given the opportunity to ascertain the personal credentials and expertise of the witness. Only after this process is complete does the judge acting on behalf of the court accept the witness as an expert. In a public debate, interlocutors or opponents have the same right.
You are effectively challenging Terry’s expertise. With respect to graphic design, I believe that you are right to do so.
Terry is the engineer to whom I earlier referred in my earlier post. He designed the book I describe:
“An engineer once sent me a book to read. The book was set in 10 point type on 10 point leading, set in a single column full across the width of an A4 page. When I said that I could not read it physically, there were many excuses as to why the book was really quite all right as though this were my problem and not a case of physically illegible book design. I simply did not read the book.”
I did not name Terry in this post because he did not explicitly claimed expertise in graphic design. Now he has done so.
In addition to the unreadable book, I have experienced several web sites that Terry has designed. It was my experience that these sites exhibited what most people would call navigation problems along with a significant number of legibility problems. Several web documents were scattered with those symbols in which a question mark in a black diamond replaces a character that has somehow been set wrong.
It is true that Terry can claim to be a graphic designer, a typesetter, and a designer of visual information. He has done work of this kind for many years. The fact that he does the work does not not mean that he does it well. In my view, Terry is expert in using the software that instructs computers. Terry is expert in using software. As I see it, he is not expert in designing information artefacts for human readers.
Full disclosure: I do not myself claim this expertise. I use Microsoft Word or PowerPoint as a researcher who creates clear, legible document for readers. These are useful, workaday documents — nevertheless, they are not examples of expert graphic design. When I want a product designed professionally, I call on an expert in graphic design, information design, or communication design. My expertise is that of a reader or an end-user.
Terry may truthfully claim experience in graphic design, book design, or web design. Experience simply means Terry has done this many times over the years, and he has. Doing something many times doesn’t always lead to expertise. Many of Terry’s stated views on graphic design, information design, and communication design suggest to me that he does not understand some of the issues that a skilled graphic designer understands. This is not an issue of “art and design.” Rather, it involves visual communication and the testable principles underlying legibility, information design, and related issues. Several experts on these issues subscribe to the list. Few seem to find Terry’s position credible.
It is your right to challenge Terry’s opinions and his claims.
Warm wishes,
Ken
--
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Elsevier in Cooperation with Tongji University Press | Launching in 2015
Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology ||| Adjunct Professor | School of Creative Arts | James Cook University | Townsville, Australia ||| Visiting Professor | UTS Business School | University of Technology Sydney University | Sydney, Australia
Email [log in to unmask] | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
Telephone: International +46 480 51514 — In Sweden (0) 480 51514 — iPhone: International +46 727 003 218 — In Sweden (0) 727 003 218
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
