Dear colleagues,
Thank you for bringing up the issue of terminology (and beyond) in this forum.
I was drawn into the subject, if I may say, through a different door, that of the problematic understanding of visual communication design as a discipline (VCD) in the academic community, and particularly in the open call for papers (CfP) for a symposium (Balkan Locus-Focus: Visual Communication Design Histories in the long 20th century) in Turkey in 2012. (http://fadf.ieu.edu.tr/balkanlocusfocus)
As co-organiser of that event I had the opportunity to oversee an entanglement of terms/definitions in some of the paper submissions we received. My full report, which will be published in the symposium’s proceedings (due in late 2014), was born out of a personal struggle to understand what went wrong in our initial Call and attempts at definition of the discipline. Please allow me to share some of my thoughts and questions here. I would be happy to hear you comments in this thread, or here: [log in to unmask]
So, what I have experienced is that: despite the efforts in defining the field of VCD (appearing in the symposium’s head title: Balkan Locus-Focus: Visual Communication Design Histories) and by explicitly noting also its design applications (graphic design, advertising, typography, web design, media), some paper submissions on visual arts, architecture, film, and fashion stood out because papers from these disciplines were not invited or anticipated. […] These submissions that otherwise appeared to be engaging and interesting in their own respect, did not have any direct reference to the study of graphic design / vcd, and its history. They drew mostly from the areas of the well-established cultural studies, visual culture, philosophy, and politics, without a clear connection to the discipline of GD/VCD. […] Unquestionably, all design manifestations are visual systems of communication, however, the type of work proposed from the above fields did not fit in with our stated description of the discipline. Were our expectations too narrow-minded after all?
On the educational front, revisions in terminology for the graphic design profession have become commonplace in the last few decades, reflecting its overgrowing potential. Looking closer at programs of study across the globe, and as some of you have already noticed in this forum, both terms (GD and VCD) are used interchangeably and variations of them, such as the hybrid term ‘Graphic Communication’, exist alongside each other in design education curricula today. One can find many examples of this, or similar kind, across Western and non-Western contexts. Would these variations in scholarly environments cause unwanted confusion, disillusion and disorientation to the intended audience (students) and beyond? Or is this a symptom of the manifold expectations of the design profession in the real world that is also reflected in academia at a slower pace?
Even though I wholeheartedly agree with Professor Jorge Frascara in his claim that ‘terms, as names for professions, are only words[.] [t]hey get their meaning from reality, not vice-versa’ (personal electronic communication on 22 October 2013), yet, I still think that the questions may still be valid and open for discussion. For instance, is the emergent term (VCD) concrete enough to delineate a kind of boundary from kindred disciplines, namely architecture and fashion? Does the in-a-state-of-transition discipline of VCD need time and scholarly commitment to be acknowledged as one that concerns specifically the (evolving) graphic design profession? Or, is it a term that, with a seemingly vague collection of words, needs reconsideration? In our search for answers, where can we turn to find a way to define what we are and what we do?
These are some of the questions that I am trying to find an answer to, and your contribution is already much appreciated. Thank you.
Marina Emmanouil (PhD RCA)
marinaemmanouil.wordpress.com
Izmir University of Economics, Turkey
----- Original Message -----
From: "PHD-DESIGN automatic digest system" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 2:00:02 AM
Subject: PHD-DESIGN Digest - 26 Sep 2014 (#2014-258)
There are 5 messages totaling 279 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Researching user's unconscious
2. Graphic Design as Communication Design (was background vs design) (4)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:03:44 +0800
From: Terence Love <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Researching user's unconscious
Hi Priscila,
Is the survey intentionally not anonymous?
Wondering why you chose that kind of research design?
Please say more.
Best wishes,
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Priscila Mendoza
Sent: Friday, 26 September 2014 10:12 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Researching user's unconscious
Hello,
My name is Priscila Mendoza and I'm a M.F.A. Design Management candidate at The Savannah College of Art and Design. Currently I'm working on my thesis research which is about developing a framework of research methodologies to probe users' unconscious.
I'm asking designers in academia and industry to share their methods and approaches when it comes to tacit, implicit, and latent knowledge (levels of knowledge that relates to unconscious metal processes).
For this intention I'm kindly asking if you could take this survey. It is very brief and it takes around 12 minutes to complete.
https://priscilamendoza.typeform.com/to/fkfqq3
I'm also looking for experts in the area, if someone of you is available and interested on a interview (~30 minutes) please let me know and I will contact you and accomodate to your schedule.
Thanks to everyone.
Best regards,
--
Priscila Mendoza
MFA Design Management Candidate
http://priscilamendoza.mx
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:10:05 +0000
From: Robert Harland <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Graphic Design as Communication Design (was background vs design)
Point taken Carlos, and apologies for assumptions on my part.
Regards, Robert
On 26/09/2014 00:10, "Carlos Pires" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>And maybe not in the UK, but keep in mind that semantics are different
>from country to country.
>Here the printing industry is called "indústria gráfica" and graphic
>designer is "designer gráfico," so there's a stronger semantic link
>between the graphic designer and print media.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:39:26 +0000
From: Robert Harland <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Graphic Design as Communication Design (was background vs design)
Hi Terry
Thanks for your post. I enjoyed it.
I didn't intend for it to be a boundary discussion I've had enough of
them. I was trying to get a clearer sense of how terms were being
conceptualised, as you suggest. And I'm not arguing that we retain a
"designer as the hero" approach either, as David implies. Though there may
be some value in this for certain disciplines. I was concerned more with
the issue of what's at the core of something. I believe this is relevant
to the list when there is such little contribution from the "art and
design" community, if I may use that phrase momentarily.
I can see how communication is close to the core of Graphic Design, but
personally do not see Graphic Design at the core of Communication Design
when it seemingly involves so many other factors that are multi-sensory.
Incidently, I wrote a paper a couple of years ago about graphic design
education. The early drafts argued for the sole use of the term Graphics,
like Physics. But I took it out in the end. So your example is pertinent.
Next small thing or new moon, I guess time will tell. But I'm not
suggesting that Graphic Design is the full moon either.
Regards, Robert
Robert Harland
School of Arts, English and Drama
Loughborough University
On 26/09/2014 01:40, "Terence Love" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Trying to conceptualise and define the term design is about clearer theory
>foundations and better theory development about design activity. This, in
>turn results in improvements to design activity, especially in areas of
>computer support for designers and automation of design activity. Perhaps
>even more important, it helps those working in design build on knowledge
>from elsewhere. To do this well is the mark of a mature discipline.
>
>The current discussion is different. It seems to be a boundary discussion
>about territory and naming for universities wanting attract students.
>
><snip>
>When trying to identify the 'one true version' without the work to
>identify
>the core theory foundations it can lead to undirected educational
>confusion.
>I remember one institution had 5 absolutely different e-business Masters
>programs with different names carefully chosen to delineate by name that
>they addressed very different aspects of e-business theory and practices.
>I remember the humour when teaching staff realised all 5 programs were
>teaching the same content.
>
><snip>
>
>It is not that long ago that a weird and very small novel subgrouping of
>practitioners focused only on the physical aspects of the world. Within
>the
>broader field, they were nicknamed the 'physicalists' to distinguish them
>from serious researchers and what they did was disparagingly referred to
>as
>'physics'. The parent field (Natural Philosophy) has now all but
>disappeared. Physics is at the stage where there are so many significant
>subfields, they will soon replace it as a head discipline as the world
>moves on, and Physic disappears. Engineering and Architecture are in much
>the same position.
>
>As Mulla Nassr Uddin said, 'Is it better to be the full moon or the new
>moon?' The full moon is greater bigger and brighter than the new moon at
>the
>moment. Its powers however are waning and the New Moon's light will soon
>come.
>
>Best wishes,
>Terry
>
>---
>Dr Terence Love
>PhD(UWA), BA(Hons) Engin. PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, 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]
>--
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:05:04 +0200
From: Carlos Pires <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Graphic Design as Communication Design (was background vs design)
On 2014-09-26 09:39, Robert Harland wrote:
--- snip ---
> Next small thing or new moon, I guess time will tell. But I'm not
> suggesting that Graphic Design is the full moon either.
>>
>> As Mulla Nassr Uddin said, 'Is it better to be the full moon or the
>> new
>> moon?' The full moon is greater bigger and brighter than the new moon
>> at
>> the
>> moment. Its powers however are waning and the New Moon's light will
>> soon
>> come.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Terry
Quick note:
Don't forget that "full moon" or "new moon" are artifacts of your point
of view...
Anyway, after all the controversy about human agency, it is refreshing
to see Terry quoting Mulla Nassr Uddin.
Best,
---
Carlos
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 22:49:18 +0800
From: Terence Love <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Graphic Design as Communication Design (was background vs design)
Hi Carlos,
Thank you for your kind words,
Next time Junaid, Patanjali or Veeresh.
Best,
terry
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
End of PHD-DESIGN Digest - 26 Sep 2014 (#2014-258)
**************************************************
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
