This essay will explore the ways in which social change has affected graphic design and the true roles of graphic designers in cultural versus consumerism, it will outline whether graphic design can be more than just serving consumerism. The essay will look at key movements within graphic design that have aimed to affect or change the way in which the consumerist system works, key examples such as the first things first manifesto and Ad buster culture jamming will be discussed throughout the essay.
The 1960’s were a time of great social change, after the world wars people were starting to rebuild their lives and started to gain the disposable income, which had not been available before. This fuelled consumerism and allowed it to gain heights that it had never previously gained. On the opposite end of the spectrum the threat of war in Vietnam sparked activists to stand up and take charge against governments. Civil rights and social change allowed people to speak up for what they believed in. The first things first manifesto was written in 1963 and published in 1964 by Ken Garland along with 20 other designers, photographers and students, the manifesto was a reaction to the staunch society of 1960s Britain and called for a return to a humanist aspect of design. It lashed out against the fast-paced and often frivolous productions of mainstream advertising, calling them trivial and time consuming. It's solution was to focus efforts of design on education and public service tasks that promoted the improvement of society. The influence of the manifesto was quick to reach a wide audience and was picked up by The Guardian, which led to a TV appearance by Garland on a BBC news program and its subsequent publication in a variety of journals, magazines and newspapers. It was revisited and republished by a group of new authors in the year 2000 and labeled as the First Things First Manifesto 2000.
Ken Garland waged a war against consumerism and the negative affect it has on design ‘By far the greatest effort of those working in the advertising industry are wasted on these trivial purposes, which contribute little or nothing to our national prosperity’ (Garland, K et al1964) He then goes on to list some of the consumerist products that are deemed trivial ‘cat food, stomach powders, detergent, hair restorer, striped tooth paste, aftershave lotion, before shave lotion, slimming diets, fattening diets, deodorant, fizzy water, cigarettes, roll-ons, pull-ons and slip-ons.’ (Garland, K et al 1964) There is a tone of irony echoed throughout the quote such as the juxtaposition of ‘slimming diets, fattening diets’ to help make these products seem unneeded and unnecessary. Likewise in Poyner’s revisited manifesto he too lists updated products seen as trivial but to very different effects. ‘Encouraged in this direction, designers then apply their skill and imagination to sell dog biscuits, designer coffee, diamonds, detergents, hair gel, cigarettes, credit cards, sneakers, butt toners, light beer and heavy-duty recreational vehicles.’ (Poyner, R et al 2000) Many of the products listed have a more sinister tone than those listed in the original manifesto. For example cigarettes have a negative effect on health and are addictive which means that once a person has bought one packet they want to buy another, thus fuelling a consumerist cycle. Like wise with credit cards, people become stuck in a rut trying to buy the products consumerism is selling them and need credit cards to pay off credit cards.
Opposing the views of both manifestos Jan Michl writes ‘There is no doubt that the high quality and sophistication of graphic design in the Western culture is a function of a commerce-based society. Besides, historically speaking, only the societies based on economic and political freedom have made possible a growing standard of living to the majority of its members. Luxuries, earlier available only to the rich and powerful, became increasingly accessible to common people only in the Western societies. It is a fact that commercial societies have permitted a growing number of its members to define their own preferences, i.e. to decide for themselves what their first things are. Not surprisingly, the Western system of economic growth has brought greatest profits to those innovators who improved the standard of living of many less rich, rather than of a few fabulously wealthy. We may assume that the global capitalism, in spite of the upheavals of its "creative destruction", will keep improving the living standards of all those who live outside the wealthy Western world. True, a free-market society does not make, and will never make, for an ideal society. The signatories of the First things first 2000 Manifesto are not alone in finding many features of the consumer society personally regrettable, and I for one would join them in the complaints. But their first-things-first philosophy is short-sighted at best. The problem is that if every group will try to tailor the world to the first things of its own, while rejecting, as the signatories apparently do, the framework which permits more than one group to advance their own first things, we would be cutting off the very branch we all are sitting on. It is imperative to have not just one, but two objectives: to go ahead and further our own first things, and, at the same time, to care to preserve and defend the political and economic framework which permits other people to pursue their own first things. The existence of this framework is both the primary source, and the only guarantee, of our prosperity. This is our ultimate first thing.’
In the manifesto Ken Garland outlines the fact that the world has been saturated with consumerist products that serve no other purpose than to boost consumerism and do not enrich our lives in any way. A number of other authors such as Papanek (1983) and Rick Poyner (2000) also agree with this. For instance Garland writes in the First things First manifesto ‘In common with an increasing number of the general public, we have reached a saturation point at which the high pitched scream of consumer selling is no more than sheer noise’. This is supported by Papanek who wrote ‘Most things are designed not for the needs of the people but for the needs of manufacturers to sell to people’ (Papanek, V 1983 p46). Papanek here outlines how consumerism is driven by the need for corporate companies to sell more products to unsuspecting consumers. This is supported by Poyner who writes about consumerism at a much later date than the previous ‘The scope of debate is shrinking; It must expand. Consumerism is running uncontested; it must be challenged’ (Poyner, R. 2000) There is more of an urgency and importance in his tone of voice. Unlike Garland and Papanek, Who both wrote that consumerism does not enrich our lives, Poyner goes on to say that the affects are far more dangerous than that and are actually damaging to the consumer ‘To some extent we are all helping draft a reductive and immeasurably harmful code of public discourse’ In essence the consumer system that helped to build up social change will in the end destroy it.
Although there are many examples of graphic design driven by consumerism there are also examples of design aimed to challenge consumerism and provoke social change. Adbusters is a non profit organization based in British Columbia, Canada. It is a philosophical magazine that aims to address and highlight the consumer world we live in and challenge it. They aim to raise awareness through philosophical writing and culture jamming through out the world. The term Culture jamming was coined in 1984, it is a process of transforming mass media to produce satirical and ironic commentary of itself using the existing mediums communication method. Culture jamming is usually employed in opposition to a perceived appropriation of public space, or as a reaction against social conformity, It uses the power of big brands against themselves. Kalle Lasn explains this further “Corporations advertise. Culture jammers subvertise. A well-produced print “subvetisement” mimics the look and feel of the target ad, prompting the classic double take as the viewers realize what they are seeing is in fact the very opposite of what they expected. Subvertising is potent mustard. It cuts through the hype and glitz of our mediated reality and momentarily, tantalizingly, reveals the hollow spectacle within. Suppose you don’t have the money to launch a real print ad campaign. What you can do is mimic the million-dollar look and feel of your opponents campaign, there by detouring their own carefully worked out button pushing memes in your favour. They spend millions building their corporate cool, and you keep stealing their electricity” (Lasn, K 1999 p131) [fig 1] In this image a billboard of a coca cola ad has been defaced. The purpose of this alteration is to show the corporate giants main love, money. The Culture jammers aim to make a mockery out of the companies targeted “It’s exhilarating to throw a megacorporation like McDonalds or Calvin Klein to the mat with the awesome momentum of it’s own icons and marketing hype-leveraging the very brand recognition the company so painstakingly built over the years. It is fascinating exercise to take on a cartel like the global automakers and try to make it question it’s mandate.” (Lasn, K 1999 p130) One of the failings of culture jamming is it’s uneducated and amateurish style, The graffiti may appear to many as just another act of vandalism, which could turn people away from the subvertisements message completely. Righty or wrongly graffiti is seen as the work of youths and vandals, this in turn means that the messages conveyed are often dismissed and discarded as criminality.
In contrast to the culture jamming movement the campaign for buy nothing day is a lot more considered, educated and revolutionary. Buy Nothing Day was founded in Vancouver by artist Ted Dave and subsequently promoted by Adbusters magazine. The first Buy Nothing Day was organized in Canada in September 1992 as a day for society to examine the issue of over-consumption. In 1997, it was moved to the Friday after American Thanksgiving, also called Black Friday, which is the busiest shopping day in the USA. In 2000, advertisements by Adbusters promoting Buy Nothing Day were denied advertising time by almost all major television networks except for CNN. Participation now includes more than 65 nations. It challenges consumers to go cold turkey on consumption for 24 hours and create a peoples revolution to take back Christmas. The event is held in late November, a pinnacle moment for consumerist companies in the run up to Christmas. It is an interesting fact that consumption can be seen as an addiction “The commercial mass media are rearranging our neurons, manipulating our emotions, making new connections between deep immaterial needs and material products. So virtual is the hypodermic needle that we don’t feel it. So gradually is the dosage increased that we are not aware of the toxicity” (Lasn, K 1999 P12) Many consumers feel an over riding obsession to obtain possessions that consumerism has taught them to need. Products that may not enhance their life in anyway other than to fulfill empty needs of self-satisfaction and keeping up to date with current trends and styles. This need to fill an empty void with consumption is never as present than at Christmas time. [fig 2] shows one of the campaign posters for buy nothing day. The strong imagery and uses of monochromatic colour help to draw the viewers attention. This style of design is much more effective that the techniques of culture jamming. The sophisticated design is both intriguing and subtle, but the message can still be received that the consumer is trapped behind the very bars of consumerism it’s self.
Kalle Lasn’s culture jamming initiative has also come under some scrutiny, Debra Goldman writes that Lasn’s subvertisements employs the same manipulative and destructive methods as the advertising that he strongly opposes. “Kalle Lasn, the architect of Buy Nothing Day and its springtime counterpart, Turn Off TV Week, complains that he can't get his promos for Buy Nothing Day on network TV. He has, however, gotten his anti-consumer crusade into Time. An enemy of the empire of brands, dedicated to the "unswooshing of America," he is something of a cult brand himself, boasting several product lines for the consumer niche he serves.”(Goldman, D. 1999). Here Goldman writes that Lasn has created a brand in it’s self, it has a corporate identity and applies to a specific consumer, just like the corporate companies he opposes. “Now Lasn extends the brand with a new de-marketing manifesto, Culture Jam, the Uncooling of America. In a neat bit of synergy, the book's publication has been timed to coincide with Buy Nothing Day. Lasn's career shows that good de-marketing works just like good marketing does.” (Goldman, D. 1999) Goldman raises the question whether graphic design truly can challenge consumerism, in this case it appears that Lasn’s attempts to challenge consumerism have in fact added to it. This shows that perhaps the methods employed by Lasn are no better than the corporate giants he is trying to challenge.
On the opposite end of the spectrum Ken Garland’s First Things First manifesto has been seen by many as redundant, as it only appeals to the cultural elite. Michael Bierut writes “The first things first thirty three have specialized in extraordinarily beautiful things for the cultural elite. They’ve resisited manipulating the proles who trudge the isle of your local 7-Eleven for the simple reason that they haven’t been invited to. A cynic, then, might dismiss the impact of the manifesto as no more than that of the witnessing of a eunuchs take a vow of chastity” (Bierut, M 2007 p55). It appears that there is a fine line between boycotting the consumer system and employing “trivial” advertising techniques in order to gain the attention of the consumer. There is also a question of what would happen to the consumer system if graphic designers withdrew from it. Further more as the manifesto only targets the cultural elite it fails to acknowledge the thousands of other creatives who have not yet reached the dizzy heights of their chosen professions and don’t have the time, resources or financial security to enable them to souly devote their time to more worthy ethical causes. Creative professions are, at the end of the day a career path and the aim of any career is to make money. A young creative may have to work for some more unethical, consumer driven companies in order to make a living before they can donate their creativity to social, environmental and ethical charitable causes.
In conclusion Graphic design is driven by consumerism, just as much as consumerism is driven by graphic design. The purpose of advertising and graphic design is inherently interlinked, and in some cases trying to combat consumerism through this medium, much like Lasn, designers are merely adding to the consumer cycle. Graphic design can be more than serving consumerism, however there has to be a balance between practicing what you believe and earning a living. Many graphic designers invest their own interests in side projects to aide social change and cultural design mixed with more trivial consumer based work in order to earn a living. “About four years after the original First Things First, Ken Garland wrote “What I am suggesting… is that we make some attempt to identify, and to identify with, our real client: the public. They may not be the ones who pay us, nor the ones who give us our diplomas and degrees. But if they are to be the final recipients of our work, they are the ones who matter” And, I would submit, they deserve at very least the simple, civic-minded gift of a well-designed dog biscuit package. If you think that’s so easy, just try.” (Bierut, M 2007 p60) I think the views of Lasn and others are some what biased and paint graphic designers who design for consumerism in a bad light. However Just because a designer works for the corporate system it doesn’t make them poor designers, hence the success of these companies. Graphic design can be more than just serving consumerism, but is also a vital part of so many corporate companies around the world.
Word Count: 2822
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bierut, M. (2007) Seventy Nine Short Essays On Design. New York, Princeton Architectural press
Garland, K et al. (1964) 'The First Things First Manifesto’
Goldman, D (1999) http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising/art-commerce-debra-goldmans-consumer-republic-39863 (date accessed 15.01.14)
Lasn, K. (2000) Culture Jam. New York, HarperCollins
Michl,J (2006) First Things Fist or Our Things First?, Oslo, http://janmichl.com/eng.firstthingsfirst.html (date accessed 10.01.14)
Papanek, V. (1983) Design for human scale. Van Norstrand Reinhold co
Poyner, R et al. (2000) 'First Things First Manifesto Revisited
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/05/the-new-culture-jamming-how-activists-will-respond-to-online-advertising/257176/
https://www.adbusters.org/content/barcode-escape
No comments:
Post a Comment