a great sentiment from an anonymous narrator in the in-progress film “end:civ”. a great reminder to me of how easily i (we) can get caught up in inconsequential details. check out the trailer and info about the film here. thanks to tony brock for the link.
new video from free range studio
no meaningful community can be sustained (let alone flourish) without radical new commitment to the art of people sharing time to talk
- tony brock
a former instructor of mine while in grad school at ncsu, tony constantly questions how we should be educating our students and what constitutes "education". he also questions -- rightly -- what we value as educators and how that reflects/informs our lives more holistically. (re-read quote for reference)
the sale of rebellion is tantamount to heresy
i recently saw a lecture in which a large design studio showcased a huge range of research and design solutions for converse and "all stars" in particular. it is probably just my personal background and beliefs clouding my judgement, but the more i watched this presentation, the more i because nauseous about the careful scrutiny and subsequent commodification of alternative/youth/creative/rebellious culture. being in the punk/hardcore scene for many years showed me clearly the difference between authentic expressions of an alternative view of society/culture and inauthentic/prepackaged ones. this typically happens in the form that this design studio engaged in -- understand the audience, design some campaign featuring your "solution" that embodies the correct brand attributes which mirror the audience's attitudes, attach it to your product, and sell those attributes/product back to the audience. not cool at all.
now as i said before, it may just be my own sensitivity to this issue and others don't find fault with it. in an attempt at objectivity, i asked my wife -- a long-time chuck taylor wearer -- why she repeatedly chose to purchase those shoes.she mentioned first the associations with her youth, which involved punk rock, skateboarding, etc. next she mentioned (correctly) that the shoes have an association with counterculture and she identifies with that, so she continues to signify her cultural associations by wearing those shoes.
that's all fine and dandy and i don't have a problem with any of those reasons. i guess it's when the company decides to actively push that angle in trying to sell more shoes that it becomes problematic. the imagery and video i saw in the presentation included a canvas bag with "revolution" stencilled in red on it, guys skateboarding, people playing music shows, raw rock 'n' roll soundtracks, etc, etc.
what i think is amusing about the studio's "understanding" of the audience, as thorough as it is, is that anyone that is serious about nearly any of the subjects they tried to associate themselves with, would have a huge problem with the product. any serious skater, except maybe an old school dude, would never skate in chucks these days. anyone serious about social/political activism or revolution would be unlikely to wear chucks because nike owns them, they are not sustainably made, they don't pay their workers a living wage, etc. but maybe that superficial understanding of "rebellion" is exactly what appeals to converse's target market -- those who think they are being rebellious by wearing a particular brand of anything.
so what do you think? why do you wear chucks? why not? what do you think of their association with counterculture, whether propagated by culture itself or by designers, marketers and the corporation? is the sale of rebellion tatamount to heresy?
elegant dissent by elliott earls
i just watched this video (embedded after the jump) from elliott earls, artist in residence for graphic design at cranbrook academy of art. it was a great reminder for me that the form and how it is made is incredibly important. it reminds me to ask big questions about the work i am making and how it can and should challenge dominant paradigms. not that i need to work as elliott does, but to really push my beliefs and values into my work and consider how those things are communicated through the work. i have been talking a lot to my seniors in visual advocacy about how graphic design and design thinking can really make a difference on a socio-political level, beyond traditional awareness campaigns. we have talked about form and process before, but not as much recently as issues of self-initiated work, the designer's role in a project or in relation to a community and things of that nature. this excerpt from earl's talk is a great reminder for me to keep questioning all aspects of how design functions and to embody how i believe it should function and look.
Elegant Dissent: Elliott Earls talk at the ICA Boston from Elliott Earls on Vimeo.
thanks to cameron perry, one of my students at kcai, for posting this on his blog. another great reason to be a teacher -- continuous exposure to a whole network of ideas and sources.
I believe that the artist's involvement in the capitalist structure is disadvantageous to the artist and forces him to produce objects in order to live.
-- sol lewitt
but can't the same be said for any job? should we not want to create and produce simply because we are intrinsically compelled?
Nothing dollarable is safe, however guarded.
-- john muir
(from a message to the 1908 Governors Conference on Conservation)
oh, the ironies of patriotism
labor day weekend i found myself meandering through a buffet line when i picked up a napkin before retreating to my seat. that napkin was designed to look like an american flag. "well," i said to myself ironically, "isn't that simultaneously patriotic and cute?" only when i began to utilize my napkin for its intended purpose did i realize the implications of such a design.
in the graphic design department at kansas city art institute, we talk a considerable amount about "the user's experience" and how important it is to plan for. use, context, process, attitudes, etc are all very important factors in how the designed artifact is utilized and the meaning that is gleaned from it. after wiping my mouth a couple of times it became painfully clear that the designers of this napkin had not thought about "experience" at all. so here i am, soiling "the flag" with veggie burger juice and other food residue, wondering about the good people who bought these napkins in some attempt to express a love for their country and if they thought the same things as me when they wiped their faces.
shenanigans from the yes men
the yes men have been an inspiration to me ever since i saw a short film about their antics involving one of them posing as a world bank representative at a financial conference in europe. they more recently produced 100,000 copies of a fake new york times newspaper with all kinds of optimistic headlines such as an end to the iraq war, among other events.
i received an email giving some vague indication that they are up to more pranks related to forcing the u.s. government's hand on global warming. apparently there is a global summit planned in december, and all i can tell from the email is that they need a good chunk of money, people in new york that can sew, and people willing to get arrested for civil disobedience. awesome. there is a bit of info about the global warming issue and a sign up for the civil disobedience at the beyond talk website.
grad school notes
ran across this today, from back in 2006 while at ncsu.