Friday, September 14, 2012
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
recordbar research & strategy
kansas city's a great town for food, drink, and music, and kc's own recordbar is a great pick for all three. with delicious food, easy drinks, and live shows almost every night of the week, it's hard to go wrong. the iconic decor is classic: it's cool without being trendy, and fits the mood of the place; and the crowds aren't there for social posturing: they're there for a good time.
there's only one problem: you'd never know from the outside.
the recordbar is in the commercial and retail corner of westport, 43rd, and southwest trafficway. it's next to first watch. it's next to a cleaner's. a dollar tree. an ace hardware. the half price books. and with the look of its exterior, complete with the bubbly blue and gold typographic logo, you would never know that it wasn't a retailer itself. everyone who reviews it online says the same thing: "i was so surprised." or "i never would have guessed."
the recordbar shouldn't stay a secret. even just driving by, you should be able to guess what they do, and how well. they deserve it.
Monday, September 10, 2012
visual advocacy debate
smak and i have been asked to argue against this statement: "acting in a partisan manner through research or other design process discourages free thought and unfairly influences the minds of the audience members."
on this topic, here are some arguments we have found:
• it is our right and responsibility as designers and researchers to use the skills we have developed and the time we have spent learning about a given topic to present it in the most ethical and most useful way. other people don't have the time to sort through tons of neutrality and determine the best solution, but not only do we have that time, but we have been trained to identify that best solution. there's no shame in us rising to the call to action to do our job, and well.
• as they discuss in the section on catalyst design, we can use our position as designers to frame an issue and get a conversation started. it may well be beyond our power to direct people specifically, or influence their minds in a particular way, but we can give them a jumping off point to discuss.
• as our educations have (hopefully) prepared us to do, we should have a pretty strong sense of cultural literacy and critical thinking. having a transparently visible stance in a work can be much more useful in discourse than attempting to be neutral, because the well-defined stance gives people something to reject and craft an argument against, or hone in around, if they agree.
• given that it is impossible to be truly neutral, it's safer and better to have a well-reasoned and well-designed position than to deny your opinions and try to pass off something that, as neutrally as you may have attempted to make it, will definitely contain biases in your prioritization. it is much more insidious to allow people to internalize your priorities without realizing it.
• if your free thought can't withstand a touch of dialectic, maybe it wasn't all that much free thought in the first place? strong thinking can only get stronger and more reasoned when confronted with other people's opinions. anything that collapses the first time it encounters another thought is probably pretty arbitrary and not well considered.
on this topic, here are some arguments we have found:
• it is our right and responsibility as designers and researchers to use the skills we have developed and the time we have spent learning about a given topic to present it in the most ethical and most useful way. other people don't have the time to sort through tons of neutrality and determine the best solution, but not only do we have that time, but we have been trained to identify that best solution. there's no shame in us rising to the call to action to do our job, and well.
• as they discuss in the section on catalyst design, we can use our position as designers to frame an issue and get a conversation started. it may well be beyond our power to direct people specifically, or influence their minds in a particular way, but we can give them a jumping off point to discuss.
• as our educations have (hopefully) prepared us to do, we should have a pretty strong sense of cultural literacy and critical thinking. having a transparently visible stance in a work can be much more useful in discourse than attempting to be neutral, because the well-defined stance gives people something to reject and craft an argument against, or hone in around, if they agree.
• given that it is impossible to be truly neutral, it's safer and better to have a well-reasoned and well-designed position than to deny your opinions and try to pass off something that, as neutrally as you may have attempted to make it, will definitely contain biases in your prioritization. it is much more insidious to allow people to internalize your priorities without realizing it.
• if your free thought can't withstand a touch of dialectic, maybe it wasn't all that much free thought in the first place? strong thinking can only get stronger and more reasoned when confronted with other people's opinions. anything that collapses the first time it encounters another thought is probably pretty arbitrary and not well considered.
Sunday, September 9, 2012
on authorship, production, and intent within design
graphic authorship:
michael rock questions whether authorship is a useful concept for graphic designers. authorship, being the pre-postmodern (modern?) notion of the author as being truly the single, genius creator of a work, who is the ultimate authority (note the etymology) on the object and outside of whom no further information can be taken about it. postmodern decentering removes the author from the heart of the work, laying ultimate responsibility for interpretation on the reader him or herself, with all the social context they can glean.
he says: "The cult of the author narrows interpretation and replaces the author at center of the work. Foucault noted that the figure of the author is not a particularly liberating one. By transferring the authority of the text back to the author, by focusing on voice, presence becomes a limiting factor, containing and categorizing the work. The author as origin, authority and ultimate owner of the text guards against the free will of the reader."
a more comforting visualization for the design process, and its inherent collaboration, is as poetic translation, which must remain focused on keeping the literal content consistent and yet still recapturing the intangible character at the same time. in the end, though, all he has to offer is that, after all these trying on of concepts, design simply = design.
why is it important for us to define and redefine the work we do? does our definition, or others', change the way we feel about & execute our work?
the designer as producer:
victor margolin asserts that "Until now, users have engaged more flexibly than producers with the product milieu. Now designer/entrepreneurs have the opportunity to create a much more inventive and
spontaneous product culture than we have ever had in the past. They can subvert the near monopolies of large companies in many product sectors and create products for needs that have yet to be met."
in this revitalization of an almost "arts and crafts" movement of alternative makers and alternative products filling niches unfilled by mass production and focusing on ideas like sustainability and user experience.
he proposes a program of master's studies in "design entrepreneurship" for people who want to be "both product innovators and manufacturers."
should this, in fact, be a separate field, specifically tailored to filling these economic niches in high-tech/sustainable thinking? should it be a designer's responsibility to join with this manufacturing, or is there a notable difference between working with a manufacturer and doing it yourself?
design with intent:
robert fabricant describes the turnover from the "disappearing designer" whose user-centered work was so neutral and unquestionable that it was invisible to the user, so seamlessly meshing with behavior; to the active and personal designer whose skillset and ethics lead them into the three emergent direct design categories of persuasion design, catalyst design, and performance design.
these intervention strategies can seem gutsy, but they get results. "As designers, we don’t always have the courage or the opportunity to look honestly at the impact of the decisions we make. Persuasion design allows for that. At its best, this model starts with results and works backward from there."
is a creative way to intervene and solve a problem ever simply enough? how far do you have to take a solution before it is inarguably a design artifact? are the problem solvers themselves "designers" or does it require a visual solution to be considered a designed project?
michael rock questions whether authorship is a useful concept for graphic designers. authorship, being the pre-postmodern (modern?) notion of the author as being truly the single, genius creator of a work, who is the ultimate authority (note the etymology) on the object and outside of whom no further information can be taken about it. postmodern decentering removes the author from the heart of the work, laying ultimate responsibility for interpretation on the reader him or herself, with all the social context they can glean.
he says: "The cult of the author narrows interpretation and replaces the author at center of the work. Foucault noted that the figure of the author is not a particularly liberating one. By transferring the authority of the text back to the author, by focusing on voice, presence becomes a limiting factor, containing and categorizing the work. The author as origin, authority and ultimate owner of the text guards against the free will of the reader."
a more comforting visualization for the design process, and its inherent collaboration, is as poetic translation, which must remain focused on keeping the literal content consistent and yet still recapturing the intangible character at the same time. in the end, though, all he has to offer is that, after all these trying on of concepts, design simply = design.
why is it important for us to define and redefine the work we do? does our definition, or others', change the way we feel about & execute our work?
the designer as producer:
victor margolin asserts that "Until now, users have engaged more flexibly than producers with the product milieu. Now designer/entrepreneurs have the opportunity to create a much more inventive and
spontaneous product culture than we have ever had in the past. They can subvert the near monopolies of large companies in many product sectors and create products for needs that have yet to be met."
in this revitalization of an almost "arts and crafts" movement of alternative makers and alternative products filling niches unfilled by mass production and focusing on ideas like sustainability and user experience.
he proposes a program of master's studies in "design entrepreneurship" for people who want to be "both product innovators and manufacturers."
should this, in fact, be a separate field, specifically tailored to filling these economic niches in high-tech/sustainable thinking? should it be a designer's responsibility to join with this manufacturing, or is there a notable difference between working with a manufacturer and doing it yourself?
design with intent:
robert fabricant describes the turnover from the "disappearing designer" whose user-centered work was so neutral and unquestionable that it was invisible to the user, so seamlessly meshing with behavior; to the active and personal designer whose skillset and ethics lead them into the three emergent direct design categories of persuasion design, catalyst design, and performance design.
these intervention strategies can seem gutsy, but they get results. "As designers, we don’t always have the courage or the opportunity to look honestly at the impact of the decisions we make. Persuasion design allows for that. At its best, this model starts with results and works backward from there."
is a creative way to intervene and solve a problem ever simply enough? how far do you have to take a solution before it is inarguably a design artifact? are the problem solvers themselves "designers" or does it require a visual solution to be considered a designed project?
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
visual advocacy reading responses
visualizing a revolution: emory douglas and the black panther newspaper
in the very first paragraph, author colette gaiter writes that the black panthers can be looked at in a variety of ways, "One extreme: the Panthers were a bunch of charismatic, grandstanding violent thugs, exploiting oppressive conditions to promote their own pathological agendas, and the United States is fortunate that the FBI and police stopped them before they started a bloody civil war. The other extreme: the Black Panthers were brilliant revolutionary visionaries who tried to expand the African American civil rights struggle into an opportunity to end Western imperialism, global racism and capitalist exploitation of working people."
throughout this text, there are distinct word choices that soften or mold the content.
ex: "became receptive to the idea of armed retaliation", "harshest images simultaneously elicited revulsion at the graphic violence and attraction to the idea of effective self-defense"
in what way are the words in this article used to direct the reader? in what ways are our visual communications subject to similar bias? should there be, as we discussed in class, ethical considerations given to these things, beyond their effectiveness?
design of dissent
tony kushner (playwright of the incredible angels in america) wonders "is there a dismal history to be written of embryonic political movements aborted for want of a great graphic designer?"
we love to believe in a meritocracy, being americans, growing up with the american dream, and fed by the internet; that the best and most important things will become visible and be rewarded with success and action, but is that true? will good ideas always find their way out, or, without the guiding hands of a mythmaker/an identity-crafter/a designer, do some just fail to make?
if it's the collective recognizance of truth that makes visual dissent so effective, can the first person to observe something have that power? or must the atrocity go on long enough to be well known before dissent can emerge, given that dissent is most basically the powerless vs. the powerful?
for instance, if "every phenomenon, including language, including the language of oppression, carries within itself the seeds of its own unraveling", must those phenomena reach a certain height before they have enough weight to fall?
glaser believes that "dissent when it's at its best is fueled by empathy, and it's fueled by the idea that other people matter, and that if somebody is hurt or victimized, we are all hurt or victimized." is it true that shock often results in withdrawal, while empathy draws people into action?
in the very first paragraph, author colette gaiter writes that the black panthers can be looked at in a variety of ways, "One extreme: the Panthers were a bunch of charismatic, grandstanding violent thugs, exploiting oppressive conditions to promote their own pathological agendas, and the United States is fortunate that the FBI and police stopped them before they started a bloody civil war. The other extreme: the Black Panthers were brilliant revolutionary visionaries who tried to expand the African American civil rights struggle into an opportunity to end Western imperialism, global racism and capitalist exploitation of working people."
throughout this text, there are distinct word choices that soften or mold the content.
ex: "became receptive to the idea of armed retaliation", "harshest images simultaneously elicited revulsion at the graphic violence and attraction to the idea of effective self-defense"
in what way are the words in this article used to direct the reader? in what ways are our visual communications subject to similar bias? should there be, as we discussed in class, ethical considerations given to these things, beyond their effectiveness?
design of dissent
tony kushner (playwright of the incredible angels in america) wonders "is there a dismal history to be written of embryonic political movements aborted for want of a great graphic designer?"
we love to believe in a meritocracy, being americans, growing up with the american dream, and fed by the internet; that the best and most important things will become visible and be rewarded with success and action, but is that true? will good ideas always find their way out, or, without the guiding hands of a mythmaker/an identity-crafter/a designer, do some just fail to make?
if it's the collective recognizance of truth that makes visual dissent so effective, can the first person to observe something have that power? or must the atrocity go on long enough to be well known before dissent can emerge, given that dissent is most basically the powerless vs. the powerful?
for instance, if "every phenomenon, including language, including the language of oppression, carries within itself the seeds of its own unraveling", must those phenomena reach a certain height before they have enough weight to fall?
glaser believes that "dissent when it's at its best is fueled by empathy, and it's fueled by the idea that other people matter, and that if somebody is hurt or victimized, we are all hurt or victimized." is it true that shock often results in withdrawal, while empathy draws people into action?
Saturday, August 25, 2012
community psychology
i have always loved the study of social interaction and this article on the psychology of a "community" is a stellar example, right down to the mathematical simplification of the feelings and hopes of any number of people to the following equations for community cohesiveness:
shared emotional connection is equal to contact AND high quality interaction, which is itself equal to (events with successful closure WITHOUT ambiguity) MULTIPLIED by (event valence MULTIPLIED by sharedness of the event) AND the amount of honor given to members WITHOUT humiliation.
the amount of sense this makes is amazing considering how initially incomprehensible it seems to be. throughout reading, the community to which i can best relate in my life to this setup is, conveniently, the kcai graphic designers.
our shared emotional connection (studio culture!) equals the fact that we all spend time together in studio AND give good, solid critiques and conversations (which run the course of class periods and allow for feedback to ensure understanding) MULTIPLIED by (how much we enjoy what we're doing and talking about it, MULTIPLIED by the fact that we have these classes always together, following along through every step of the processes) AND the amount of rewarding feedback and good critiques and advice WITHOUT being a jerk and tearing into people's work and making people feel bad.
the sense of "all-in-this-together"ness; that we are stronger and cleverer through our support and collaboration than we could be "designing in the dark," all by our lonesomes; and that we know this, (and find joy in the fact,) is what makes our studio a solid community.
that fits absolutely perfectly, does it not? and having established how much sense it makes in one community, it's easy to see how people who cooperate or connect in any capacity run through a similar set of experiences resulting in their consistently increasing closeness and cohesion.
shared emotional connection is equal to contact AND high quality interaction, which is itself equal to (events with successful closure WITHOUT ambiguity) MULTIPLIED by (event valence MULTIPLIED by sharedness of the event) AND the amount of honor given to members WITHOUT humiliation.
the amount of sense this makes is amazing considering how initially incomprehensible it seems to be. throughout reading, the community to which i can best relate in my life to this setup is, conveniently, the kcai graphic designers.
our shared emotional connection (studio culture!) equals the fact that we all spend time together in studio AND give good, solid critiques and conversations (which run the course of class periods and allow for feedback to ensure understanding) MULTIPLIED by (how much we enjoy what we're doing and talking about it, MULTIPLIED by the fact that we have these classes always together, following along through every step of the processes) AND the amount of rewarding feedback and good critiques and advice WITHOUT being a jerk and tearing into people's work and making people feel bad.
the sense of "all-in-this-together"ness; that we are stronger and cleverer through our support and collaboration than we could be "designing in the dark," all by our lonesomes; and that we know this, (and find joy in the fact,) is what makes our studio a solid community.
that fits absolutely perfectly, does it not? and having established how much sense it makes in one community, it's easy to see how people who cooperate or connect in any capacity run through a similar set of experiences resulting in their consistently increasing closeness and cohesion.
Thursday, August 23, 2012
senior year begins: the first mx post
first of all, let's just say that starting the first school day of the year with a girl showing us how to look nice for school even when we're running late: spot on. we're all gonna be using that eyeshadow trick from now on, and everyone will know we're exhausted by the white highlights in the inside of our eyes.
the 8 multiple intelligences are something with which i'm very familiar because the junior high i went to structured its teaching methods around them. if i remember correctly, back then, i ranked very highly in verbal/linguistic, visual/spatial, and interpersonal. i don't think those things have changed; that's definitely still how i work best. in my school, a public charter school which never failed to baffle the rest of the school district, students sat 4 around each round table, and rather than exams or papers to test our learning, we had what were known as "inquiries," which could take the form of any of a collection of different options dreamed up by the teachers, based around the different intelligences, whether it turned out to be a something written, a poster/brochure, a skit, or any number of other things to be done alone or with a group. this was designed to ensure that everybody got to demonstrate their learning on equal footing, as they felt they could work most strongly.
according to this absolutely puzzling 4 learning style questionnaire, i am a type one learner, with which i identify fairly well, seeking meaning, bringing unity and cooperation, fixating on people and culture, and looking at things from all the way around. the way the axes of the coordinate grid work, though, is a bit absurd... there's no reason they couldn't have run negative and positive numbers in their normal directions and labeled the quadrants to fit. this also read a bit like those experiments wherein everybody agrees with a fake personality assessment because it is just vague enough to apply to anyone who reads it, while having just enough specificity to feel personal.
i had seen this absolutely gorgeously animated presentation before, and was similarly blown away this time. i find it to be a very hard line to walk between the optimism and trust it takes to believe in these improvements being possible, and the cynicism to know that the overhaul necessary for such a change would be massive and devastatingly unlikely. in small ways, though, we're making progress, and this project, i think, will end up opening our eyes to that progress and allowing us to see where else it can go.
as for my own research, i've unearthed this documentary on unschooling.
unschooling is a philosophy that dates all the way back to rousseau musing that the best way for children to learn is for adults to set the environment and get out of the way. unschooling is based around the notion that the most productive and truest learning comes from people's own pursuit of their interests and passions rather than being forced into a stilted social scenario and having information banked into them. obviously with the development of today's interactive technology, we're in a better position than ever before to facilitate but ultimately not interfere with independent learning.
the 8 multiple intelligences are something with which i'm very familiar because the junior high i went to structured its teaching methods around them. if i remember correctly, back then, i ranked very highly in verbal/linguistic, visual/spatial, and interpersonal. i don't think those things have changed; that's definitely still how i work best. in my school, a public charter school which never failed to baffle the rest of the school district, students sat 4 around each round table, and rather than exams or papers to test our learning, we had what were known as "inquiries," which could take the form of any of a collection of different options dreamed up by the teachers, based around the different intelligences, whether it turned out to be a something written, a poster/brochure, a skit, or any number of other things to be done alone or with a group. this was designed to ensure that everybody got to demonstrate their learning on equal footing, as they felt they could work most strongly.
according to this absolutely puzzling 4 learning style questionnaire, i am a type one learner, with which i identify fairly well, seeking meaning, bringing unity and cooperation, fixating on people and culture, and looking at things from all the way around. the way the axes of the coordinate grid work, though, is a bit absurd... there's no reason they couldn't have run negative and positive numbers in their normal directions and labeled the quadrants to fit. this also read a bit like those experiments wherein everybody agrees with a fake personality assessment because it is just vague enough to apply to anyone who reads it, while having just enough specificity to feel personal.
i had seen this absolutely gorgeously animated presentation before, and was similarly blown away this time. i find it to be a very hard line to walk between the optimism and trust it takes to believe in these improvements being possible, and the cynicism to know that the overhaul necessary for such a change would be massive and devastatingly unlikely. in small ways, though, we're making progress, and this project, i think, will end up opening our eyes to that progress and allowing us to see where else it can go.
as for my own research, i've unearthed this documentary on unschooling.
unschooling is a philosophy that dates all the way back to rousseau musing that the best way for children to learn is for adults to set the environment and get out of the way. unschooling is based around the notion that the most productive and truest learning comes from people's own pursuit of their interests and passions rather than being forced into a stilted social scenario and having information banked into them. obviously with the development of today's interactive technology, we're in a better position than ever before to facilitate but ultimately not interfere with independent learning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)