I often receive questions from students about the First Things First
Manifesto. I thought these questions were challenging enough to share
the answers:
My approach to the essay is to look at the manifesto from a student
point of view. Are we a new breed of designers who can "change the
world", or are we just new designers who have to make a living (take
what job we can, to put food on the table), that is my angle.
I was wondering if you could answer some of my questions?:
- What is your personal opinion on what is being said in this
manifesto? If you look at it from a student point of view, what is your
opinion on what students should use their skills on?
When I signed the manifesto I felt that the design field was rather
apathetic to social issues. While a few voices could be heard, while
many designers were socially minded, there was a dichotomy between
practice and belief. I still feel this is true to an extent. I believe
what's happened in the US since the 2000 presidency has changed many
views. I also believe the issue of sustainability has been banged into
designers heads. However, I don't view the manifesto as a call to arms.
I see it as a nudge towards ethical behavior. That it exists and
students, like yourself, have continually discussed its merits since
2000 is a good sign. So in the end I feel, at the very least, it is a
"talking point" that leads to increased consciousness, despite the
particulars of the wording.
- What was your view on graphic design when you were a student? What did you see as our foremost task?
I was never really a design student. But I was a young once. I was also
working for politically and socially stimulated publications. So to me
design was about communicating (more than selling, though the two can
be conflated). Design has always, for me, been two things: A frame for
message, or a means of entertainment. The two are not always mutually
exclusive.
- How has your view changed through the years that you have worked? If it has..?
I've become more sober, realistic, but continually curious. I write
much more than I design. I work with students much more than clients.
And at last, what is your opinion on what Lucienne Roberts says in this text:
”Graphic design is generally a rhetorical art – its job is to
persuade – so do we have a responsibility to be mindful of what we are
persuading people to do? We might, for example, argue that creating
desires for things that people don’t really want or need is ultimately
damaging both to the people concerned and to the environment on which
we all rely. We may therefore not want to participate in doing this.
Alternatively, we may see constant demand as a prerequisite to a
successful capitalist society and argue that this is broadly for the
good.”
I'm not sure what she means by rhetorical art. Design's job is to order
and enhance. The message we frame as designers may persuade or it may
inform, or both. As today's designers I believe we should be content
producers (as well as framers), but that is not about "design per se,"
its about authorship. If all we do is persuade, then we must have the
persuasive material given to us. However, if we are more than packagers
we must create that material - and for this we need to understand the
world we're living in. I'd say graphic design is an "understanding art"
(or at least service).
|