source images: http://www.sagmeisterwalsh.com/work/project/aishti/
In 1964 Advertising and consumer design was a 'pitched scream of consumer selling- no more that noise' Garland, K (1964). By 1990 designers who worked in these disciplines were 'engaged in nothing less that the manufacture of contemporary reality' Poynor, R (1990) developing into 'an environment so saturated with commercial messages that it is changing the way citizen-consumers speak, think, feel' Lasen, K (2000).
In that case the advertising campaign pictured below by Sagmeister and Walsh is part of this 'pitched scream'. While it is true that the purpose of these designs and the campaign its self is all about selling, it is not simply about product but about the brand identity and selling the idea of the department store concerned. "But", I hear you cry, "it's still about selling" and indeed it is. However, I believe we have, as a society, developed beyond the 'hard sell', a post pitched scream age if you will and all through the involvement of designers and other creatives in this area of society.
These images overtly and simply communicate value, desire and worth and implant them into the trademark Aishti box. The message and the means are completely transparent. It doesn't shout 'buy me', it says (in an indoor voice) 'why don't you come and have a look?'. It is huge self aggrandisement on the part if the designer to say that anyone looking at this would suddenly think differently, speak differently and feel differently. To view this add as brainwashing is to represent the audience as having 'little or no critical faculties' Bierut, M (2007) when in actual fact, they clearly do, otherwise all add campaigns would be 100% successful all the time. Apparently, 'we no longer recognise' the way design 'prompts, cajoles, disturbed and excites us' Poynor, R (1990). I would argue that simply by calling what designers do a 'form of communication' Lasen, K (2000) the previous quote is undermined. Communication is a two way thing, a give and take in which each party decides what to give and what to take, simply being good at this does not mean that you can change the way someone thinks any more than you can when you are talking face to face with someone.
Lasen argues that design dictates the way 'citizen-consumers speak, think, feel'. He cites that to be part of our current society is to be a consumer and indeed in the original First Things First Garland says that the removal of high-pressure consumer selling would 'not be feasible' suggesting that it is so ingrained in our society it could not be removed. However, Lasen says it himself, 'citizen-consumer', does this not mean that all graphic designers are consumers too? With the development of the internet we have seen the up-suregance of a producer/consumer, through mediums such as tumblr and Instagram, a greater awareness of the inner workings of design and visual communication has become hugely prolific. In such a society is it really possible for graphic design to have that much sway over you? The increase in shock tactics in campaigns would suggest otherwise. People are aware of the tools of the trade and have become even less susceptible to them.
Design in this sense simply makes consumerism bearable. In this post pitched scream age of design, designers respect their audience and talk to them in ways that are jokey, open and most importantly as equals. This is not to say that the 'big problems' shouldn't be addressed using design, far from it, rather that we should not abandon this area of practice, it needs us to keep it 'post pitched scream'.
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment