Adam Brown Lecture

I recently watched a lecture by Adam Brown, a new media artist that does everything from performance art, to video installations, to responsive robitic devices. I thought his range of work was very interesting, but the project that captured most of my attention was his ‘Bion’ project. Part of the inspiration for the project came from flocking patterns of Starlings in Europe. When he metioned this I remember a photographer I had ran across in a Seed Magazine and did a little investigation.

Below are some other references. I thought these were amazing and beautiful. Noteworthy of art, science and design.

Stuart Bailey Lecture (opinions & summary)

Last night I attended the Stuart Bailey lecture as part of our (Michigan State University Department of Art & Art History) lecture series. Although I’m undecided on how to feel about the lecture itself, I do have to say I very much enjoyed the material he presented and the conversation he is attempting to have.

First, my critical analysis of the presentation. For whatever reason, whether it was miscommunication or misunderstanding, Stuart was way off from speaking to his target audience. I appreciate that the undergraduate student body at MSU had exposure to this type of thinking, however I think a majority of the lecture went over their heads (although I must say I am shocked at the lack of philosophical knowledge among the students in this art department). Stuart seemed like he was speaking to graduate class or a group of academics at a conference. Also, his presentation was a bit flat in my opinion. I’m not a big advocate saying a presentation has to be all uber designed and cool, but I do think the presentation lacked visual support, cohesiveness and a message. Even the text slides we were suppose to read were unreadable given their small type size. I get the non-design approach, but I expect a little more from someone with a design background. I also appreciate the open-endedness of the lecture/conversation, but it definitely lacked closure, conclusions or even a vague suggestion on moving forward.

With that said, I do think the material he presented was very interesting and relavant to conversations that should be taking place in design curriculums today. The professional practice and theoretical practice of graphic design has changed significantly over the past 10 years and immensely over the past 40 years and yet we still use educational models for design based on old principles and methods created more than 40 years ago. Although some core ideas regarding design have remained the same, the methods to execute those ideas and their intended communicative goals have broadened greatly. The days of clever ads, business cards, logos standardized grids, big portfolios with matte boards and static communication are gone. And yet most design programs still embrace these as fundemental necessities and create courses specifically to fulfill these needs.

My interpretation of Stuart’s lecture is that academia needs to look critically at itself and realign it’s goals to sustain new models of design programs as the old ones are quickly disappearing. And that the previous (an very American) notion that separates design from art and attempts to categorize graphic design based on old ideologies and teaching methods (as well aligning itself with corporate entity, advertising and work-for-hire clients) needs to be examined, abolished and reconstituted.

The following text is a structured spattering of random notes and personal insight I jotted down during the lecture. This was intended for me only as part of my nonlinear sketchbook of thoughts and not as a ‘matter of fact’ documentation of the lecture.

———-

Stuart’s presentation contained 6 points of creative praxis and personal philosphy:

1. Pragmatism (& demonstration)

1. rebirth of the ‘whole earth catalog’
2. metaphysics, the self as center of the universe (you only know your world and project onto other peoples worlds without really knowing what is going on in their life, world or mind)
3. an awareness of your existence, there is no ‘correct’ or ‘incorrect’ there only is through your interpretation of life and the meaning you give it,
4. the story of the squirrel and the tree

2. Articulate the Condition (Michael Bracewell & his book ‘The Nineties: When Surface was Depth’)

1. ironic & authentic
2. we have moved beyond the critique of past condition and now critique within the condition which is nearly impossible
3. we are in a market formatted cultural production
4. we are living in the era of benign corporate structure (life is hard by my product, my product will solve your problems)
5. dealing with (and creating) discomfort — especially related to academia — we are in academia and cannot see beyond that to create change and yet change is happening inherently based on cultural parameters, but we do not see it,
6. academia has become a system onto itself instead of serving its intended purpose, specifically in relation to creative theory and practice

3. Making Strange ( Stefan Themerson and ‘semantic poetry’)

1. the notion that we should be developing new forms of language instead of attempting to repeat the old ones
2. reinvent structures: making ‘language’ (or visual language) strange creates a new awareness through that process is naturally subverts democratic standards (such as publishing) and questions formulaic norms (such as found with graphic design pedagogy)
3. the goal of creativity (design) should be to extend the dimensionality of language (written and visual) to explain what doesn’t exist yet
4. politician began to understand the rules (language) of poetics, rhythm, repetition, emphasis and context to enhance speeches and sway public opinion
5. dynamics of inquiry & the Peirce model of semiotic philosphy

4. Solitude (thinking out loud to realize the point while you are in the act of making it)

1. narrating the moment while it happens (I related this to Gonzo writing, Italo Calvino and Stranger Than Fiction)
2. massive amounts of preparation for disproportional small moments of quality class time and interesting ideas
3. academics teach ‘facts’ instead of absolute knowledge
4. schools & movements: (1) schools lead toward an inevitable fate because of rigid structure, heavy administration and self serving ways (2) movements are open, like dada, not fixed, no hierarchy, no bureaucracy, no set discipline or plan to follow
5. students seek schools to be apart of a community to feel the need of support but academia should reconcile students to find solitude and independence while operating within a community.

5. ???  (I like the word ‘Errata’ so maybe I should just call this section by that name (if you could redesign an art & design school from ground up how would it look?)

1. It would be much different from any structure that exists today (Werkplaats Typografie, Karel Martens, Stuart attending school there and was the first to graduate from that program),
2. Deleuze theory on the ebb and flow of movement
3. three papers on the three stages of changing curriculum and thought: (a) ‘Incubation of a Workshop’ (b) ‘Some False Start’ (c) ‘Errata’

6. The Demonstrator (Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance)

1. the brick as teaching philosophy
2. let teaching happen through the process of teaching
3. most of what is being taught is the act of teaching how to mimic (especially at a high school level)
4. do not teach to mimic, do not mimic, reinvent

———-

Some additional links:

Dot Dot Dot

Dexter Sinister

Werkplaats Typografie

Stuart Bailey Interview

Stuart Bailey Profile & Info

In Response to Milton Glaser and Plagiarism

I’m always on the fence with Fairey, he has made some pretty outrageous comments and claims. Outside the US he isn’t the big graffiti rock star he thinks he is. I also think he relies too much on pop culture while other graffiti artists are more inventive.

And I do respect Milton Glaser, although I’ve never really liked his work or his opinions (I know I should be crucified as a designer), but I always thought Seymour Chwast was the stronger one at pushpin.

However, I think this article definitely shows how out of touch the old designers (and old design philosophies) are with new movements in visual / technological/ global /culture. Didn’t this conversation already take place in the early 90’s within the music culture? Didn’t appropriation as an art form already win? As always, design is a few years behind the rest of the creative world.

I do think its a fine line between ripping something off and referencing it, but there is a huge gray area in between. We live in age where there is so much media that nothing is really new and everything is being remixed and repurposed. I also think its noble of an artist/designer to rip off an image to create something new, its a way of subverting commercialism, property rights and authorship in an age where Ted Turner owns several classical movies, Bill Gates owns photo rights to everything and currently DNA of certain species are being purchased by corporations. That might be a stretch when simply referring to graphic design, but the questioning of ‘rights’ is very important in our new electronic library age.

Also, did Glaser really reference his Dylan poster again? My god! I wish the dylan poster and ‘i heart ny’ would go away. Someone should point out to Mr. Glaser that his ingenious creative image  ‘resembles’ several ukiyoe prints, not to mention the back and forth inspiration with 60’s poster artist’s Tadanori Yokoo and Peter Max, which in comparison (and context or the era) really makes the dylan poster seem cliché and weak in my opinion.

I’m sort of surprised at Glaser’s comments and critique of Fairey’s work since a most of the posters in “Design of Dissent’ (Glaser’s publication) use appropriated images and directly rip off other artists, photographers and designers. I’m also surprised at his “nothing substantial has been added” comment because I doubt many people would have t-shirts and posters of Obama using the AP photo.

Perhaps I’ll send him a copy of Paul D Miller’s ‘Rhythm Science’ to get him up to speed on semiotics of the remix.