Andrea Hannah Cooper Word count: 1598
“Could it be argued that Fine Art ought to be assigned more “value” than Graphic Design?” Traditionally, there has been a distinct separation between the practices of art and design, particularly when comparing what appear as two very different fields: fine art and graphic design. Throughout history, fine art has readily been assigned and compared to the notion of value which is seen to have stemmed from the ties fine art has with cult practices and religion, and the monumental impact it has had on the development and progression of society and culture. The ‘unique singularity’ (Larsen, 2010) associated with the sacredness of art works has consistently placed the discipline of fine art on a pedestal which many design disciplines seemingly fail to reach. The field of graphic design regularly falls under the category of having less cultural significance and value than fine art, which is often caused by its relationship with reproducibility and how it acts as a means of commercial problem solving. However, despite the cultural significance applied to the fine arts throughout history, the question of whether or not fine art ought to be assigned more value than graphic design is one which still remains contestable. One of the most notable differences between fine art and graphic design as practices can be stripped down to the simple idea of fine art possessing ambiguity and complexity of meanings, holding a place in culture without any particular set function, while, in comparison, graphic design is generally said to exist for a purpose, in particular to communicate. In terms of content, the argument of creativity versus problem solving can be introduced. Art is supposedly a manifestation of creativity whereas graphic design is simply problem solving. The flaws in this argument lie with the consideration that creativity should be ‘more appropriately thought of as cultural production’ (Barnard, 2005; p169) as defined by anthropologist Pierre Bourdieu, where graphic design and art both fit as examples of this, as both require a certain degree of creativity. It could then be said that in terms of cultural prestige and capital, there is less of a distinction between fine art and graphic design which lacks notability in the present day considerations of the two fields. Another major distinction between the two comes with the audience associated with each practice. The work of fine art is traditionally and historically targeted at the elite in society, used in religious acts and rituals, and placed in exhibitions, in opposition to graphic design where the work is generally for the masses and can be found virtually anywhere. This dissimilarity acts as a separation between the fields, and relates back to the function of each area, yet should not necessarily be a basis for assigning more value to one over the other. A way of separating graphic design away from art comes with the reproducibility of the work. Take, for example, the oil painting of the Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci (figure 1.) which is arguably the most famous painting in the world and which is associated with high culture and authenticity. With the growing presence of graphic design as a creative field, the Mona Lisa image has been reproduced countless times, particularly in the graphic field of advertising. One example of this type of reproduction is show in an advertisement for the car, the Audi Q7, (figure 2.) 1