Tangible Design by Callie Kant

Contents

Introduction

What is Tangibility?

History of Tangibility

Tangibility Today Why Use Tangibility in Design?

Interviews

Bibliography

Conclusion

n order to understand how tangibility is being used, one must first understand what exactly tangibility is. Defined literally, “tangible” is “Discernible by the touch; palpable; possible to touch; possible to be treated as fact” or “Possible to understand or realize.”1 For the purposes of this paper, however, tangibility refers not only to the use of tactile, touchable elements in design, but instead to a larger subset of work that uses handcrafted elements, such as texture; hand lettering; distressing; materiality (the use of materials such as paper scraps, paper clips, fabric, tape, or string); stitching; staining; hand illustration; stamping; analog technologies; folding; rips and tears; and embossing and debossing. Such elements need not be used only in print design; instead, even onscreen images such as websites may use tangible elements. Similarly, these methods of creation need not be disseminated in their original form; that is, if a tangible design is created using embossing, the embossed piece of paper may then be scanned and reprinted digitally so as to reach a larger audience than an original piece of work. In this manner, tangible design is able to reach just as large an audience as digital design, and because of this larger reach, it helps adapt historical, traditional modes of communication to the modern world.

1 “tangibility.” The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 02 Mar. 2010. <Dictionary. com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tangibility>.

he struggle between tangible and intangible design can be seen throughout graphic design history. This battle is quite illuminating in the quest to understand the present use of these two design techniques, as it “reflects a continual tension between the hand and the machine, the organic and the geometric, the human body and the abstract system.”2 Since the early nineteenth century, viewers and critics alike have questioned graphic design’s authenticity as an art form. As traditional fine art was handmade, it was thought of as having a “special air or aura of authenticity that linked it to the original artist.”3 Conversely, graphic art was mass-produced through various technologies, such as lithography, woodblock engraving, and letterpress. Such work “was considered a comparatively humble, commercial skill, not an art,”4 and thus, “For all of their artfulness, graphic images were not considered high art.”5 Mass production seemed to separate the art from its artist due to intervening technologies that made the work less “real” and human. Rather than applying his touch to each individual work, a commercial artist conceived of a design, which was then reprinted many times with the aid of a machine. Each print looked relatively the same, and the artist did not labor over and personalize each piece in the same way he would a piece of fine art.

2 Ellen Lupton, Thinking With Type: A Critical Guide for Designers, Writers, Editors, & Students (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2004) 13. 3 Johanna Drucker and Emily McVarish, Graphic Design History: A Critical Guide (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, 2009) 134. 4 Drucker and McVarish134. 5 Drucker and McVarish 134.

Unknown, advertisement This poster is an example of the advertising posters that abounded in the mid-nineteenth century. Such posters are known for their use of a large variety of wood type.

In a similar manner, the mechanized typefaces used in letterpress printing “treated the alphabet as a flexible system divorced from the calligraphic tradition.”6 Letters were no longer based on handwriting, but instead, were stiff and dehumanized. This mechanical typography further removed graphic art from the realm of the individual artist, and thus, from its acceptance as an art form. The public did not look favorably upon graphic images as something to be held in high esteem like art was, and thus, its impact and importance was belittled. As graphic art spread and became more ubiquitous, however, its acceptance as an art form surged. During the late nineteenth century, “The distinction between fine art and advertising became difficult to maintain,”7 as commercial art had become much more central in daily life. Furthermore, printing technologies had become specialized enough that they required a separate person to oversee them; thus, the designer was able to concentrate on the aesthetics of design itself, rather

6 Lupton, Thinking With Type 21. 7 Drucker and McVarish 158.

than the intricacies of the printing process. As a result, design was executed by a specialized craftsman and was more carefully executed. In this landscape, the designer became more elevated in society; he was no longer a humble tradesman, but instead, a communicator hired specifically for his artistry. To some critics, however, such “designers” were failing to design at all and instead were producing a vast amount of work in little time because of increase demand. Industrialization had spawned the creation of more and more products at a faster pace, which in turn increased the need for more and more advertising. Similarly, the need and capability to spread information grew, resulting in great increases in the number of newspapers, magazines, and books. Against this industrial backdrop, graphic design became far more widespread. This growing pressure to mass produce often worsened design quality, due to hurried work and cramped layouts. Such design eventually led to reactionary critiques by the newly established Arts and Crafts Movement. This movement was inspired by the writings of Augustus Pugin and John Ruskin, yet was led most notably by William Morris. Morris asserted that the poor quality of mass-produced objects reflected “a moral failing and cultural weakness”8 in modern society. In so doing, he elevated design’s importance as a cultural barometer of society itself. To Morris, beauty and craft were of the utmost importance, and

William Morris, Canterbury Tales Morris used decorative, Gothic-style typography to illuminate the texts he printed in a decorative fashion. These elaborate compositions were crafted by highly skilled artisans.

8 Drucker and McVarish 164.

he sought to remedy the design landscape through his writings and the founding of his own printing press, the Kelmscott Press. In his work, Morris set standards for design, ranging from specifying appropriate margin measurements for books to praising specific typefaces for their legibility.9 Morris asserted, “letters should be designed by an artist, and not an engineer.”10 Of course, one must consider that in today’s landscape, the “industrialized” design of William Morris’s age hardly appears industrial at all. Though technology such as letterpress and lithography allowed for the swift dissemination of many copies of nearly identical imagery, the artist’s touch was still evident in the imperfection of the pieces. In the case of lithography, lettering was often done by hand. With letterpress, inconsistencies in the inking of letters pointed to the human touch. Morris was in good company; a distrust of the new trend toward mechanization pervaded society across all media, not just graphic design. Architect C.R. Cockerell stated, “‘I believe that the attempt to supersede the work of the mind and hand by mechanical process for the sake of economy will always have the effect of degrading and ultimately ruining art,’”11 while Charles Eastlake posited that the “perfect finish and accurate uniformity of shape” of machine-produced goods “indicate degrees not only of advanced civilization, but, inversely, of 9 William Morris, “The Ideal Book,” Looking Closer Three: Classic Writings on Graphic Design, eds. Michael Bierut, Jessica Helfand, Steven Heller, and Rick Poyner (New York: Allworth Press, 1999). 10 Morris 2. 11 Adrian Forty, Objects of Desire: Design and Society since 1750, (London: Thames & Hudson, 1986) 42.

decline in taste.”12 The use of ornamentation was also hotly disputed. In response to the work at the Great Exhibition of 1851, Richard Redgrave observed, “Wherever ornament is wholly effected by machinery, it is certainly the most degraded in style and execution; and the best workmanship and the best taste are to be found in those manufactures and fabrics wherein handicraft is entirely or partially the means of producing the ornament.”13 Instead, he favored “products in which the craftsmen had influenced the design.”14 Perhaps one of the most notable adversaries of mass production was Karl Marx. Marx, in his Capital, underscored the effects machine production had upon social and economic divisions. He argued that industrial machines “are used to make goods more cheaply, and to further subjugate the worker to the will of the ‘master.’”15 Morris also related capitalism to the declining quality of design. He “blame[d] the poor quality of design upon the greed of capitalism”16 and “disliked mechanization and thought its products ugly.”17 As Morris’s movement continued to develop against this background, it came to incorporate many different attitudes and styles. Rather than designers simply looking to historical influences, “two poles of abstraction—organic and geometric— came into vogue,”18 eventually leading to the development of new stylistic movements. The organic movement focused on Forty 43. Forty 49. Forty 50. Carma Gorman, ed., The Industrial Design Reader (New York: Allworth Press, 2003) 22. 16 Forty 61. 17 Forty 61. 18 Drucker and McVarish 169. 12 13 14 15

Above: Henri Toulouse-Lautrec, Jane Avril Toulouse-Lautrec used handwork to elevate commercial art in the public eye. Opposite: Jules Chéret, Loïe Fuller Chéret is credited with inventing the advertising poster. This poster uses hand-rendered type and illustration in a free-flowing style that matches the dancer’s movement and attitude.

natural, humanistic forms, while the geometric movement centered on precise, rigid, measured forms that were not indicative of human impact. Thus, the tensions between tangibility and intangibility continued to develop. Art Nouveau was one of these emerging movements; its proponents heavily incorporated the use of organic, hand-made elements. Art Nouveau posters, with their curvilinear, sensual illustrations and hand lettering, were in marked stylistic contrast to the surrounding industrialism pervading society, despite the fact that they often advertised commercial products. The use of lithography as a printing technique also helped define the style of these posters. When using lithography, artists were able to draw directly onto limestone, which would then be used to print on other surfaces. This ability to draw freeform onto the stone ensured that organic, flowing forms and hand-rendered lettering were easier to achieve than with the rigid metal type grids of

letterpress or the unnatural difficulty of engraving. Art Nouveau poster artists took full advantage of new printing technologies that were developed at this time; “the vivid inks, large format, photographic and mechanized separation and reproduction methods of the late nineteenth century offered artists the means to make striking works of commercial art.”19 Famous fine artists, such as Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, crossed over into the commercial realm, often catching the public’s attention in the process. Such artists commonly incorporated their signatures into their posters, allowing for a personal imprint of the artist and elevating the work from the realm of commercial to fine art. The public enjoyed these posters so much that, in addition to viewing them as advertisements, they collected them as art. The bright colors, expressive line qualities, and individualized styles of specific poster artists helped establish these posters as a valid and potent form of artistic expression. The Viennese Secession and Weiner Werkstatte movements also “attempted to forge fundamental links between fine and applied art.”20 Gustav Klimt, who was well-known for his fine art, led the Secessionist movement and fought to establish this association. The Secessionists and Weiner Werkstatte designers replaced the decorative flourishes of Morris’s time with geometric and reductive forms. Despite the use of simple geometric forms, however, the work of these groups incorporated many hand-

19 Drucker and McVarish 158. 20 Drucker and McVarish 173.

drawn elements, including illustration and lettering. Artists involved in the modernist movements of Aestheticism and Decadence also used many hand-rendered elements and concentrated on an “art-for-art’s-sake agenda.”21 These artists brought the ideals of the Arts and Crafts Movement to a new level, as they rejected any type of utilitarianism and instead focused on art only for its aesthetic purposes. They abandoned the usage of their work for commercial ventures and sought instead to publish their work in artistic journals and magazines. At the end of the nineteenth century, however, functionalism took root. Peter Behrens and the Deutscher Werkbund embraced a more mechanical aesthetic, using modern features, such as grids, standardization, and geometric forms. Unlike Morris before them, Behrens and his followers sought to create “a marriage of art with technology.”22 Instead of shunning technological advances, they worked with these new tools and used them to make design more “universal rather than individualized by the touch of an artist’s hand.”23 In doing so, they stripped design of its decoration and instead concentrated on standardized forms. The Futurists took Behrens’s fervor for functionalism even further. They advocated an “embrace of the new that required

21 Drucker and McVarish 176. 22 Philip Meggs, “Peter Behrens: Design’s Man of the Century?” Graphic Design History, eds. Steven Heller and Georgette Ballance (New York: Allworth Press, 2001) 100. 23 Meggs 100.

a break with the past”24 and sought to invoke social change in doing so. The avant-garde designers of the early twentieth century eschewed decorative, handdrawn imagery and instead focused on the use of photography, geometric forms, and sans serif typography.25 These designers strove to create new, modern, machine-made work and exalted the machine as beautiful. Along with the other avant-garde artists of their time, they “abandoned the quest for an essential, perfectly shaped alphabet, but they offered austere, theoretic alternatives in place of the solicitous novelty of mainstream advertising.”26 Despite their rejection of the past and embrace of the machine, however, these artists often made their own books using hand lettering and drawing. Indeed, “their alphabets were assembled from modular components, so they are almost like factory production, but most were produced by hand, not as mechanical typefaces.”27 Still, even these handmade ventures broke with traditional conventions in their structure and formal elements. Diagonality and mixed typography were some of the hallmarks of this style, in which avant-garde designers sought to create radical new modes of typography, layout, and illustration.28 In their poems, for

Fortunato Depero, portfolio Depero uses Furutism’s characteristic diagonality and sans serif typography in the design of this book. Though the Futurists favored technology, they often produced handmade books.

24 25 26 27 28

Drucker and McVarish 187. Drucker and McVarish 189. Lupton, Thinking With Type 25. Lupton, Thinking With Type 25. Ellen Lupton, “Design and Production in the Mechanical Age,” in Graphic Design in the Mechanical Age: Selections from the Merrill C. Berman Collection (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998) 6.

example, they broke technological conventions by creating collages of paper scraps and handmade marks, photographing the resulting image, creating an engraving of it, and using letterpress printing to reproduce them. In this manner, they broke away from the traditional letterpress grid structure and treated type as an illustration.29 Dada artists also adopted a technological aesthetic while actually using hand techniques. In many Dada works, the artist appropriates commercial artistry, such as “found” imagery from advertisements. However, such depictions were often not “found” at all, but instead, were drawn by hand.30 In such a light, Dadaism was reflective of “modern graphic design, a profession built on the conflicts between free expression and technological precision, between consumer culture and social critique.”31 Similar to the Futurists and Dadaists, the Constructivists lauded “the look—as well as the principles—of functionality derived from machines.”32 Constructivists, too, made use of bold typography, collage work, high contrast, and geometric shapes. They did so by embracing hand techniques in addition to machine-made imagery. In El Lissitzky’s “Suprematism and World Reconstruction,” one of Constructivism’s founding documents, he writes, “in expressing our creative ability paintbrush and ruler and compasses and machines are only

29 30 31 32

Lupton, “Design and Production” 8. Lupton, “Design and Production” 9. Lupton, “Design and Production” 10. Drucker and McVarish 193.

extensions of the finger which points the way.”33 Though the Constructivists saw rulers and compasses, above paintbrushes, “as instruments of precision and economy,”34 they appreciated the creative potential of all tools. Instead of concentrating on the choice of medium, they focused on distributing information to a wide public, rather than an individual. Lissitzky also stressed the importance of choosing methods of production and layout in order to “visually translate the meaning” of the message he conveyed.35 In this time period, “avant-garde styles were rarely absorbed directly into mainstream propaganda which, by contrast, sought to reach a broad audience through familiar formats and imagery.”36 Such advertisements and propaganda posters used more traditional methods of hand lettering and illustration to appeal to the public, as avant-garde style was still unfamiliar and often jarring to a mainstream audience. In 1919, Walter Gropius founded the Bauhaus school in Weimar, Germany. Upon its opening, the school advocated a “return to craft”37 and the use of art in design work, working under the motto “The artist and the craftsman are one.”38 The school concentrated 33 34 35 36 37 38

El Lissitzky, Ellen Lupton, “Design and Production” 11. Lupton “Design and Production” 11. Lupton, “Design and Production” 12. Drucker and McVarish 197. Drucker and McVarish 202. Ann Schoenfeld, lecture, Pratt Institute, New York, 12 Nov. 2009.

on coursework in design fundamentals, such as color theory, formal elements, and materials. The artists focused on experimentation and exploration in their work with craft materials. As the Weimar government began to reduce funding for the Bauhaus, however, the artists slowly gravitated toward creating more industrial work in efforts to fund their work at the school. In 1923, the school’s amplified focus on industry inspired a new motto: “Art and technology—a new unity!”39 In 1926, the school moved to Dessau, a more industrial town, where Gropius further shifted the school’s focus to a more utilitarian, functionalist approach to design. Jan Tschichold, a

Herbert Bayer, Bauhaus poster for Kandinsky exhibit This poster’s geometric shapes, sans serif type, and use of photography are emblematic of the Bauhaus style.

39 Drucker and McVarish 202.

typographer not officially affiliated with the Bauhaus, yet active in its realm, published Die Neue Typographie (The New Typography). In this influential text, Tschichold called for sleek, streamlined, sans serif typography—a style reliant on machine production. In 1932, the Bauhaus moved to Berlin, but Adolf Hitler closed the school after his election as Chancellor in 1933. Regardless of this closure, the Bauhaus continued to have a potent influence on design globally, as the faculty and designers dispersed throughout the world, bringing the Bauhaus vision to new markets. In the Soviet Union, industrial production signified the desire to move art into life and thus “marked a commitment to modern technology and a utopian mass culture.”40 In this atmosphere, many designers rallied around the idea of creating “art” for the masses rather than the individual. Under these designers’ avant-garde experiments, “graphic design emerged as a socially engaged, technologically critical discourse involving the reproduction of texts and images, a domain that now extends from the printed page to the Internet.”41 Inherent in the profession of graphic

40 Lupton, “Design and Production” 5.

design was the concept of disseminating ideas to large amounts of people through technological means. Ellen Lupton writes, The modernists didn’t invent new technologies but rather devised new ways to use them, ways that often sought to emphasize technology itself. The means of production became a tangible presence, infusing the printed page with the taste—bitter, metallic, invigorating—of the mechanical age.42 However, despite these designers’ excitement at the prospect of technological reproduction, they still largely created their work through hand processes, and thus, “the language they created outpaced the technologies of the time.”43 Similarly, despite the technological, modern approach of Soviet designers, American design in the 1920’s and 1930’s still relied on hand-rendered imagery. Such imagery included painterly illustrations and hand-drawn logotypes.44 This continued use of handmade techniques in the United States, however, was juxtaposed with an even more fervent embrace of modernism in Europe. Russian Constructivism, with its bold lines, stark typography, use of photography, and strict grids, was spreading to other countries in Europe as a result of Joseph Stalin’s regime. These designs often emphasized the collective whole, or a concentration on the masses, rather

41 42 43 44

Lupton, “Design and Production” 5. Lupton, “Design and Production” 8. Lupton, “Design and Production” 6. Drucker and McVarish 221.

than on individualistic or humanistic characteristics. Some Russian designers moved to other parts of Europe, carrying these formal design elements with them. In the 1930’s, political regimes caused even more movement, as “the rise of fascism in Italy, Spain, and Germany prompted many prominent graphic designers to emigrate,”45 often to the United States. These designers fled from persecution based on both their ethnicity and their profession. Upon arriving in the United States, many of the designers were hired by American companies “eager to capture the sophistication of European style.”46 Thus, European modernism made its mark on American design. Even amidst the influence of stark modernism, some humanism held its place in European graphic design during this period. For example, Eric Gill’s influential work in typography was founded upon the combination of hand-lettering with geometric forms. His most famous typeface, Gill Sans, was designed in the late 1920’s and adopted for usage by the London Underground transportation system. In this typeface, “A slight deviation from purely geometric design gives the letters a humanistic touch that enlivens them. (By contrast, most of the purely mechanical lettering designs inspired by the rationalist enthusiasm of this period had a deadening effect on the eye.)”47 Other typography of this era included streamlined advertising display faces that used geometry in

45 Drucker and McVarish 219. 46 Drucker and McVarish 219. 47 Drucker and McVarish 224.

their composition, as well as highly popular sans serif typefaces. Typefaces were further commodified and presented as a “product line,” sold as a package including various weights, such as light, regular, and bold. Another notable aspect of design during the 1920’s and 1930’s was the development of new technologies for reproduction. Using such technologies, designers could “produce glossy images with smoothly toned surfaces” that allowed for “easy consumability.”48 Designers used alteration methods, such as reversing and highlighting, photomontage, and the airbrush “as a way to lend graphic art a machine-like finish that proclaimed modernity.”49 Similarly, the advent of offset printing made it easier and more affordable to reproduce photographic imagery, resulting in an increase in the use of photography in design.50 Newer cameras were also lighter and therefore more portable. Due to these advances, “photography entirely replaced drawings for journalistic purposes because the camera seemed to escape the bias of an individual eye.”51 Some of the illustrations that remained in use throughout the late 1930’s and 1940’s were intended to be as universal as possible. For example, designers working for the United States government developed pictographs to communicate quickly and easily with any viewer. Such imagery removed the human hand and individualism from illustration. Similarly, information

48 49 50 51

Drucker and McVarish 229. Drucker and McVarish 229. Drucker and McVarish 243. Drucker and McVarish 245.

graphics were meant to make complex information easily understood, and thus, employed a simple, graphic style. This simplified representation of complex data was further developed in the 1940’s and 1950’s, when early computers helped designers visualize large amounts of information. Designs created in this period were influenced by the Bauhaus in their adherence to strict grids, efficiency, and functionality. In this landscape, “a deliberate exclusion of feeling, experience, and context became [a] hallmark”52 of information design. This analytical approach “affected the way graphic design saw itself,” such that it was “conceived as a system in which all elements operated as integral parts of a network of flows and exchanges.”53 After World War II, the International Typographic Style (or Swiss International Style) was developed in Switzerland and remained popular throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s. Adherents of this style strove for universalism, uniformity, abstraction, and neutrality. Stark grids, asymmetry, sans serif typography, and a concentration on legibility were all hallmarks of the movement. Designers sought simple, basic solutions that were highly functional, rather than decorative. In so doing,

52 Drucker and McVarish 251. 53 Drucker and McVarish 251.

they often used geometric forms and photography to appear objective and unbiased. Designers using this clean simplicity eschewed decoration or ornament. Instead, they made use of structure to impart a look of controlled neutrality. Inherent in this neutrality, however, was “a conformism that had little room for the social differences that stylistic diversity might express.”54 Amidst this landscape, corporate identity design blossomed. Graphic designers were hired to create logos and communication campaigns for corporations in order to give these companies a personality. This “personality,” however, was generally highly systematic and free from traces of humanism; “identity” referred to that of a large company, rather than a human. Imagery was clear and simple, so as to be easily recognized by consumers. Thus, the International Typographic Style greatly influenced much of corporate identity design in this period. The style lent an air of authority, rationality, and stability in its predictable, controlled aesthetic. Photography continued to replace handwork in design, as handwork became a sign of eccentricity, unwelcome in the corporate world of conformity and efficiency. Marks of individualism vanished in the photographic production of type … [while] professionalism in graphic design was associated with a capacity to command technological means of production.55

54 Drucker and McVarish 266. 55 Drucker and McVarish 269.

Despite such concentration on conformity and neutrality, however, some American designers sought to cultivate their own unique individuality. These artists, such as Bradbury Thompson, Alvin Lustig, and Lester Beall, often studied the “visual character of old illustrations, wood type, script and decorative faces, and photographically manipulated letterforms.”56 They also made use of organic or free-flowing imagery in their work. Although most corporate designers at the time approached their work in a highly rational manner, these unique designers “realized that they could gain prestige in the marketplace by commissioning artistic and humanistic graphic campaigns rather than promoting goods or services.”57 Rather than adhering to the universality of International style, they pushed their design to be experimental and individual. While modernist designers embraced technology and the machine aesthetic, these designers found that going back to more traditional forms helped set them apart from the mechanized ideal that had by now become mainstream. In the 1960’s, these two worlds blended with Pop style. Pop combined the mass, commercial aesthetic with a self-conscious, anti-establishment approach. Humor and irony were prevalent in such design. Though the International style was still the preferred design aesthetic in corporate communications, underground styles developed

56 Drucker and McVarish 267. 57 Drucker and McVarish 268.

as well, fostering a do-it-yourself attitude.58 Such work took on a homemade feeling with a revival of traditional crafts. Designers also referenced historical sources, yet with a modern or psychedelic bent. In this environment, specific designers were able to develop their own personal styles, which were in turn recognized and appreciated. For example, the work of Milton Glaser and Seymour Chwast at Push Pin Studios was popular for its reliance on distinctive illustration, rather than photography.59 The relationship between fine and graphic art tightened during this period, as well. New tools and technologies in graphic design allowed designers to lead the way in innovative image-making. These technologies also inspired sleek-looking design, rife with airbrush retouching and tightly controlled typographyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;a look that was often adopted by pop artists such as Andy Warhol.60

Milton Glaser, Bob Dylan Glaserâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s iconic Bob Dylan poster successfully uses hand illustration to create a unique and endurin image.

58 Drucker and McVarish. 59 Drucker and McVarish 284. 60 Drucker and McVarish.

Underground presses also abounded during this time period. Designers created low-budget newspapers and books that allowed them to freely express their stylistic impulses. These works helped designers distance themselves from the commercial approach of the time and instead concentrate on maintaining an “authenticity” born of original illustration, expression, and grittiness. Drug culture often played into this aesthetic, prompting a hallucinatory, psychedelic style. These pieces were reflective of earlier organic illustration, yet used new colors and perceptual cues to exude a novel and revolutionary instability. In the late 1960’s, designers used photocomposition of lettering as their primary form of typesetting; “hot” type was, in turn, deemed outdated. This technology spurred much typographical experimentation, as designers were able to draw new and inventive letterforms much more easily, as well as compose them more freely. The 1970’s and 1980’s brought the development of postmodernism, and hence, an eclectic style referential to the past yet insistent on breaking rules. Postmodern works were chaotic and unconventional in their appropriation of historical styles. A “post-human” stylistic standpoint emerged, and “the line between organic life and machines seemed to blur.”61 Designers layered technological aspects in their work. Due

61 Drucker and McVarish 306.

to a more widespread use of computers, a greater number of people had the opportunity to design typefaces. Similarly, the use of scanners allowed for even more historical reference, “but the interest in found images and common iconography was as much a response against the modernist banishment of handmade and context-specific imagery as it was an effect of technological change.”62 Ed Fella was one artist who was quite referential in his work; he combined photographic imagery of hand-painted lettering with Letraset in order to create a unique and distinctive variation on typography. Rather than perfecting these imprecise forms, he “eschewed digital tools”63 and instead capitalized on the erratic, eccentric look that made his work so distinctive. At the same time, some work turned away from the personal, human imprint. Instead, the true power of design lay in chiseling it down to its purest form . . . To inject personal voice was to deviate from this no-nonsense objective, and one was best advised to resist such subjective impulses. Better to hone your craft and minimize your imprint, remove yourself from the work and focus on the most salient, most germane form your message could and must take. The designer’s mission was simple: to create the simplest, most harmonious, most neutral form, thereby enabling communication to the widest possible audience.64

62 Drucker and McVarish 309. 63 Drucker and McVarish 309. 64 Jessica Helfand, “Can Graphic Design Make You Cry?” Design Observer (03 Aug. 2009): n. pag, online, internet. 7 Oct. 2009. Available <http://observatory. designobserver.com/entry.html?entry=9737>

Messages were crafted for a mass audience, not a specific, niche one; designers strove to appeal to as many people as possible. In addition, the availability of the personal computer in the mid-1980’s allowed the general public to engage in experiments with typography as they never had before.65 In a similar vein, the Emigre type foundry was founded in 1984 and created digital typefaces tied to the technology of the computer. Rather than emulating the metal typefaces of letterpress, Emigre’s designers intentionally allowed their typefaces to appear “digital” and embrace the new technology and style of bitmap fonts.66 In their words, they were “‘new primitives,’ pioneers of a technological dawn,”67 as “Emigre’s development reflected the evolution of digital technology while questioning conventional ideas of legibility and layout.”68 Cofounder Rudy Vanderlans states, We made a name for ourselves because we became involved in using the Mac before most other graphic designers did. And in those days, before PostScript was invented, the Macintosh provided its own unique visual bitmapped language. Everything you did on the Mac looked like it was done on a computer, which set it apart from all other graphic design work at that time. And since there were very few people using computers in design in those days, there [were] no visual precedents, no examples to copy.69

65 Lupton, Thinking With Type 27. 66 Rhonda Rubinstein, “Zuzana Licko,” Eye Magazine Spring 2002, issue 43, online, internet, 11 Nov. 2009. Available <http://eyemagazine.com/feature. php?id=62&fid=272 > 67 Lupton, Thinking With Type 27. 68 Rubinstein 1. 69 Armin Vit, “Rudy VanderLans,” Speak Up, (8 Nov. 2002): 1, online, internet, 11 Nov. 2009. Available <http://www.underconsideration.com/speakup/interviews/rudy.html>

In the 1990’s, the combination of historical reference and an interest in new technologies continued to characterize design. Photoshop 1.0 was released in 1990, and new digital abilities, such as the opportunity to use Photoshop filters, appealed to designers as a fresh way of treating imagery. Similarly, typeface designers continued to embrace pixel-based styles, influenced particularly by the internet. Still, a particular physicality appealed to designers. At the beginning of the decade, as digital design tools began supporting the seamless reproduction and integration of media, many designers grew dissatisfied with clean, unsullied surfaces, seeking instead to plunge the letter into the harsh and caustic world of physical processes. Letters, which for centuries had sought perfection in ever more exact technologies, became scratched, bent, bruised, and polluted.70 Overall, “the early ‘90s was an extraordinarily fertile period in the U.S.” in which designers “had embraced formal experimentation as a mode of critical inquiry.”71 Such work challenged accepted design norms and pushed formal boundaries. One typeface that is perhaps indicative of the juxtaposition of technology and human-made forms in the 1990’s is Barry Deck’s Template Gothic. The letters are “based

70 Lupton, Thinking With Type 29. 71 Ellen Lupton, “Typography in the 1990s,” Print Magazine, online, internet. Available <http://www.printmag.com/article/typography-in-the-1990s>

on letters drawn with a plastic stencil. The typeface thus refers to a process that is at once mechanical and manual,”72 blurring the line between the two. The result is a “notoriously ‘imperfect’ font, with . . . peculiarities of weight and shape”73 that established it as characteristic of its time period. Indeed, “although the computer was the dominant medium, during the early ‘90s designers were transitioning from the hand to the pixel, experiencing all the visual quirks and anomalies that came with technological unease.”74 By the early 2000’s, however, designers began to depend on the computer’s capability to render clean, unsullied design similar to the minimalism popular in the Swiss Typographic Style.75 Still, amidst this digital reliance, many designers rebelled against the growing dependence on the computer and became staunchly “anti-digital.” Such designers, while still making use of the computer in their designs, became desirous to “get back to the hand” as “the craft aspect of design was lacking in their formal educations and practices.”76 The do-it-yourself mentality abounded, and “designers were feeling a need to make physical (not virtual) contact with their materials and outcomes.”77 72 Lupton, Thinking With Type 29. 73 Drucker and McVarish 309. 74 Steven Heller, “The Decade of Dirty Design,” AIGA Voice (09 Dec. 2009), online, internet, 5 Mar. 2010. Available <http://www.aiga.org/content/cfm/thedecade-of-dirty-design?pff=2> 75 Heller, “The Decade of Dirty Design.” 76 Heller, “The Decade of Dirty Design.” 77 Heller, “The Decade of Dirty Design.”

oday, digital media has provided us with an entirely new level of mechanization. On the screen, imagery is crisp, sterile, and often unadulterated by the human hand. Digital printing technologies have ensured that there are far fewer inconsistencies in printing, and though the viewer’s monitor type sometimes affects the look of the image, these differences among viewers are reproducible according to screen type. The computer has become a much more accepted and integrated part of design and society in general. Indeed, many graphic designers now learn to design almost exclusively on the computer. Yet, despite the inextricable tie between graphic design and technology—or perhaps even because of it—the designer’s hand still remains one of his/her most potent tools. In recent years, the look and feel of old-fashioned letterpress— a printing form with more physicality than an inkjet or laser printer, due to the necessity for human involvement in the printing process—has come back in vogue. Artists purposely “destroy” or “distress” their work in order to create a more authentic, lived-in quality. Traditional, hand-made elements are incorporated not simply for the sake of nostalgia, but also for the feeling of newness they now project. In a digital world, the traditional, hand-wrought quality reaches a new level of authenticity and beauty. Much as the Arts and Crafts

Movement reacted against modes of industrialization, some designers today are reacting against digitization. Even Rudy VanderLans of Emigre, once an outspoken pioneer of technological design, remarks, “Today, I find the computer far less interesting. Everybody has one. It is definitely not any more the tool that will set your work apart. On the contrary, the computer now assures a certain level of homogeneity.”78 Similarly, according to Debbie Millman, President of Sterling Brands and AIGA, In a day and age when nano-technology and computer science have ushered in a brave new era, I believe there is a profound beauty in all things handmade. While computers might set type in flawlessly accurate columns, things that are made by hand are beautiful by virtue of their irregularity. I see these imperfections as marks of dignity and integrity, and believe that they bear witness to the artist—and the human—in all of us.79

Opposite: Stefan Sagmeister This iconic AIGA poster brings tangibility to a new level: self mutilation. Says Sagmeister, “We probably could have photoshopped that AIGA Detroit poster, rather than cutting the type in my skin. I think the results now are more authentic and the process more interesting (and painful).”

Agrees Jean Orlebeke, “Our collective urge to use our hands is a reaction to technology, mass production, conformity and authority.” 80 One popular way of expressing this “collective urge” of handcraft and tangibility is through the use of hand lettering. Advocates of hand lettering attempt through their work to “let the viewer know that a person made [the design]…It

78 Vit. 79 Debbie Millman, “The Letter H,” Fingerprint: The Art of Using Handmade Elements in Graphic Design, ed. Chen Design Associates (Cincinnati: HOW Books, 2006) 32. 80 Jean Orlebeke, “The Exquisite Connection,” Fingerprint 56.

can’t be perfect, which is so much the beauty of it.”81 Michael Perry, a fervent defender of hand-rendered lettering, comments, By rendering hand lettering obsolete, the computer strips it of its previous obligations and imbues the very act of lettering with a level of meaning that it has not had. Now I use my hands because I want mistakes, quirks, and imperfection—those qualities that give my work warmth. Keep in mind that, at different times in history, that warmth could’ve gotten you fired. Now we view these results as the elemental quality of working by hand.82 Now that staring at computer screens and mechanized type has become a daylong fact of life, physicality and tangibility prove interesting to these designers. Hand lettering is often a way of communicating an individual personality with its own special charm.

81 Michael Perry, Hand Job: A Catalog of Type (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007) 13. 82 Perry 14.

hat specifically about handcrafted work makes it so appealing? First, it provides a “breath of fresh air . . . into a field glutted with predictable, passionless solutions.”83 Such work acts to “help design reconnect with its audience. Even the hint of a hand-created element can activate a surface, instill passion and energy into a medium, and reassure the recipient that human understanding and insight are the foundations for the message.”84 Whereas computer-rendered imagery, with its precision, perfection, and starkness is efficient and clear in delivering its message, the integration of hand-rendered elements helps bring the human into such communication. Furthermore, Handwritten, hand drawn, gestural notations feel closer to the heart of the author, more personal, more honest and more genuine. It is analogous to the linguistic translation system, whereby the original language is the truth and the translation is merely an attempt to render it comprehensible to someone else. So often, the translation seems to be missing something. As our means of production become more transparent, so does the worth of handmade objects. It is not only their rarity, but also their authenticity that makes them valuable. It is their humanness that shines through, and this is the thing

83 Josh Chen, introduction, Fingerprint 5. 84 Chen 5.

we so desperately crave. Would a love letter have the same power if it were typeset? Handmade objects are ultimately about direct and meaningful communications between the artist and their audience. It is this connection between people that we seek as designers. And it is through the use of our hands that we can make our work felt.85 Tangible design, then, feels rooted in human nature. Indeed, “As dextrous or clumsy as they are, our hands are rooted in that natural world, along with ink and paper. There are limitations and properties that they can’t ignore, but must tackle and resolve. The final work is a record of the struggle, and whether a mess or a masterpiece, it is brimming with life.”86 Debbie Millman comments, The love affair our culture has with communicating by keyboard has drastically reduced the amount of time we write by hand, so much so that the New York Times recently reported that the skill, like an unused muscle, is pretty much dead by the time we [are] in High School. What are the ramifications of losing our handmade muscle? Yes, our ability to communicate now is certainly beneficial to the culture, but what does it mean for us individually? Throughout time, we have used our hands to satisfy our needs with the spiritual or down to earth. This creation of meaning from nothing may be our greatest achievement. They bear witness to the artist and the human in all of us . . . What resonates in these objects is an inherent authenticity and honesty, like a fingerprint. The visual

85 Orlebeke 56. 86 Martin Venezky, “I’ve Been Asked to Write an Essay for This Book,” Fingerprint 81.

language of these messages provides an indelible imprint. What is contained in these objects is enduring. The intent is more obvious and it is harder to take back.87 Thus, the hand, “while not always the fastest or most precise . . . is the most emotive. Going directly from hand to paper (or wood, stone, textile) is the most effective means of achieving unfettered communication.”88 The artist is able to speak directly to the audience and therefore connect on a human level. This human voice is important in establishing a design’s very purpose. Jessica Helfand writes, Design that strives for neutrality, that seeks to extinguish its relationship to the human condition, risks removing itself from the very nucleus of its purpose, which is, yes, to inform and educate — but also, to enchant. And at the end of the day, we succeed in this effort by being honest: we’re not graphic designers but people who make graphic design. Which means that first, we’re people: people who pay taxes and raise children and read newspapers and vote. People who eat and sleep and argue and question. People who laugh. People who remember. People who even, occasionally, cry.89 In contrast, the use of a computer can sometimes stunt such personal expression. Designer Michael Mabry writes about the mid-1980’s, when he first began using a computer for design work, stating,

87 Debbie Millman, interview with Doyald Young, Design Matters with Debbie Millman (02 Feb. 2007) Online, internet, 15 Feb. 2010, Available <http:// observermedia.designobserver.com/audiofile.html?entry=9217>. 88 Steven Heller and Mirko Ilic, Handwritten: Expressive Lettering in the Digital Age (New York: Thames & Hudson Inc., 2004) 6. 89 Helfand.

The intense focus on technology started to cloud my creative judgment. I found myself finding ways to work with the computer’s capabilities rather than with my own. For example, I would rely on the simplest path of least resistance if I had a tight deadline . . . I became creatively restless. After working thirteen years in the business, I needed to step away and evaluate what I was doing . . . To create an image that reveals something about the artist as well as engages the viewer takes skill. You just don’t sit down and bang out something that embodies multiple emotions on the first try. This is a life-long pursuit.90 What resonates in tangible objects, then, is an inherent authenticity and honesty of emotion. They contain an enduring, uniquely human imprint. As we deconstruct our lives searching for meaning, it is these handcrafted messages that have the magnitude—and the permanence—to measure, reflect, and express who we are. Nathan Heleine looks at tangibility through the lens of writing a handwritten letter, which he argues is infinitely more rewarding than digital communication “due in part to the thoughtful, tangible effort they require.”91 He explains that hand writing a letter “arguably produces more valuable writing as a sheer response to the effort involved,” in addition to the effort needed to seal, stamp, and mail the letter. He suggests, “we should look at how we actually interact with technology

90 Michael Mabry, foreward, Fingerprint, 6-8. 91 Nathan Heleine, “Licking the Stamp,” Field Guide, online, internet, 15 Mar. 2010. Available <http://fieldgui.de/articles/licking-the-stamp>

and try to find a fresh upside.”92 This outlook is similar to that of many current-day designers, who strive to bring a new approach to technology. In the realm of tangible design, the use of traditional craft techniques applied through newer technological means may, in fact, bring this “fresh upside.” The use of tangible elements may also work to help distinguish professional designers from desktop publishers. The ability to design using one’s hands does not necessarily take more skill than the ability to design using a computer; rather, it takes a different skill set. Still, there is a certain artistry associated with the (successful) use of one’s hands. Anyone with a computer can easily use it to create a flyer or poster. While these design solutions are quite often not nearly as successful as the computer-rendered solutions produced by professional designers, these amateur designers may be under the assumption—whether false or not—that they are just as capable as a professional armed with a computer. Tangible design is also effective in aiding designers in their quest to create a unique design—a considerable feat in a marketplace so saturated with design. Clearly, designers are capable of creating unique designs on the computer, as well, but such solutions may not be as full of the

92 Heleine.

eccentricities and imperfections that mark the distinctiveness of hand-crafted designs. To bring this point to an extremely simplistic level, consider the task of creating a circle. If prompted to create a circle on the computer, designers would, no doubt, return with slightly different outcomes. The circles could vary in size, color, stroke weight, or fill. However, these circles would essentially be the same; they would be proportional and have perfectly consistent radii. In contrast, consider the same task as generated by hand. The possibilities for resulting designs have now multiplied. Proportions in hand-rendered circles by different designers would likely not be equal (that is, the radius would not be perfectly consistent throughout the entire circle). In addition, the weight of the stroke might vary in different parts of the perimeter, due to factors such as inconsistent pressure on the drawing tool, the grain of the paper, the flow of the ink or paint, a change in the sharpness of the pencil, or any number of other specificities. The fill of the circle may also differ significantly within one circle, not to mention among

different designersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; circles. The texture of the fill would depend on the texture of the surface upon which the circle was drawn, as well as what material was used to create the fill (paint, ink, lead, paper, etc.) and how consistently the designer applied this material. The inconsistencies contained in this hand-rendered circle also would not follow a pattern, as they likely would in a computer-rendered texture. For example, if a designer uses the â&#x20AC;&#x153;noiseâ&#x20AC;? filter in Photoshop, a grainy texture is applied to the area. While a pinpointed area within this texture may differ from another pinpointed area, these inconsistencies follow a pattern based on the amount of noise the designer specifies within the filter menu, and thus, they repeat themselves in a predictable manner that can be replicated by another designer, computer, or trial. When creating by hand, however, such inconsistencies are unpredictable. Similarly, handcrafting provides designers with an arsenal of methods to distinguish themselves from others. While the computer aids designers with a plethora of approaches, it cannot account for the vast media available when handcrafting an object. Handcrafters may choose from a wealth of materials, including (but certainly not limited to) from oil paints, watercolors, ink, pencil, cut paper, charcoal, stamps, acrylics, spray paints, and ceramics. In addition, a variety of methodologies may be used with each material. Designers may

bring their own personal style to these materials even more so than with the computer. Another relevant issue in thinking about tangibility is the aspect of control. When using craft materials, there is a certain “texture of chance”93 that arises; that is, the maker often arrives at the final product through a series of happy accidents that occur because of a lack of precise control over the materials. Tangible materials can often take on a life of their own; there is sometimes no way of knowing how paint will look when it dries, how liquids will run on a page, or how elements will appear when combined. Commenting on hand lettering, Steven Heller and Mirko Ilic´ agree, “Although drawing on screen is perhaps no less complicated than it is on paper by hand, the newer method eliminates that fortuitous edge unique to the older one.”94 Whereas in “the digital environment, accuracy has generally been a commercial quest, to gain control over a material or data …artistic practice, especially as a token gesture of ‘freedom’ in modernism, has sought randomness, freedom of expression and often chaos.”95 Heller and Ilic´ continue, Even allowing for various technological flaws and idiosyncrasies, the hand has still enabled the creation of some of the most beautiful lettering ever devised,

93 Mark Wilson, exhibition book, RCA | Print Digital, 2007 Control: Print exhibit, Parsons The New School for Design, New York, 15 Nov. 2009. 94 Heller and Ilic´ 6. 95 Wilson.

which underscores the paradox that after centuries of progress we have both gained and lost something with new technology. The computer has made arduous procedures unnecessary and has allowed for increased precision, yet it has also atrophied instincts needed to create beautiful and beautifully bawdy handlettering.96 The process of making itself is incredibly important to craft; “There are forms to be found within the activity of making as much as within the end products.”97 The handmade process stamps the mark of a human on a work. Evidence of human involvement with a piece is apparent and perhaps even heightens the viewer’s connection to the message. Whereas more technological formats produce works of precise and accurate perfection, hand work is successful for the very opposite reason. “Imperfections contribute to give [works of the hand] individuality—as it were, a soul.”98 The personality of the maker, then, comes through in the piece of work, informing the viewer about the artist. In addition, the mode of creation communicates on its own. It communicates a unique voice, the historical context within which the mode of creation originated, and a sense of tradition. Machines, of course, are not without worth to design; on the contrary, they have certainly helped design become more important in society. During the Industrial Revolution, great

96 Heller and Ilic 6. 97 Robert Morris, “Some Notes on the Phenomenology of Making: The Search for the Motivated,” Artforum 8, April 1970, 62-66. 98 Ernest Chesneau, quoted in Richard Schiff, “The Photographic Soul,” Where is the Photograph, ed. David Green (Brighton, UK: Photoworks, 2003) 105.

attention was paid to the development of the field of design, as “the development of machine production had made design very much more valuable to manufacturers . . . The great advantage of machinery was its potential to manufacture a single design endlessly; the successful design became a very much more valuable possession, for it was what released the machine’s capacity to make a profit.”99 In much a similar way, the internet and digitization have allowed for a further “democratization of design.” Great amounts of information are now available to a wide-ranging, international audience, and for this information to stand out, it must be well-designed. The act of reproduction, however, may work to remove the work from its cultural context. As Walter Benjamin writes, Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be. This unique existence of the work of art determined the history to which it was subject throughout the time of its existence. This includes the changes which it may have suffered in physical condition over the years as well as the various changes in its ownership. The traces of the first can be revealed only by chemical or physical analyses which it is impossible to perform on a reproduction; changes of ownership are subject to a tradition which must be traced from the situation of the original. The presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of authenticity.100

99 Forty 58. 100 Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” 1935, online, internet, 16 Oct. 2009, 2. Available < http://www.marxists.org/ reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm>

He goes on, however, to remark that technical reproduction differs from manual reproduction in that it expands the audience of the work and “can put the copy of the original into situations which would be out of the reach for the original itself. Above all, it enables the original to meet the beholder halfway.”101 Thus, in the case of internet reproduction, the medium works to deliver the message to a far more wideranging group of people, and in so doing, does things that the “original” design cannot. According to Massimo Vignelli, the internet allows a designer to reach millions of people— something traditional publishing does not allow to the same degree. Because of this wide audience, the internet allows the designer to “spread his gospel,” allowing for a democratization and diffusion of culture to the viewer.102 However, as Benjamin states, “the quality of its presence is always depreciated.”103 The act of reproduction, then, has both its positives and its negatives. A reproduced art object loses some of its authenticity, “ranging from its substantive duration to its testimony to the history which it has experienced,” and in turn, “what is really jeopardized when the historical testimony is affected is the authority of the object.”104 In effect, “that which withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art,” as “reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition.”105 The copying of an artwork 101 Benjamin 3. 102 Massimo Vignelli, “Night of the Italians,” lecture, The Type Director’s Club, New York, 15 Oct. 2009. 103 Benjamin 3. 104 Benjamin 3. 105 Benjamin 3.

“substitutes a plurality of copies for a unique existence.”106 A reproduction does not hold the same uniqueness, historical context, and sense of tradition as does an original. Of course, even graphic art that incorporates hand skills may be reproduced, especially if the handmade elements are scanned into the computer or used on a web or digital platform. In such instances, however, the works are still created using a traditional method and reproduction is an afterthought. One must also examine the differences in interaction with physical, tangible objects versus screen-based imagery. Physical objects allow for the added sensory experience of tactility. Users may see the object, but they also are able to experience its dimensionality, whether feeling its texture or examining it from different angles. This form of physical interaction is not possible with screen-based imagery such as that seen on the internet. These images may indeed be seen and have an added form of interactivity in their ability to “respond” to the viewer after actions such as clicking. Such response may be targeted uniquely to the viewer, making for customizable content. However, tactility is lost in such imagery. Though the viewer can interact with the content on a figurative level, the actual act of touching the content

106 Benjamin 3.

itself is not possible. Because a viewer is not able to experience the physicality of a screen-based image, some of the features that allow print-based material to stand out are lost. For example, paper texture, paper weight, embossing or debossing, intricate folding, foil stamping, die cutting, and other attentiongrabbing techniques are an impossibility. In cases where tangibility has been integrated into the design style of a website or digital platform, such as a scanned hand illustration or paper texture, viewers cannot directly “touch” these elements, but they are able to relate directly to their previous experience with these items in real life. In such a way, these textural or handmade elements may evoke a similar feeling for the viewer as the actual physical object itself would. Physical objects also have an obvious advantage in their historical context. Whereas humans have interacted with physical imagery for many years, the internet is a relatively new technology. Viewers do not have the same experience level with screen-based imagery as they do with more traditional modes of communication, such as posters, business cards, or brochures. Perhaps this prior experience is why companies like Twitter that are entirely digital in their concept and execution still use physical business cards in their daily dealings.107 The sense of physicality may appeal to the maker, as well:

107 Eric Kuhn, “SXSW: Gasp! Twitter gives out paper business cards,” CNN: SciTechBlog (15 Mar. 2010) online, internet, 15 Mar. 2010. Available < http:// scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/15/sxsw-gasp-twitter-gives-out-paper-businesscards/?hpt=C2>

In producing a handcraft project, people can see something from start to finish and then have a material product that they can use themselves or give away. Even though we all have frequent access to the internet and are able to communicate with people through digital media, we are still sensual beings. We need to maintain a tactile relationship to the world.108 The internet is certainly not without benefits to craft. One of the internet’s strong suits is its ability to create a sense of community. Web content’s wide availability allows people with similar interests in craft to unify and further develop these interests, as well as their relationships with others who may further the advancement of their work. This focus on community has been incredibly important in fostering the “indie craft” movement that has arisen in the 1990’s and 2000’s. “It may sound strange that a bunch of people who are trying to reclaim handicraft are using technology to do so, but it’s undeniably true,”109 and websites like Etsy.com are incredibly potent examples of this fact. On Etsy.com, users are able to post their own “shops” of handcrafted goods and sell them to other users, much like a handmade-based eBay. In this sense, “The internet has made it possible for small-scale makers to get their wares seen by a much larger population than could have

108 Sabrina Gschwandtner in Handmade Nation: The Rise of DIY, Art, Craft, and Design, Faythe Levine and Cortney Heimerl (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2008) 26. 109 Garth Johnson, “Down the Tubes: In Search of Internet Craft,” Handmade Nation, 30.

ever been imagined.”110 Small businesses with no budget for advertising or marketing have access to a marketplace in which they may reach many potential consumers and create direct, lasting relationships with these customers. Furthermore, the internet and technology in general may have even helped cause the recent inclination toward the use of handcrafted elements. Writes Sabrina Gschwandtner, a founder of Knit Knit magazine, I think that handcraft is popular right now as a reaction against a whole slew of things, including our hyper-fast culture, increasing reliance on digital technology, the proliferation of consumer culture, and even war. During all major wars in which America has been involved, handcraft has experienced a resurgence. I think that’s definitely true right now. A lot of people have written about the return to homemaking and the interest in nesting after 9/11. I think that, in the United States anyway, our tentative international image and relationship to international communities has produced a lot of anxiety for people.111 Handcraft fosters a sense of sentimentality and simplicity in an increasingly complex world. By making use of the simple tools and techniques used in generations past, designers may hope to reclaim a piece of the past—a past that, in times of trouble, seems all the more appealing. Though “nostalgia is

110 Sarah Neuburger in Handmade Nation 38. 111 Gschwandtner 26.

now as it has always been, a bad thing in design,â&#x20AC;?112 traditional methods may be used in innovative ways, contributing to a design aesthetic that is both humanistic and original. Similar to the current renewed interest in organic food, natural materials (such as glass or wood rather than plastic), and vinyl records, tangible design allows people to get â&#x20AC;&#x153;back to basicsâ&#x20AC;? and focus on the humanistic facet of design.

112 Helfand, p. 1.

What do you consider to be tangible elements in design? It’s like when I pick up a pencil, and I work with a piece of tissue or a canvas or a paintbrush or anything on any surface. It’s a tactile feeling that connects you immediately to what you’re doing, and that feeling cannot be replaced by an eff-ing computer! Delete the word I just said. Why do you use tangible elements in your design work? For example, is it for aesthetic or conceptual reasons? I don’t even think in those terms. When I’m given an assignment by a client, my job is to solve his problem in the best possible way, whatever means it requires. Does Picasso use a number two pencil or a carpenter’s pencil? He doesn’t think about that, he just grabs stuff, something around him, and starts playing with it on the surface and creates something beautiful. In our field, it’s not creating and solving your own aesthetic problems, it’s solving someone else’s problem. That’s the difference as I see it between fine arts and communication arts. But craft is in both fields and artists and designers have an affinity for it. Does your likelihood to use tangible elements depend on the type of client? The end result is what’s important. It’s a matter of appreciating the tools. Even a plumber will tell you, if you don’t have the right tool, you can’t get the job done, but a tool is a tool—it’s the plumber that gets the job done. My first tool is the thinking tool. 71

Do you think the use of tangible elements makes the viewer react to a piece of design in a different way? Why or why not? I think so. It’s like when you look at an original piece of art in a gallery versus looking at it as a poster in a book or on a computer screen. It’s purely inspirational. Do you think tangible/handcrafted elements take any more or less skill to produce than computer-rendered elements? No. You need skills to do hand work and skills to do computer work. Artists need skills, the only difference I see is the tool. You have to master your tool. How has the notion of craft/tangibility in design been influenced in the digital era? I’m always pushing for traditional aspects because whenever a new invention comes along, you lose something. I grew up with the inkwell and the penpoint. I came to this country when I was nine—and wow, ballpoint pen! But I still like those fountain pens. Those instruments are valuable nowadays, they’re collectables. How many people collect ballpoint pens? Sounds like I’m an old designer with my traditional stuff, but I’m just more comfortable with that. I think today’s students need to at least have a foundation course in those methods because once you learn those methods, the other stuff becomes even easier. Many design historians and writers have pointed to a recent increase in the use of handcrafted elements in design. Why do you think this increase has occurred? I don’t know where the hell they’re pointing—I can’t find it. I see less and less of it. Or I think what’s happening is they probably recognize—these young people, designers—come along who appreciate the previous generation’s craft, perhaps— pre-computer craft, let’s say? And they try their hand at it and end up with some

decent stuff—like a place like the Society of Scribes that still has people using traditional tools. You have to have a basic love for the medium, the tools, and so forth and so on. They become an extension of you. When I pick up a pencil, it’s a connection from my hand to my head. When I pick up a mouse, I don’t get that same feeling, although I do appreciate a computer because there were times when I wish I had a computer in the earlier generations. Do you have any additional comments about tangibility? Yes! More hand-crafted work! Like this class, here! Now turn your recorder off, I’m gonna curse out my students.

What do you consider to be tangible elements in design? Anything that lends a tactile quality to a design. Do you ever use tangible elements in your design work? Why or why not? Yes, whenever possible. I do it for both aesthetic interest and to make a concept more meaningful. Do you think the use of tangible elements makes the viewer react to a piece of design in a different way? Why or why not? I think that because we live in a world now where more and more is computer generated, many people crave tactile or handcrafted works. Do you think tangible/handcrafted elements take any more or less skill to produce than computer-rendered elements? I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t think you can generalizeâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;either can be done well or badly. How has the notion of craft/tangibility in design been influenced in the digital era? Again, people crave tactile or handcrafted works.

What do you consider to be tangible elements in design? Type, picture, pattern. Under these categories all your subcategories will find a place. Do you ever use tangible elements in your design work? Why or why not? I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t design (I art direct). I think all designers use them in some fashion. Do you think the use of tangible elements makes the viewer react to a piece of design in a different way? Why or why not? Anything that triggers interest is useful. And certainly the more eclectic the trope the more likely the reaction. Do you think tangible/handcrafted elements take any more or less skill to produce than computer-rendered elements? Not necessarily. Though that seems to be the legend thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s arising. How has the notion of craft/tangibility in design been influenced in the digital era? By the past and present. Craft is always present. Designers are makers, and they like to use their hands. Many design historians and writers have pointed to a recent increase in the use of handcrafted elements in design. Why do you think this increase has occurred? It looks and feels good in the context of digital production. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a fashion. It will turn to something else soon. 76

What do you consider to be tangible elements in design? I have never used this term, but I think it’s a good idea. Hand-made and physical elements to have a special status in graphic design. Do you ever use tangible elements in your design work? Why or why not? Yes, I often use hand-painted illustrations in my work. See, for example, my book Design Your Life, or the illustrations on my website, elupton.com/paintings. Economic: If you are not a good photographer, then creating your own imagery is a fast, inexpensive way to execute an idea. Aesthetic: A digitally rendered image can look cold, while painted textures and details feel warm and authentic. Do you think the use of tangible elements makes the viewer react to a piece of design in a different way? Why or why not? I don’t presume to know what viewers think or feel, but I suspect that they see handmade or tangible elements as more relaxed and approachable and also more “present” than purely digital and photographic elements. Do you think tangible/handcrafted elements take any more or less skill to produce than computer-rendered elements? It really depends on the effect you are trying to get as well as your abilities. For me, it is easier to get out my paints than try to figure out how to create an image in Illustrator. How has the notion of craft/tangibility in design been influenced in the digital era? There has been a rebirth of craft in the digital era. In part, this is because there are so many tools for self-education and “how to” on the internet, as well as ways to sell and share the results. People feel empowered by software to make their own photos, movies, and blogs, so why not make stuff with their hands, too? Many design historians and writers have pointed to a recent increase in the use of handcrafted elements in design. Why do you think this increase has occurred? Partly it’s a trend, and I suspect that some of this will go away as the trend inevitably becomes stale. But it’s also a social movement that embraces a deprofessionalized, personalized view of design practice. Design is for everyone, and it doesn’t have to be perfect.

What do you consider to be tangible elements in design? If there’s a soul in it. If there are things used to make it by hand that are evident in its design. Do you ever use tangible elements in your design work? Why or why not? Yes, I use them when I’m compelled to. Look Both Ways is almost entirely handmade. It’s the only way to authentically express my personal vision in my personal work, since my corporate work is often produced electronically. My corporate work is sometimes tangible—for example, hand-drawn type. Do you think the use of tangible elements makes the viewer react to a piece of design in a different way? Why or why not? Yes, it’s more homespun and attainable. There’s a sense of tangible work being genuinely from someone. It informs the viewer about the maker. Do you think tangible/handcrafted elements take any more or less skill to produce than computer-rendered elements? They’re probably a different type of skill set. They’re equal, but with tangible design, you can get away with less because you can’t cover up your mistakes.

How has the notion of craft/tangibility in design been influenced in the digital era? There’s a backlash against electronic methods. The pendulum is swinging in the other direction. It goes back and forth. Tangibility is a phase (though not a trend) in the evolution of design. Many design historians and writers have pointed to a recent increase in the use of handcrafted elements in design. Why do you think this increase has occurred? Etsy is one way. There’s the opportunity to get your work out in more ways. More exposure allows people to spread the word of handmade. Do you have any additional comments about tangibility? Just that it’s really exciting to see it’s popular again!

I was in undergrad when the first Macintosh hit, so my undergraduate training for the most part was traditional, in that we were doing marker comps and all that. And then I went to grad school, where we had computers, so I kinda got both the beginning of the computer and the formal training in traditional techniques. I can tell you that I was doing silkscreening in school, and people thought I was a superfreak for silkscreening for years after. I think I was the only designer silkscreening; people just thought I was a nut. Designers had no interest doing silkscreening or doing anything by hand at that time. That went on until I noticed, maybe about 2002 or 2003, all of the sudden, silkscreening was now cool—and it’s still cool. At a certain point, the computer became status quo. It wasn’t the new thing anymore—it was how everyone worked. So there was a want to find a different way to work. And using your hands and getting off the computer was a way to do that. What do you consider to be tangible elements in design? I would think of the word tangible as things that are printed. I tend to be suspicious of making things by hand and then scanning it into the computer. Does it lose some of its soul when it’s taken into another means of production? Does it become fake in some way? One of my most hated things is when you see a painting that’s a poster. It just seems so asinine to me. I wouldn’t say websites can’t use tangibility, but it seems a little dubious to me.

Why do you use tangible elements in your design work? For example, is it for aesthetic or conceptual reasons? It helps communicate something. It also feels very personal. It feels less institutionalized. It gets back to conceptual reasons, aesthetic reasons in some cases, and sometimes a mix of the two. Do you think the use of tangible elements makes the viewer react to a piece of design in a different way? Why or why not? Yeah, sure. It depends on how it’s being used and what the thing is, but I definitely feel like if you see something that’s handwritten as opposed to something that’s typeset, it’s gonna have a very different kind of feel to it. In the case of something that’s handwritten, I could give you plenty of examples of things I’ve done that communicate in subtly different ways. Do you think tangible/handcrafted elements take any more or less skill to produce than computer-rendered elements? When you’re doing it well, it’s this kind of thing where it just looks right or it doesn’t. That takes a lot of skill . . . I wouldn’t say more or less, but it’s a different kind of skill. How has the notion of craft/tangibility in design been influenced in the digital era? I think that silkscreening a poster is a very craft activity. Silkscreen’s not going away, print’s not going away, because it’s gonna become much more of something that’s special. Letterpress is this way now. Silkscreen will become more like that. It has a different feel. There’s different times you’d want whatever you’re doing to have that kind of feeling. Digital stuff will just become the way we access most of the information we access on a daily basis, but print will have a little bit of a different role. Print’s not going away anytime soon. People are still going to want to read books. If there are half the magazines there are out there right now, who

fucking cares. Let it go on the website. I think the stuff designers design is still going to be around. I would argue there are even going to be more opportunities . . . There’s a difference between thinking about how something is produced and how it’s used in whatever medium it’s in. Will handwriting go away online? No. Will drawing go away online? No. It will still exist, it just won’t be printed. Do you have any additional comments about tangibility? Technology influences all [design] on some level of course, because if you look at a Marinetti doing something on letterpress, it’s a totally different feel than something produced today, but that work had really strong limitations on the way that you could actually produce, and so it really informed the style and what it looked like. Well, now we’re in an age where, much more, we can go and mine that stuff and use it for all kinds of different reasons. But I think that it’s really important to keep in mind how this stuff was produced. I think that, being in the bubble of the computer, you forget a lot of that. It makes sense to at least know where these things are coming from.

What do you consider to be tangible elements in design? Everything that is non-intangible: materials, texture, colors et cetera. Do you ever use tangible elements in your design work? Why or why not? Of course, everything is tangible. What is relevant is the choice of materials in relation to the destination of the object.This relationship is very complex and is based on appropriateness. When is meaninglessly arbitrary is to be avoided. So, it is for conceptual reasons. Do you think the use of tangible elements makes the viewer react to a piece of design in a different way? Why or why not? Everything is tangible and [evokes] response[s from] the viewer. Do you think tangible/handcrafted elements take any more or less skill to produce than computer-rendered elements? Hand or computer are the same. [It] is the end result that counts. How has the notion of craft/tangibility in design been influenced in the digital era? Sometimes for the best, sometimes for the worst. Many design historians and writers have pointed to a recent increase in the use of handcrafted elements in design. Why do you think this increase has occurred? Because there is room for everybody to express their desires. Perhaps as a reaction to high tech. Do you have any additional comments about tangibility? Everything that is perceivable by the senses is tangible. Everything that is made by hand or one at the time, is handcrafted. Both involve materials, textures and color. Anything that is tangible generate[s] aesthetic responses and appreciation . . . according to its appropriateness and to its destination of use. 87

Benjamin, Walter. “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” 1935. Online. Internet. 16 Oct. 2009. Available < http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm> Chen Design Associates, Ed. Fingerprint: The Art of Using Handmade Elements in Graphic Design. Cincinnati: HOW Books, 2006. DiSpigna, Tony. Personal interview. 15 Apr. 2010. Drucker, Johanna, and Emily McVarish, Graphic Design History: A Critical Guide. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, 2009. Fili, Louise. E-mail to the author. 14 Mar. 2010. Forty, Adrian. Objects of Desire: Design and Society since 1750. London: Thames & Hudson, 1986. Gorman, Carma, ed. The Industrial Design Reader. New York: Allworth Press, 2003. Helfand, Jessica. “Can Graphic Design Make You Cry?” Design Observer. (03 Aug. 2009): n. pag. Online. Internet. 7 Oct. 2009. Available <http:// observatory.designobserver.com/entry.html?entry=9737> Heleine, Nathan. “Licking the Stamp.” Field Guide. Online. Internet. 15 Mar. 2010. Available <http://fieldgui.de/articles/licking-the-stamp> Heller, Steven, and Mirko Ilic. Handwritten: Expressive Lettering in the Digital Age. New York: Thames & Hudson Inc., 2004. Heller, Steven. E-mail to the author. 5 Mar. 2010. Heller, Steven. “The Decade of Dirty Design.” AIGA Voice. (09 Dec. 2009) Online. Internet. 5 Mar. 2010. Available <http://www.aiga.org/content/ cfm/the-decade-of-dirty-design?pff=2>

Kuhn, Eric. “SXSW: Gasp! Twitter gives out paper business cards.” CNN: SciTechBlog. (15 Mar. 2010) Online. Internet. 15 Mar. 2010. Available < http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/15/sxsw-gasp-twittergives-out-paper-business-cards/?hpt=C2> Levine, Faythe, and Cortney Heimerl. Handmade Nation: The Rise of DIY, Art, Craft, and Design. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2008. Lupton, Ellen. “Design and Production in the Mechanical Age.” Graphic Design in the Mechanical Age: Selections from the Merrill C. Berman Collection. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998. Lupton, Ellen. E-mail to the author. 5 Mar. 2010. Lupton, Ellen. Thinking With Type: A Critical Guide for Designers, Writers, Editors, & Students. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2004. Meggs, Philip. “Peter Behrens: Design’s Man of the Century?” Graphic Design History. Eds. Steven Heller and Georgette Ballance. New York: Allworth Press, 2001. Millman, Debbie. Interview with Doyald Young. Design Matters with Debbie Millman. (02 Feb. 2007) Online. Internet. 15 Feb. 2010, Available <http://observermedia.designobserver.com/audiofile. html?entry=9217>. Millman, Debbie. Look Both Ways: Illustrated Essays on the Intersection of Life and Design. Cincinnati: HOW Books, 2009. Millman, Debbie. Telephone interview. 11 Mar. 2010. Morris, Robert. “Some Notes on the Phenomenology of Making: The Search for the Motivated.” Artforum 8. April 1970. 62-66. Morris, William. “The Ideal Book.” Looking Closer Three: Classic Writings on Graphic Design. Eds. Michael Bierut, Jessica Helfand, Steven Heller, and Rick Poyner. New York: Allworth Press, 1999. 1-5. Perry, Michael. Hand Job: A Catalog of Type. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007.

Rubinstein, Rhonda. “Zuzana Licko.” Eye Magazine. Spring 2002, issue 43. Online. Internet, 11 Nov. 2009. Available <http://eyemagazine.com/ feature.php?id=62&fid=272 > Sagmeister, Stefan. E-mail to the author. 5 Mar. 2010. Sahre, Paul. Personal interview. 7 Apr. 2010. Schiff, Richard. “The Photographic Soul.” Where is the Photograph. Ed. David Green. Brighton, UK: Photoworks, 2003. Schoenfeld, Ann. Lecture. Pratt Institute, New York. 12 Nov. 2009. “tangibility.” The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 02 Mar. 2010. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tangibility>. Victore, James. E-mail to the author. 2 Apr. 2010. Vignelli, Massimo. E-mail to the author. 5 Mar. 2010. Vignelli, Massimo. “Night of the Italians.” Lecture. The Type Director’s Club, New York. 15 Oct. 2009. Vit, Armin. “Rudy VanderLans.” Speak Up. (8 Nov. 2002). Online. Internet. 11 Nov. 2009. Available <http://www.underconsideration.com/speakup/ interviews/rudy.html> Wilson, Mark. Exhibition book. RCA | Print Digital, 2007. Control: Print exhibit. Parsons The New School for Design, New York. 15 Nov. 2009.

submitted by

A thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

in Communications Design

Edvin Yegir

Thesis Advisor Date:

Jeff Bellantoni Chairperson Date:

Design & Illustration

Callie Kant

Software

InDesign Photoshop

Hardware

Apple MacBook Pro

Typefaces

Sabon Trade Gothic (hand-rendered) Hand lettering

Printing

Print Icon

Binding

Callie Kant

Paper

Genesis Milkweed Neenah Environment Desert Storm