Ross francis 102181 cop3 by Ross Francis

Name Ross Francis Degree Programme (BA Hons.) Graphic Design 2013/14 Title The role of self-set projects within a progressive graphic design practice.

7078 words

Contents Introduction

Chapter 1 - Designer as...

Chapter 2 - Differentiation and Diffusion

Chapter 3 - Stefan Sagmeister

Chapter 4 - Ji Lee

Chapter 5 - The Brief Of The Individual

Conclusion

Images

Bibliography

Appendices

Introduction Self-set projects within the graphic design industry have been a topic of debate since the mid-1990â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s. This essay explores the place of self-set projects within graphic authorship and evaluates how they both contribute to a progressive graphic design practice.

The opening section of this essay will look into the emergence of the term graphic authorship, which will be analysed by juxtaposing texts written by established graphic designer/writers. The essay will analyse and evaluate the increasing ambiguity of the profession, in particular, its shift from facilitation based practice to a content centric practice. The essay progresses with the case studies of two leading advocates of self-set projects, using the aforementioned texts to evaluate the defining nature of each case. These case studies will assist to construct the argument that self-set projects and proposed models of graphic authorship are of vital importance in the progression of the graphic design profession, despite their tendency to go beyond the confines of the archetypal graphic designer.

In reference to the integral graphic authorship debate, the seminal texts that will provide a basis for evaluation are Designer As Author and Fuck Content by Michael Rock, in conjunction with Ellen Luptonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s essay Designer as Producer. These texts will provide an introduction to the debates surrounding a progressive mode of design practice. In order to construct an opposing argument I will be using the text Designer as Author: Diffusion or Differentiation, an essay written by Christina de Almeida and Steven McCarthy. These texts provide informed speculation about the ever-evolving role of the graphic designer, and despite providing strong arguments for each case; they are in contention with one another. In addition to these texts, the writing of Adrian Shaugnessy, and Quentin Newark will be drawn upon to develop a wider context for debate. The seminal texts previously highlighted will 1

assist in the debate about the perennial evolution of graphic design outside of its distinguishable defines, but will be met with further insights taken from essays by John Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Reilly. Further sources drawn upon will be from documented lectures, and online sources. The essay will continue with two case studies, which will form the argument that self-set projects can be used to develop, diversify, and enrich the interconnected personal and professional practices of the graphic designer. The first case study will be based on Stefan Sagmeister, the creative director/founder of Sagmeister & Walsh, which will investigate his advocacy of self-set projects. In addition to this, the case will analyse the conception of his body of work that led to Things I Have Learnt In My Life So Far. The second case study will be based on Ji Lee, the current creative director of Facebook, which will analyse his self-set project The Bubble Project. These case studies will highlight similarities and differences in the individual motivation, approach, and execution of self-set projects, and how they contribute to a progressive graphic design practice. The concluding chapter of this essay will analyse, evaluate, and assert the importance of self-set projects within a contemporary graphic design practice, and highlight how they can provide value and enrichment to the individual, and a reforming mode of graphic design for the 21st century.

This essay argues that, despite defying the traditional graphic designer archetype, self-set projects should be encouraged due to their ability to define and redefine the boundaries and possibilities of the graphic design profession.

Chapter 1 The Designer As… The accomplished design critic and founder of Eye magazine, Rick Poynor, first published the designer as author model. The term emerged from a reaction to postmodernism. It described the process of a designer attributing a signature style to their work, and affirmed the claim that style was the designer’s authorial content that would sit on top of the client’s message. This movement, according to Lupton (2011), would revolutionise the way design was perceived, and marked a shift from design performing objective functionality, to a subjective interruption in the communication process. In Spring 1996, Rick Poynor commissioned Michael Rock to write an essay for Eye on the topic of graphic authorship, which has since been republished in the book Multiple Signatures by Michael Rock. Since the original publication of Rock’s Designer As Author, the text has become misinterpreted as a proclamation for the designer to manifest their own content, and assume a more authorial role within the creative industries.

In Designer As Author, Rock provides a brief history of the term author. He analyses the term in response to Roland Barthes’s Death Of The Author, and highlights how critical theorists have debunked the term in its reference to origination. Having described that the ‘author’ was a term spawned from the enlightenment period as a mark of authority, Rock concluded that this were an unjust description of the graphic design process: ‘…design is done in some kind of collaborative setting, either within a client relationship or in the context of a design studio that utilizes the talents of numerous creative people. Thus the origin of any particular idea is clouded.’ (Rock, 2013:49) Rock puts forward the notion that a monopoly should not be claimed on a work with multiple collaborators. Rock proceeded to convert the term back to its stylistic 3

concerns. He likened the creative stance of a designer to that of an auteur, a term that emerged in the 1950’s to describe the stylistic manifestation of a film director’s input: ‘Like a film director, the art director or designer is often assigned his or her material and often works collaboratively in a role directing the activity of a number of other creative people.’ (Rock, 2013:50) Disregarding the term author, Rock applies the auteur criteria to the stylistic design paradigm in an attempt to justify a comparison. Rock implies that a designer is able to garner an artistic elevation similar to that of a film director if a succession of subsequent work alludes to create a resonant and maintained ‘overriding philosophy’. In 1998, Ellen Lupton wrote The Designer as Producer, an article in The Education of a Graphic Designer edited by Steven Heller, which would later be published on her website in 2004. The Designer as Producer also uses the context of film to provide an argument on the topic of authorship: ‘…a “producer” brings together a broad range of skills–writing, directing, acting, cinematography, editing, and so on–in a work whose authorship is shared.’ (Lupton, 2004) The essay, in a similar vein to Michael Rocks article, acts as a proponent in dismissing the authorship rhetoric entirely. However, Lupton acknowledges the likeness to film from a different perspective. Rock initially highlights the idea that the designer can act as an auteur in the presentation of form; Lupton proposes that the designer assumes the role of a producer, who focuses on the mechanics and practical elements of the design process. Lupton (2004) explains that, contrary to the auteur discourse, which is routed in post-modernism; the producer is a ‘concept embedded in the history of modernism’. Lupton (2004) draws heavily from the critical theory of Walter Benjamin, a 20th century literary critic, who ‘attacked the model of the writer’ and aggrandised the role of the producer. She concludes that the designer:

‘…must have the skills to begin directing content, by critically navigating the social, aesthetic, and technological systems across which communications flow.’ (Lupton, 2004) Lupton proposes that the role of the designer can be evolved, not by seeking an authorial integrity in an overriding philosophy, but by developing their individual ‘functions of consulting, styling, and formatting’. In order to achieve this she proposes five contributing methods to design pedagogy: ‘Language is a raw material’, which seeks to heighten a designer’s verbal literacy, in order for them not to become writers, but reinforce their ability to collaborate with editors; ‘Theory is a practice.’ an urge to combine the simultaneous act of thinking with the act of making; ‘Writing is a tool’, which proposes writing can act as an integral part of the design process; ‘Technology is physical’, a term that defined the designer’s role in the ‘human, material response to information’; and ‘The medium is on the menu’, which would focus on an understanding of the range of distribution methods available to designers. Lupton’s approach provides a cohesive model for design education. However, there are limitations in how it can be applied to a diverse range of professional practices; and it fails to fully recognise the ways in which designers can generate their own content, or contribute to it within their professional practice.

In his conclusion to Designer as Author, Rock (2013) proposes three modes of practice that the designer can assume. The categorical models accommodate the broad spectrum of professional approaches to traditional graphic design, and provide a platform on which these approaches can progress. The models follow the popular ‘designer as…’ paradigm, but unlike Lupton’s proposed approach to design practice, Rock’s models allow for the individual to interpret and navigate through the multifaceted field of contemporary visual communication. The models that Rock proposes are: ‘Designer as translator’, an appellation that is perhaps the closest to describing the archetypal designer; ‘Designer as performer’, which is built on the fundamental premise that a sole designer has the ability to express the content in a way exclusive

to them; the final model is ‘Designer as director’, which alludes to the notion the designer conducts the visual orchestration of individuals in order to produce a work of creative magnitude. It is clear that, in comparison to Lupton’s Designer as Producer, Rock’s alternative models provide an entirely different context for the practice of a graphic designer. Nevertheless, what unifies them is their repudiation of content creation within the confines of the profession. Rock (2013) and Lupton (2004) both dismiss authorship as a form of graphic design due to the ways in which it asserts an individual voice over a given content. It is made clear is that the traditional notion of the graphic designer is fundamentally driven by the process of giving form to preexisting content and that self-set projects do not play a role in this.

Chapter 2 Diffusion or Differentiation In 2002, Christina de Almeida and Steven McCarthy published an online article titled Designer as Author: Diffusion or Differentiation, which aimed to take a more democratic standpoint on the subject of graphic authorship. Almeida and McCarthy (2002) not only endorse the use of the term, but they advocate its increasing importance in the constantly evolving profession of graphic design. The title of the essay alludes to two potential standpoints on the theme. The first suggests that graphic authorship is an integral part of an evolving graphic design practice. The second speculates about the emergence of a concurrent discipline, in addition to the traditional defines of the profession.

In contradiction to Rock (2013), Almeida and McCarthy (2002) highlight the ways authorship can be applied to a graphic design practice are abundant and diverse. In a similar way to Rock (2013), Almeida and McCarthy (2002) present four models that allow for varying approaches to graphic design. However, what sets them apart from Rock’s models is the way in which they are proposed. The models do not follow the common ‘designer as…’ format, so their proposals immediately invite a greater degree of interpretation. Furthermore, their speculative proposal is openly permissive to the convergence of the models. This becomes apparent when the work of Tibor Kalman is used to exemplify more than one of the models. Where Rock (2013) and Lupton (2004) provide an approach to a traditional design practice, Almeida and McCarthy (2002) acknowledge the multivalent nature of the design community, and provide platforms, with precedents, that pursue to evolve the role of the graphic designer in the 21st century.

The first of their four proposed models is titled ‘Design as Advocacy’. The model initially highlights a degree of narcissism within the profession, asserting the view 7

that ‘designers have always been the most passionate advocates of their own discipline’, perhaps in reference to the multitude of design essays by designers, for designers. In addition to this, the model asserts the term author in an argument that is perhaps directed at Rock’s Designer as Author antithesis. The argument outlines the incongruous nature of the design essay, especially those that allude to being the ‘anathema to design authorship’. The key point in ‘Design as Advocacy’ is the way that the designer can construct advocation of a subject not only by instigating a design manifesto outside of their day to day practice but by taking a ‘diffuse approach’ in the conduction of their practice. ‘…the designer establishes work commitments with groups or agencies with which she or he identifies personally, morally, politically, or religiously.’ (Almeida and McCarthy, 2002) It is through this assumed association with like-minded client’s that the designer is able to construct an advocating view-point through their practice. The defining point of this model is that it highlights two interpretations of graphic authorship, and presents them as equal modes of practice in the design paradigm. ‘Design for Art’s Sake’ is the second mode that Almeida and McCarthy highlight within graphic authorship. This proposal is built upon the notion that graphic design has a continual relationship with fine art. Almeida and McCarthy account that design can be conducted as a cathartic act, that is not dissimilar from art. The motivation to do so could originate from design pedagogy, which traditionally exists in the faculties of art; reinforced by John O’Reilly (2002) in his book No Brief. He speculates that the ‘relationship with art is something that simmers away at the back of the minds of most designers’. The ability to manipulate content of the individual’s preference, in a way that is beneficial to that individual, as well as others, is emblematic of the graphic authorship mode. It may be appropriate to assume that artists like Barbara Kruger use this mode, as there are elements of graphic design that are diffused within her art practice. The popularity of the ‘design exhibition’ in the latter half of the 20th century to present day draws further parallels toward the notion that the designer’s relation

to the artist is connected on a deeper level. The After Hours exhibition held by Nick Eagleton of The Partners, presented a plethora of ways in which self-set projects can manifest in ‘Design for Art’s Sake’. Many of the pieces were unintended to see the light of day, so, in some cases, assumed a more artistic nature. The third mode is the ‘Collaboration of Equals’, which formulates the position that the graphic designer must collaborate with individuals from different disciplines in order to optimise their role and assist in the production of a ‘synthesised process’. Almeida and McCarthy make an example of Tibor Kalman’s role in the production of ‘Colors’ magazine as an act of ‘collaboratively authored design’. Their final model is that of the recognised ‘Entrepreneurial Opportunities’ available to graphic designers. This model dissects the shift of the graphic design service, to the focus on the graphic product. ‘Entrepreneurial Opportunities’ uses Erik Spiekermann’s FontShop as an example of how entrepreneurship can manifest within the graphic design profession. A more contemporary and exaggerated model of this would be Shepard Fairey’s Obey brand, and his subsequent use of the brand to inform and set up multiple design agencies. The four descriptive models proposed are the accumulation of a democratic and transparent approach to the speculation surrounding graphic authorship. Almeida and McCarthy concluded: ‘The models thus presented are open-ended, allowing for overlap, contextual reconsideration, and shifting relationships. An integration of motivations, opportunities and scenarios contribute to making selfauthored graphic design present in many of today’s practicing models— indeed these new conditions are bringing the field towards a significant intersecting moment.’ (Almeida and McCarthy, 2002) It is the malleability and interpretative aspects of these models that allow them to act as strong models for further speculation, especially in comparison to the models proposed by Rock (2013) and Lupton (2004). Intangible and unforeseen variables that amass from technological, social, and cultural factors undeniably shift the role of the graphic designer. It is versatile models, like the ones highlighted in Designer as Author: Differentiation or Diffusion, in comparison to the aforementioned 9

models of practice, that allows for the graphic design discipline to evolve with its surrounding environment. In Rock’s (2009) essay Fuck Content, which is a rebuttal of the prevailing graphic authorship models proposed by Almeida and McCarthy (2002), Rock (2009) continues to affirm that the concern and language of the graphic designer is in the form of the design itself. He affirms his point by reacquainting the reader with the position of the film auteur. He implores that the film ‘is about filmmaking’ and the artistry of the director is not in the writing of the story but in the ability to ‘mold the form into his style in a genuinely unique and entertaining way’. While this is a perfect description of the role of a director, and perhaps Rock’s approach to design, the comparison neglects to concede that accomplished directors such as Quentin Tarantino and Michael Scorsese, are directors, and indeed writers of their own content.

Rock (2013) claimed ‘…the ways a designer can be an author are myriad, complex and often confusing…’, which, despite ultimately expelling the notion of authorship, remains an accurate standpoint on the topic of graphic authorship today. While Rock mentions that graphic authorship has little relevance to self-set projects in their entirety, Adrian Shaugnessy, an accomplished graphic designer and writer, exemplifies that the link between the two is often misconstrued: ‘The notion of self-initiated briefs - graphic authorship, as it is often called - currently occupies a prominent position in design discourse. In my view, self-initiated projects and the notion of ‘pure’ graphic authorship are well intentioned but flawed as concepts.’ (Shaugnessy, 2005:141) Shaugnessy (2005), in reference to the authorship debate, reinforces the idea that graphic authorship is often used in an arbitrary fashion in the absence of a more suitable term. Shaugnessy (2009) is reductive of the term graphic authorship and dismissive in its use to purely describe self-set projects:

‘…a graphic designer who creates a new visual entity where one didn’t previously exist is indulging in an act of authorship. Not only that, but working for a client doesn’t preclude the ability to have authorial intent.’ (Shaugnessy, 2009:127) Shaugnessy proposes that graphic authorship is an inert term in describing the conduction of self-set projects, due to the term being equally pertinent to a graphic designer’s participation in a brief set by a client. This stance verifies the overarching argument of Almeida and McCarthy (2002) who highlighted that graphic authorship can be an exclusive form of professional practice. It is clear to see that the topic of graphic authorship is much-debated, and the ways in which it can be interpreted are diverse. However, what is evident is that graphic authorship plays a substantial role in the progressive process of graphic design. While the term is often used in the description of personal work, it has been undisputedly agreed that the term is not limited to this, as it can occur in the designer-client relationship through the designer’s approach to the design process and the overall nature of the brief. Descriptors such as self-set, self-motivated, self-initiated, and personal work, are less controversial in their application to work done outside of a client brief, and more resonant of work done for self satisfaction, personal development, and in the individual attempt to speculate what graphic design could be.

Chapter 3 Stefan Sagmeister Stefan Sagmeister is a graphic designer practicing in New York. Having grown up in Bregenz, Austria, he proceeded to study at the University of Applied Art’s in Vienna. Following this, and after receiving a Fullbright Scholarship, he studied at the Pratt Institute in New York. Prior to his educational endeavours, Sagmeister worked at Alphorn, an antiestablishment magazine, which would go on to inform his application of design in the future. The independently driven left-wing magazine initially employed Sagmeister as a writer; due to the hands on approach of the magazine, he also created the page layouts. This allowed Sagmeister to develop an interest in graphic design in conjunction with his social, political and cultural values. The magazine also offered an opportunity for Sagmeister to partake in the organising and promotion of music concerts. The act of designing for music was built upon early in Sagmeister’s career as a result of his involvement with Schauspielhaus, a contemporary theatre in Vienna, and Ronacher, a music hall threatened by demolition, which ran a poster campaign for its rescue. Sagmeister’s relationship to music would continue to contribute to his future body of work, and act as an overarching theme to his practice. From the humble beginning to his career, Sagmeister clearly depicted the mode of ‘Design as Advocacy’, described almost 20 years later, in Almeida and McCarthy (2002). The personal engagement of Sagmeister’s ‘diffuse’ approach, as Almeida and McCarthy would describe it, allows him to engage an audience in the content that he values himself. Conversely, this is an approach to graphic design that does not adhere to the models that Rock (2013) and Lupton (2004) respectively propose.

In 1991, Sagmeister moved to Hong Kong to work at the ad agency Leo Burnett. It was here that there was a distinct shift in his practice. Sagmeister made the conversion from taking on briefs of his choosing, to working on client led briefs set 12

to a corporate driven agency. After 2 years of enduring a difficult work-satisfaction relationship, Sagmeister moved to New York to set up his own studio not before taking a sabbatical to Sri Lanka in order to focus on a self-set book project. Upon arriving in New York, Sagmeister worked at M&Co, which was the studio of exColors art director Tibor Kalman. As previously mentioned, the work of Kalman is referenced in Almeida and McCarthy (2002) as an example of two of their models: ‘Entrepreneurial Opportunities’, and ‘Collaboration of Equals’. It could be speculated that Kalman’s authored mode of design is what attracted Sagmeister to his studio. On January 14, 1994, Sagmeister opened his studio. He opened it with the credo ‘Style=Fart’, which, in opposition to Rock (2013), was a call for idea driven and content based design overriding the subjection of form. Sagmeister’s desire to endow his form of design with a concept, and message, would be a vital factor in the definition of his future practice.

A defining point in Sagmeister’s practice was his choice to take a year long sabbatical. In June 2000, Sagmeister closed his studio and set up a temporary studio in Bali, in order to work on design experiments and self-set work. The sabbatical was instigated in order to reinvigorate Sagmeister’s approach to design. During the sabbatical, he worked on a multitude of projects, some of which had a significant effect on his practice after he returned. Things I Have Learned In My Life So Far, is a book, and body of work, which comprises of multiple statements reproduced as pieces of design. The statements were generated as a result of his sabbatical, and consist of a series of maxims that are emblematic of the project’s title. The project is an antithesis of the proposed role of the designer in Rock (2013) and Lupton (2004), but reinforces the modes of operation highlighted in Almeida and McCarthy (2002). In the case of Thing’s I Have Learnt In My Life So Far, Sagmeister conducts a personal practice, in the form of a sabbatical, and ensures that it directly informs his professional practice. The content generated by Sagmeister was consequently used in commissions by clients. The maxim Money Does Not Make Me Happy was

commissioned as part of an editorial piece in a magazine, as well as being displayed on the side of a casino building. This process reinforces the ‘diffusion’ model of authorship highlighted in Almeida and McCarthy where they describe the process as: ‘the assimilation of self-authorship concepts into the wider discourse of the graphic design discipline, whereby the modes of designing incorporate authorship as an integral part of the activity’ (Almeida and McCarthy, 2002) Sagmeister implements this approach to graphic authorship in a number of versatile executions, all of which can be categorised into one of the aforementioned four models that Almeida and McCarthy propose. Everybody Always Thinks They Are Right is another maxim, which was commissioned by the Scottish Executive, that fulfils the role of ‘’Design for Art’s Sake’, where Almeida and McCarthy (2002) note that examples of this mode ‘expand the spaces for graphic design as a form of subjective expression’. Rock (2009) asserts, in reference to graphic designers, that ‘Our content is, perpetually, Design itself’, which is a rebuttal of designer generated content as a part of a graphic design practice. Rock (2013) highlights that methods of subjection for the graphic designer should be exclusively executed through the formation of content. However, it is eminently clear that Sagmeister’s approach does not adhere to this notion and exceeds the boundaries of stylistic subjection. Steven Heller’s essay in Things I Have Learnt In My Life So Far highlights that the work Everybody Thinks They Are Always Right is the ‘nexus of art and design in the service of self expression’. This statement concludes that Sagmeister is transcending the traditional boundaries of graphic design from a facilitator of content to the proponent in the progressive modes of authorship. By doing this, Sagmeister broadens the scope of the graphic design profession, and provides an exemplifying model of graphic authorship. It must be re-iterated that this mode of authorship could not be attained without the personal reflection and development enabled by Sagmeister’s self-set projects.

Sagmeister’s further connection to Almeida and McCarthy (2002) is his fulfilment of the mode ‘Collaboration Of Equals’. If I Want To Explore A New Direction Professionally, It Is Helpful To Try It Out For My Self First was a project in which Sagmeister asked Marian Bantjes, an esteemed type designer, to create the typography. The act of designer commissioning designer is an act that expands the ‘Collaboration of Equals’ model. The content of the type itself is one of Sagmeister’s axioms, which describes his pursuit to push the boundaries of his individual approach to graphic design. Furthermore, the axiom acknowledges the importance of personal development in its effect on his professional practice. ‘Collaboration of Equals’ is realised more recently in Sagmeister’s project The Happy Film. The film, of which Sagmeister is a credited director, is a progression from Things I Have Learnt In My Life So Far and consists of research, and scientific based experimentation into themes of psychological happiness and well being. In the production of the project, Sagmeister works closely with the following people: Hillman Curtis, an accomplished director; Ben Nabors, a producer; Ben Wolf, a cinematographer; and Jonathan Haidt, a professor of social psychology, who acts as an advisor to the project. Through this collaborative process, Sagmeister provides an example of the notion highlighted in Almeida and McCarthy (2002) where they highlight the initiation of graphic authorship sees the designer performing a more integrated role in production, creating a more ‘synthesised’ design process. Ironically, this case is incomparable to the ‘Designer as director’ role highlighted in Rock (2013), and indeed the other roles that Rock suggests for an approach to design practice. Perhaps Sagmeister’s role in the film project exceeds the ‘Collaboration of Equals’ model and transcends into a model unmentioned by Almeida and McCarthy (2002): designer as researcher. The Happy Show was exhibited at a number of locations as a presentation of the thoughts, data, and design pieces relating to Sagmeister’s findings in The Happy Film. The show is exhibited, which would fulfil the ‘Design for Art’s Sake’ model of graphic authorship, but also fulfils elements of ‘Graphic Design as Advocacy’. As Sagmeister provides work in the form of ‘film, print, info-graphics, sculpture, and interactive installations’,

his seamless assimilation and transcendence through various disciplines of visual communication are accompanied by his amalgamation of the presented forms of graphic authorship. While being exhibited, The Happy Show dismisses confusions with ‘Design for Art’s Sake’ by working to inform the participants in exhibition, and by distinguishing a distinct motivation for the context of the work.

Things I Have Learnt In My Life So Far and The Happy Film/The Happy Show are integral exemplifiers of the ways in which Almeida and McCarthy’s models could be ‘open-ended, allowing for overlap, contextual reconsideration, and shifting relationships’. In some respects, Sagmeister transgresses from the presented models, and manipulates their application to their limits, forging an individual and entirely progressive model of professional graphic design practice that seamlessly integrates his personal self-set Projects by diffusion. In 1998, SVA launched the MFA Design: Designer as Author + Entrepreneur program, which endeavoured to provide an emphasis on content over form, and described itself as providing entry to the ‘next creative level’. It may come as no surprise that Sagmeister teaches on the course, and directs a module entitled ‘Can Design Touch Someone’s Heart’. His view to evolve design into a discipline that can communicate on similar levels to film, music, art, and literature, progresses design beyond the superficial modes of content delivery highlighted in Rock (2013). Sagmeister aims to bring the subjectivity of design to a wider audience. In Things I Have Learnt In My Life So Far he asserts his opinion that: ‘…design produced for designers–similar to music for musicians and art for artists–sadly insular and consequently boring.’ (Sagmeister, 2008:2) Perhaps it is the subjectivity infused within each of Sagmeister’s graphic design products that makes it resonate so pertinently to an audience, in comparison to the superficial facilitation of a client’s message. In Almeida and McCarthy (2002), they conclude that, despite fundamental differences in each of the modes proposed, the binding factor of each was that the graphic designer must ‘move towards an 16

increased level of commitment and responsibility with the message’s content’. This is reinforced by Steven Heller’s essay in Things I Have Learnt In My Life So far, which highlights that Sagmeister’s design simultaneously exemplifies and activates the notion that ‘design cannot be a neutral frame or decorative vessel but is an active ingredient in the comédie humaine, and indeed in humanity itself’. Sagmeister’s integration of his personal self-set work and his professional practice, have made him a prominent figure in the embodiment of graphic design authorship. His implementation of a diverse range of approaches to graphic design continues to progress and diversify the span of the discipline. While his professional practice is certainly an approach fuelled by design authorship methods, his all encompassing and subjective mode of graphic design would not be realised if it were not for his selfset projects and individual ambitions.

Chapter 4 Ji Lee Ji Lee is an accomplished graphic designer living and working in New York. Lee was born in Seoul, South Korea and raised in São Paolo, Brazil. In 1991, Lee moved to New York to study fine art at Parsons School of Design. Lee (2003) accounts that the fine art course did not allow him to communicate his ideas clearly, and instead placed focus on achieving a utopian romanticism, which was inherently attributed to the fine art practice at Parsons. Lee notes that art is often confined to the exclusive settings of galleries or museums, whereas design has a greater ability to communicate to the masses. While studying at Parsons, Lee worked on a range of self-set projects that, with further personal development, had an influential bearing on his future practice.

While at Parson School of Design, Lee created the Univers Rounded project, which started as experimentation into 3D software. The project consists of a typeface made from taking the existing letterforms of the typeface Univers, and rotating them 360 degree’s on an axis. What results is an alphabet of mostly illegible forms that are unrecognisable from their original starting point. Lee presents them in a range of formats diverse and innovative formats ranging from cityscapes, to replications of nursery rhymes. The project is reminiscent of Neville Brody’s type experiments published under Fuse and exemplified in Almeida and McCarthy (2002) as an example of their ‘Design for Art’s Sake’ model. Abbot Miller, who subsequently hired Lee to work at his studio Design/Writing/Research, saw the project. The move marked a series of chain reactions that led to Lee’s participation in the World Changing Ideas Award, held by world-renowned advertising agency Saatchi & Saatchi, and a career move to the said agency. The shift from a design agency to an advertising agency is a key factor in the changing modes of creative practice that Ji Lee experienced. The shift documents a move from being a facilitator, as highlighted in Rock (2013), to a mode of creativity orientated around the generation 18

of content highlighted in Alemeida and McCarthy (2002). The way in which Ji Lee differs to Stefan Sagmeister is that Lee’s self-set projects began as an addition to his professional practice informing it superficially and extrinsically. Sagmeister’s self-set projects provide a far more intrinsic value to his professional practice. More recently, in a lecture for Creative Mornings, which it must be highlighted is a self-set project of designer Tina Roth Eisenberg, Lee accounts the importance of integrating personal and professional practices, and the value of their consequent symbiotic relationship. This regards Sagmeister’s approach as a more admirable model to follow for a more integrated model of graphic authorship.

Lee’s most prominent self-set project comes in the form of The Bubble Project. The project was set up due to Lee’s frustration at the insular nature of the ad-agency– client relationship and the binding limits this imposed on creativity. What resulted was a series of white vinyl stickers in the shape of speech bubbles that were stuck over print advertisements in New York. In the hope to initiate public involvement, Lee left the speech bubbles blank providing a platform for communication. Over time, content was generated by the public that covered a diverse range of topics from socio-political messages, to abrupt degradations of the advertisement’s content. The project could be seen as a progressive mode of authorship that expands on, and exceeds, the ‘Design as Advocacy’ mode of authorship highlighted in Almeida and McCarthy (2002). Lee intricately manipulates and meanders through the traditional modes of design highlighted in Rock (2013) by acting as a facilitator, not for the authoritative client message but for a democratic user driven message, which results in a public dialogue. What sets The Bubble Project apart from any of Sagmeister’s aforementioned projects is Lee’s ability to generate a body of subjective and engaging work through employing an objective facilitation platform. The direction and dissemination of the project’s content to deliver a clear overarching message certifies The Bubble Project as a design piece. Furthermore, this overarching message exemplifies and ascends the project beyond the ‘Design For Art’s Sake’

model in Almeida and McCarthy (2002) and melds it with their proposed ‘Design as Advocacy’ model. In a similar way to Sagmeister’s The Happy Show/The Happy Film Lee manipulates conventional design platforms, in the form of a website and a book, in order to provide a wider context for his content, and the further involvement of the public.

In 2006, Lee became a creative director at Droga5, an influential and innovative advertising agency in New York. Lee (2011) notes, in his Creative Mornings lecture, that the success of the project, and its overriding philosophy, had a greater effect on his move to Droga5 than any of his previous professional engagements. Further to this, Lee notes that The Bubble Project acted as a precedent for a project he produced for Droga5: the advertising campaign for the New Museum of Contemporary Art employs a similar guerrilla strategy to The Bubble Project. Lee’s continued advocacy for a more innovative, honest, and human form of design for advertising led him to further career success at Google, as a creative director of Google Labs, and Facebook, the companies first creative director. His affiliation with Google and Facebook, both of which are platforms that rely on public involvement, could be seen as Almeida and McCarthy’s model of ‘Design as Advocacy’ where they highlight that a designer can perform a desired role within society by affiliating with associations with a similar ambition.

It is clear that Lee is a proponent of self-set projects as part of a progressive and individual rewarding graphic design practice. While, unlike Sagmeister, his projects do not integrate entirely into his professional practice, they play a large informative role in the progression of his professional graphic design career. His projects provide an enabling platform for his creative and critical thinking as a graphic designer, and allow him to affiliate his practice with like-minded individuals and associations. Lee currently lectures around the world advocating the transformative power of personal projects. In these lectures, Lee highlights the power of self-set projects that provide

platforms for public involvement. During the Creative Mornings breakfast lecture; Lee announced that he was working on a collaborative self-set project in the form of a web-tool that would prospectively allow him to become independent. This not only exemplifies and harmonises the ‘Entrepreneurial Opportunities’ and ‘Collaboration of Equals’ modes of authorship in Almeida and McCarthy (2002) but also marks the diffusion of his self-set projects into his full time professional practice.

Chapter 5 The Brief of the Individual Almeida and McCarthy (2002) highlight progressive modes of graphic design practice that see the individual designer playing a more integral role in the generation of content. Rock (2013) also acknowledges this in the opening of his essay Fuck Content where he notes: ‘We are envious of the power, social position and cachet that artists and authors seem to command. By declaring ourselves “designer/authors” we hope to garner similar respect. Our deep-seated anxiety has motivated a movement in design that values origination of content over manipulation of content.’ (Rock, 2013:92) However, Rock brings to light the superficialities of the graphic designer’s involvement in content origination and proceeds to discredit this mode of practice. Rock puts forward the notion that the growing tendency to be concerned with content is in the hope of attaining a greater respect for the profession. This statement carries a contradictory and insular message. The aforementioned work of Sagmeister and Lee carry messages that transcend the boundaries of traditional graphic design, and indeed, the limits of a client’s message. The self-set projects Sagmeister and Lee set, and their resulting authored approach to graphic design, is concerned with the positive effect that their work can have on society; they provide platforms for the dissemination of information, and platforms for public involvement. This affirms the point highlighted by Almeida and McCarthy (2002): ‘Rather than being an appendage to their regular activities, undertaken by a few highly motivated individuals or groups as an extension of their ordinary work, we see the desire on the part of many designers to include authorship as an integral, defining part of their daily practice.’ (Almeida and McCarthy, 2002) It is in the attention of content origination that self-set projects contribute to a

defining part of the graphic designer’s practice. O’Reilly dismisses the superficialities highlighted in Rock (2013) in place of a more resolute solution: ‘It’s about how the conflict of commerce and creativity is played out. And ultimately it’s about the existential brief they set themselves.’ (O’Reilly, 2002:9) This resolution is representative of approaches to the design profession played out by Sagmeister and Lee, and succeeds the notion of authorship put forward by Newark (2002), who notes that the driving force of authorship is the will of the designer to detach from their commercial clients. This statement is superficial in its definition of authorship, and is entirely incorrect in the examples of Sagmeister and Lee, who work in conjunction with like minded commercial enterprises in order to achieve their personal ambitions. Rock (2013) asserts that ‘authorship is not a very convincing metaphor for the activity we understand as design’. However, what is clear is that a designer’s individual application of the graphic design medium can consist of, and encompass, the modes of authorship highlighted in Almeida and McCarthy (2002). Self-set projects have the ability to provide a platform for an approach to design that acknowledges the perpetually shifting defines of the profession, and in some cases, satisfy the needs of the individual graphic designer creatively and financially. An authored approach to graphic design allows the individual graphic designer to apply his or her skills in a way that ultimately satisfies their existential ambitions. Whether they use these skills as a facilitator of content or an originator of content is the exclusive prerogative of the individual.

Conclusion It is evident that self-set projects have an integral influence on an authored approach to graphic design. While it can be concluded that graphic authorship is not the act of design itself, it is its role within the process of origination that verifies it as a progressive model for graphic design in the 21st Century. To reduce graphic authorship to a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;movementâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; in design is to relinquish the idea that it potentially provides new directions and roles for the graphic designers of the future. While an authored graphic design approach can be undertaken in addition to professional practice through the initiation of self-set projects, the designers of the future must endeavour to integrate such approaches into their professional practice by affiliation, collaboration, or entrepreneurial origination. The cases of Sagmeister and Lee highlight different executions of an authored approach to graphic design, implementing their self-set projects by integration and addition respectively. Graphic designers have the ability to infuse their professional practice with their own overriding philosophy. The debates surrounding graphic authorship, and its ephemeral incarnations, may never be entirely resolute. However, it can be assumed that graphic designers will continue to conduct self-set projects, and not only exceed their traditional modes of practice but reinvent them too. Graphic design proponents of self-set projects will continue to give lectures on the benefits of an authored approach to graphic design. Perhaps other academic institutions will follow the lead of the School Of Visual Artâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Design Authorship+Entrepreneur program, and formulate an exclusive graphic authorship curriculum, or infuse current programs with modules orientated on authorship. It is evident that the future provides a platform form for a progressive model of graphic design practice, and it is clear, from precedents, that initiating self-set projects allows for an innovative and authored mode of graphic design practice.

Images

MOMA. (2012) Tibor Kalman, [Online] Available at: http://www.moma.org/explore/inside_out/inside_ out/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Tibor-Kalman.jpg [Accessed: 6 January 2013]

First Issue Of COLORS Magazine (2011) [Online] Available at: http://barndivarestaurant.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/first_issue_of_colors_magazine3.jpg [Accessed: 6 January 2013]

The 10 - 1 - 4 (2013) [Online] Available at: http://buckartblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/7402-10-14.jpg [Accessed: 6 January 2013]

Barbara Kruger Shop (2013) (Online) Available at: http://frankkunstheden.files.wordpress. com/2013/08/barbara-kruger-shop.gif [Accessed: 6 January 2013]

Obey Icon High Res Copy (2006) [Online] Available at: http://ww1.prweb.com/ prfiles/2006/01/04/329121/ObeyIconhighrescopy.jpg [Accessed: 6 January]

CUL, I. (2013) IMG_0955-edit.jpg, [Online] Available at: http://iancul.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/ IMG_0955-edit.jpg [Accessed: 11 November]

CUL, I. (2013) IMG_0402-edit.jpg, [Online] Available at: http://iancul.com/wp-content/ uploads/2013/06/21-IMG_0402-edit.jpg [Accessed: 11 November]

LEE, J. (2013) SHIP, HOTEL, CASINO, ROCKET, POLICE, GENERATOR, ROBOT, BANK, etc. [Online] Available at: http://pleaseenjoy.com/projects/personal/univers-revolved/#image280 [Accessed: 11 November]

LEE, J. (2013) I STEAL MUSIC AND Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;M NOT GOING AWAY [Online] Available at: http:// pleaseenjoy.com/projects/personal/bubble-project/#image233 [Accessed: 11 November]

LEE, J. (2013) TRADE ONE EXPLOITATION FOR ANOTHER? [Online] Available at: http://pleaseenjoy.com/projects/personal/bubble-project/#image304 [Accessed: 11 November]

SAGMEISTER, S. (2008) Things I Have Learnt In My Life So Far, Hong Kong: Abrams

SAGMEISTER, S. (2013) The Happy Show [Online] Available at: http://www.sagmeisterwalsh.com/ work/project/the-happy-show/ [Accessed: 6 January]

Bibliography Books

BIERUT, M., DRENTTLE, W., HELLER, S. and HOLLAND, DK. (1994) Looking Closer: Critical Writings On Graphic Design, New York: Allworth Press

BIERUT, M., DRENTTLE, W., HELLER, S. and HOLLAND, DK. (1997) Looking Closer 2: Critical Writings On Graphic Design, NewYork: Allworth Press

BIERUT, M., DRENTTLE, W., HELLER, S. and HOLLAND, DK. (2002) Looking Closer 4 : Critical Writings On Graphic Design, New York: Allworth Press

DOUGHER, S. and PLAZM. (2005) 100 Habits Of Successful Graphic Designers, Massachusetts: Rockport

HALL, P. (2001) SAGMEISTER, London: Booth Clibborn Editions

MCCARTHY, S. (2013) The Designer As: Author, Producer, Activist, Entrepreneur, Curator & Collaborator | New Models For Communicating, Amsterdam: BIS Publishing

NEWARK, Q. (2002) What Is Graphic Design?, Switzerland: Rotovision

NOBLE, I. and BESTLEY, R. Visual Research, Switzerland: AVA Publishing

OLDHAM, C. (2012) The Democratic Lecture, United Kingdom: Unified Theory Of Everything

O’REILLY, J. (2002) No Brief: Graphic Designers’ Personal Projects, Switzerland: Rotovision

ROCK, M. (2013) Multiple Signatures, New York: Rizzoli International Publications

POYNOR, R. (2003) No More Rules: Graphic Design and Postmodernism, London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd

SAGMEISTER, S. (2008) Things I Have Learnt In My Life So Far, Hong Kong: Abrams

SHAUGHNESSY, A. (2005) How To Be A Graphic Designer Without Losing Your Soul, United Kingdom: Laurence King Publishing Ltd

SHAUGNESSY, A. (2009) Graphic Design: A User’s Manual., London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd

WARD, C. (2012) Popular Lies About Graphic Design, Barcelona/New York: Actar

Online Sources

ASBURY, N. (2012) Creatively Reviewed, [Online] Available at: http:// asburyandasbury.typepad.com/blog/2013/09/creatively-reviewed.html [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

ASBURY, N. (2013) After Hours: Setting Problems, Rules and Limits, [Online] Available at: http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2013/june/after-hours-show [Accessed: 10 September]

BARTHES, R. (1967) The Death Of The Author, [Online] Available at: http://www. tbook.constantvzw.org/wp-content/death_authorbarthes.pdf [Accessed 2 December]

BASFORD, J. (2012) The Importance Of Self Initiated Work, [Online] Available at: http://www.johannabasford.com/blog-article/330 [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

BELISLE, A. (2013) this is tomorrow - Jerwood Encounters: After Hours [Online] Available at: http://www.thisistomorrow.info/viewArticle. aspx?artId=1847&Title=Jerwood%20Encounters:%20After%20Hours [Accessed: 30 December]

DE ALMEIDA, C. and MCCARTHY, S. Designer as Author: Diffusion or Differentiation?, [Online] Available at: http://lokidesign.net/declarations/knowledge/ DA-DD.pdf [Accessed: 10 September]

DESIGN MUSEUM. (2013) Stefan Sagmeister / Design Museum Collection : Design/Designer Information, [Online] Available at: http://designmuseum.org/design/ stefan-sagmeister [Accessed: 10 September]

FILI, L. (2011) The Great Discontent: Louise Fili, [Online] Available at: http:// thegreatdiscontent.com/louise-fili [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

HELLER, S. (2014) AIGA | Stefan Sagmeister, [Online] Available at: http://www.aiga. org/medalist-stefan-sagmeister/ [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

ICA. (2013) Stefan Sagmeister: The Happy Show - ICA - Institute of Contemporary Art - Philadelphia, PA, [Online] Available at: http://www.icaphila.org/exhibitions/ happyshow.php [Accessed: 10 September]

JERWOOD VISUAL ARTS. (2013) Jerwood Encounters: After Hours | Jerwood Encounters | Jerwood Visual Arts [Online] Available at: http://jerwoodvisualarts.org/ jerwood-encounter [Accessed: 30 December]

KONIG, E. (2012) Working At/With/For Hort, [Online] Available at: http://www.hort.org. uk/1 [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

LEE, J. (2003) Univers Revolved by Ji Lee, [Online] Available at: http:// universrevolved.com [Accessed: December 30]

LUPTON, E. (2004) Designer As Producer, [Online] Available at: https://www. typotheque.com/articles/the_designer_as_producer [Accessed: 10 September]

MCWILLIAM, T. (2013) The After Hours Exhibition, [Online] Available at: http://www. johnstonworks.com/newswire/review/after-hours-â&#x20AC;&#x201C;-jerwood-space [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

MONTGOMERY, A. (2013) So What Do You Do In Your Spare Time, [Online] Available at: http://www.designweek.co.uk/whats-on/so-what-do-you-do-in-yourspare-time/3036417.article [Accessed: 10 September]

MONTGOMERY, A. (2013) Working It Out, [Online] Available at: http://www. designweek.co.uk/editors-view/working-it-out/3036478.article [Accessed: 10 September]

POYNOR, R. (1996) Eye Magazine | Opinion | Editorial Eye 20, [Online] Available at: http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/editorial-eye-20 [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

POYNER, R. (2002) A Designer And A One Man Band, [Online] Available at: http:// www.eyemagazine.com/feature/article/a-designer-and-a-one-man-band [Accessed: 2 December]

POYNOR, R. (2008) Eye Magazine | Opinion | Portrait of the designer as author, [Online] Available at: http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/portrait-of-thedesigner-as-author [Accessed: 10 September] RAHNAMA, M. (2011) The inspiration of an occupied hotel room, [Online] Available at: http://www.labkultur.tv/en/blog/inspiration-occupied-hotel-room [Accessed: 10 November]

SAGMEISTER, S. (2013) The Happy Film, [Online] Available at: http://thehappyfilm. org [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

SINCLAIR, M. (2009) Me, Myself and I, [Online] Available at: http://www. creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2009/january/me-myself-and-i [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

SVA. (2014) MFA Design | School Of Visual Arts, [Online] Available at: http://design. sva.edu [Accessed: 10 September 2013]

Online Video Lectures

Creative Mornings. (2011) 2011/03 Ji Lee, [Online] Available at: http://vimeo. com/22751666 [Accessed: 3 December]

Design Indaba. (2013) Stefan Sagmeister: Bring the personal and the human into design, [Online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih6hCmlkNLA [Accessed: 3 December]

Github. (2013) GitHub Presents • Passion Projects (Live) #5 • Jessica Hische (Procrastiworking), [Online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=RZbqJxQJ5LY [Accessed: 3 December]

Jerwood Charitable Foundation. (2013) Jerwood Encounters: After Hours. Monday 10 June 2013 - A series of Pecha Kucha talks, [Online] Available at: http://vimeo. com/68683803 [Accessed: 3 December]

Redactie Emerce. (2008) Ji Lee (Facebook) at Emerce eDay 2013., [Online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RaNDapKNho [Accessed: 3 December]

SPD Scuola Politecnica di Design. (2010) DESIGNTALKS - Lecture “Transformative power of personal projects” - Ji Lee., [Online] Available at: http://vimeo.com/11612425 [Accessed: 3 December]

Swiss Miss. (2012) FOWD Talk 2011: The Power of Side Projects and Eccentric Aunts, [Online] Available at: http://vimeo.com/34569711 [Accessed: 3 December]

TED Conferences, LLC. (2009) Stefan Sagmeister: The power of time off, [Online] Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/stefan_sagmeister_the_power_of_time_off.html [Accessed: 3 December]

TED Conferences, LLC. (2011) Stefan Sagmeister: 7 rules for making more happiness, [Online] Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/stefan_sagmeister_7_ rules_for_making_more_happiness.html [Accessed: 3 December]

TED Conferences, LLC. (2008) Stefan Sagmeister: Designing with slogans, [Online] Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/stefan_sagmeister_on_what_he_has_learned. html [Accessed: 3 December]

TED Conferences, LLC. (2007) Stefan Sagmeister: Happiness by design, [Online] Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/stefan_sagmeister_shares_happy_design.html [Accessed: 3 December]

UM Stamps. (2012) Stefan Sagmeister: Design and Happiness, [Online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzPVe2D0kYM [Accessed: 3 December]

Walker Art Center. (2011) Ellen Lupton, [Online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=6u0_K6t8wUE [Accessed: 3 December]

Appendices

Designer As Author (2013) [Online] Available at: https://pro2.unibz.it/projects/blogs/camuffo-exhibitingcurating/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/designer-as-author-McCarthy.jpg [Accessed: 6 January]

Designer as author: voices and visions was an exhibition on design authorship in 1995. The exhibition was curated by Christina De Almeida and Steven McCarthy. The exhibition aimed to find out the current state of design authorship in the early 90â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, and was specifically concerned with the designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s involvement with the written text of a graphic design project. The exhibition did not aim to disect the term authorship but was to provide a starting point for further debate and speculation on the subject that was in emergence toward the latter end of post-modernism. The exhibition curators ultimately wrote the speculative essay Designer As Author: Diffusion or Differentiation.

Swiss Miss (2013) [Online] Available at: http://www.swiss-miss.com [Accessed: 6 January]

Swiss Miss is the alias of Tina Roth Eisenberg. Eisenberg is heavily involved in the advocation of self-set projects. Swiss Miss, which was initially her personal blog, is now her part time job and a massively influential blog in the sphere of graphic design. In addition to the running of the blog, Eisenberg runs the Tattly, a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;designyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; temporary tattoo site, and Creative Mornings, which is a breakfast lecture series that runs all over the world. Eisenberg has run her own graphic design practice, and was unsatisfied with her career. She has chosen to pursue her self-set side projects full time.

40 Days of Dating (2013) [Online] Available at: http://fortydaysofdating.com [Accessed: 6 January] 40 Days of Dating is a dating experiment from designers Jessica Walsh and Timothy Goodman. The experiment was released as a daily questionnaire for 40 days that was released one day at a time. The art work for each day was generated by individual graphic designers. Some of the contributors were Anthony Burrill, Stefan Sagmeister, and Mike Perry. The website was notoriously well covered in graphic design circles, and even reached conventional news outlets like the BBC and CBS. Consequently the rights to the story have been bought by Warner Broâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and the story of the experiment will be made into a film.

OBEY (2013) [Online] Available at: http://fortydaysofdating.com [Accessed: 6 January]

OBEY is a brand built by Shepard Fairey, the graphic designer and artist. His brand began as self-expression through a self-set project. The project garnered cult status and has since been launched into a clothing brand, and an incredibly successful propaganda campaign. Utilising his interest in phenomenology, Fairey based a brand around a sarcastic imperative message. From the success of the brand, Fairey has been involved with Barack Obama presidential campaign, and also launched a series of media companies.

Multiple Signatures (2013) [Online] Available at: http://2x4.org/work/99/multiple-signatures-on-designers-authors-readers-and-users/ [Accessed: 6 January]

Multiple Signatures is a book by Michael Rock of international design studio 2 x 4. The book is a self-set project that highlights the studioâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s view points on graphic authorship. The book contains essays relating to the process involved in contemporary graphic design and referenceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s authorship and the surrounding design criticisms.

MFA Design (2013) [Online] Available at: http://design.sva.edu/mission/ [Accessed: 6 January]

The School of Visual Arts in New York launched a post-graduate qualification that was specifically aimed at the subject of graphic authorship and entrepreneurship. The course aims to transcend the traditional definitions of the graphic designer, and aims to provide alumni with a greater understanding and importance in the creation of content for visual media. Steven Heller, a notable art director, design critic, and writer, co-chairs the course. Stefan Sagmeister teaches a first year module called ‘Can Design Touch Someone’s Heart’, as well as Milton Glaser who teaches a class called ‘Design and Intentions’. A range of other modules are taught which are all focused on the content of the design product and the role of the indivdual who synthesizes it.

No Fly Posters (2013) [Online] Available at: http://noflyposters.com [Accessed: 6 January] No Fly Posters is a self-set graphic design curational project by designer Jon Bland. The poster re-appropriates the use of graphic design to highlight the irony of putting up No Fly Posters notices. The project has been covered on the website of major design journal Creative Review, amongst comissioning submissions from high profile graphic designers. Overleaf is an email interview with Jon Bland, the curator of the No Fly Posters project.

Interview With Jon Bland (2013) [Email]