gordonated

Hero worshipping + a statement = a slight confusion

As a very young chap sometime ago, one of the first designers that injected a little interest in design is none other than Bob Gill. I bought “Graphic Design as a Second Language” book by chance. It made me drug high looking at it.

Being complimented by Paul Rand as one of Rand’s favourite designer, I’m sure Gill has something that we can learn from. Earning more than the Prime Minister (Harold Macmillan) himself at one point of time, he had a large impact on American graphic design till today, check out Sagmeister’s stuff to find out why! Even-tough he hailed from Brooklyn, NY, he had a lot to do with what we know as Pentagram now, Fletcher/ Forbes/ Gill back then.

On aspect of his work that I admire is always the ability to make a solution simple enough to understand out of a very complex problem. If you want to know why, you have to see some examples of his work. We are always bothered by the fact that we need to make something really neat,strictly grid-based minimalist and elegant looking designs to be called good designers and he comes and say:

” Look, there are no absolutes in design. Any rules or truths that you may have picked up about design, color, typography, balance, etc., are valid only if they help you accomplish what you wish. Otherwise, forget them”

What a very bold statement to say about design eh? The thing about statements like this is that they are definitely confusing and sets a preconception about how work should be done. Me, nonetheless, am a believer in his principles. It’s like saying don’t need all that. Its like saying you don’t need to be a junkie to do good design. Don’t need to learn about Bodoni to make a good design using it. Now, here is where the confusion comes in.

If you want to be a good designer, how much do you really need to know? Are all these things we learn or try to understand so hard applied at the end of the day? Or mere general knowledge?

For decades since the term graphic design exists, designers have been debating on what is good design. We look at the most copied styled designs as ‘superb’(with all due respect, I really admire those whose designs have influenced other designers and changed and set design trends around). We also look at carefully crafted designs as good designs. We look at designs that broke the barriers of technology as revolutionary. We look at Sagmeister’s 1999 AIGA talk poster and say this is design at its peak. We look at Meta and admire its use-abilities and label the same. Again, I must stress on my respect towards the names mentioned above, they’re all my hero’s!

Reading from Norman Potters book, ‘What is a Designer?‘, stated in chapter 3, about ‘What is good design?’:

“For the designer, good design is the generous and pertinent response to the full context of a design opportunity, whether large or small, and the quality of the outcome resides in a close and truthful correspondence between from and meaning” ( There are still other definitions and explanations through as well)

This made me think a little, speaking of good design then requires us to also speak of, from the conditions of our time, and our personal views on these. Then again, culture also has a lot to do with design. In advertising, design serves to re-enforce the ideas behind the concepts. Typography likewise, forms language on a spread. The grid forms a systematic way things are arranged and influences the way we read.

About being good, I believe it is always hard to find a fine-line between good and having fun. In certain cases yes, not all. Knowledge is essential but the motivations are always questioned. Questioning simple reasons even like “Why do you use blue instead of yellow?”.

An encounter with an article written by Shawn Wolfe, ‘What’s my motivation?’ (Emigre no. 64) challenged me. Besides our daily routines design jobs, what actually motivated us to take up our after work jobs, or what some call ‘things that are more fun’?

At Figtree we have a list of jobs we do to earn our salary and jobs that come with a more open brief allowing more personal freedom and creativity to be shown through. Sometimes, the amount of time spent on our corporate jobs exceeds the ones we do which allow more creative freedom. It’s pretty frustrating at times but somebodies got to do the job. At times, I work without any motivation just to finish a clean-up job, doesn’t make me lazy but saving creative-energy ( what a term..).

Back to the article, it was an article what questions about our motivation in design. Why do we want to do design mainly and Why we do a particular design in a certain way. Articulate rage.

I would say it’s not just to find pleasure upon a completed job or to pull down a pay check. A rage could be the need or desire to express talent in a useful way, that is loud and smart, and of course with the help of Apple Computers… And some help from some of the best typefaces around blended with experience and skill. On social responsibility maybe? I enjoy the challenge or trying very hard just to layout a spread creatively. Sometimes, it makes me want to bit my tongue but by understanding the longer you work, the better you get might just help you through another day.

I certainly do not take pleasure in long-winded projects, they just tend to make me loose the core idea and message behind the designs. Simple joys in selecting typefaces and upon completion of simple projects are always looked forward too. Be it a clean-up job or an annual report or complex identity system, the assurance that you can find simple rewards you gain from your work, is enough (very personalized) to get you through another day as a designer. Including me.

What is your motivation? Why do you do design? I’m sure its beyond our bad mathematics calculation skills (applies to some).