re-pub #02 June 2024
A curated collection of articles on design matters from a ‘design essentialist’ perspective. In this issue the essays span over a century. With contributions by Frederic W. Goudy, Beatrice Warde, Massimo Vignelli and Erik Spiekermann. At re-pub we thought an antidote was in order to counter the seemingly all-pervasive shoe-horning of political ideology into design practice, discourse and criticism.
To that effect, gathered here are writers whose work puts their belief in design as a positive social and cultural activity at the centre of their thinking.
As the title of this collection suggests, these articles are being given a deserved and necessary ‘second wind’ because all imply a call for writing about design to focus first on the craft of design as a necessary precondition to understanding the role of design and the designer, and more broadly the transformative potential and impact of design as we know it, on culture and society.
My introduction to re-pub #02
re-pub #02 is something of a deep-dive into the field of typographic design. That said, as a case study, it has a wider appeal to the field of design and culture. The essays span over a hundred years. From the first to the last, each is as relevant, and indeed revolutionary, today as when they were first written.
The names of all of the essayists here (Frederic W. Goudy, Beatrice Warde, Massimo Vignelli and Erik Spiekermann) will be known to today’s practitioners (if this is not the case then you need to read more) and should be known to future generations of graphic and typographic designers. But, even if one of these essayists should ‘drop-out’ of the design canon we can be sure that something has gone seriously wrong. If ‘canonical’ means anything, it should mean demonstrable ‘impact’ – within and beyond the discipline. We don’t pick our heroes; they make themselves known to us through their dedication to the craft of design. But more than that, they reach beyond the work itself into broader culture. The public has their say too, through their engagement, enjoyment and continued use of the work, whether it be products, brands, magazines, copywriting or wayfinding systems.
Of course, ‘craft’ is not only about ‘making’, it is as much about an approach to the discipline that is skills and knowledge-based, studious, precise, alongside a commitment to those it serves. A craft approach recognises the need for a continuous refinement of practice. It understands change while at the same time recognising the importance of the best of us, historically and contemporaneously. One without the other will likely lead to a narrow understanding of the role and purpose of design and put designers at the mercy of ideological grifters.
Today, in some elite quarters, the idea of the design canon is wildly (or wilfully?) misunderstood. Too many designers think that the design canon is determined by designers and academics, irrespective of impact. The notion that superficial ‘features’, that have nothing to do with design (race, gender or sexual orientation or identity), yet should determine who is to be ‘included’ in the canon is antithetical to the spirit and practice of design.
The myth of the ‘erased’ or ‘excluded’ is now common currency among elitists in designland. Grievance has replaced the celebration of the universal. The call to ‘decolonise the canon’ is legitimising the actual erasure of canonical works and individuals. You either make an impact or you don’t. It is as self-evident as that. Canonical works and individuals are valued and celebrated for their impact on the design field. Because the importance of their work points to the fundamentals of design – the universal, a shared, common language that we all understand and benefit from. All else is ideological position-mongering, the antithesis of the design essentialism our industry needs to survive and prosper – an appreciation of design from a craft perspective.
All the writers present here are assured of their place in graphic design history. And for good reason – their commitment to the craft of design, in their writing and through their work, has transformed our understanding of design and typography.
There is a poetic beauty to be enjoyed when we consider that all – Goudy, Warde, Vignelli and Spiekermann – could have held hands, one to the next, spanning over a century. It is a perfect illustration of the metaphor, ‘standing on the shoulders of giants’.
Similarly, Spiekermann takes the title of his book, Stop Stealing Sheep & find out how type works, from a quote by Goudy. As he accepted an award for excellence in typography, Goudy declared that, ‘anyone who would letterspace black letter would steal sheep’. This too is an acknowledgement of our debt to the past, to tradition, that makes us better in the present.
Over 100 years ago Goudy, in his essay, ‘On Letter Design’, threw down a challenge to the industry, ‘We have reached the turning of the ways. If there is to be revision someone must lead. Letter design no longer lives as an artistic craft. To restore the craft to its original purity of intention and make it once more alive is to go back to the very foundations of typography.’ As Paul Shaw noted in his essay on Goudy, these words were nothing short of ‘revolutionary’, arguably they remain so today.
The practice and approach to design in our new century is also at a ‘turning of the ways’. Today, in the academy, in publishing, professional associations and cultural institutions, design is being recast as a tool for a social engineering project. The role of design and the designer is no longer in the service of the client and the public but is now instrumentalised in the service of an elite ideology.
For those of us intent on defending and highlighting the immense contribution that design has made, and continues to make, in society and culture – as opposed to those who are trashing the past – Goudy’s ‘foundational’ approach to design would be a good starting point.
Alex Cameron (June 2024)
If you have any suggestions or would like to submit your own work for republication, email alexcamerondesign@gmail.com
. . . . . . . . . .
Reel Around the Fountain
Comments