COP3: Seminar 1

Graphic Design in the real world?

What is the main argument of the article? 

- Moving away from commercial design for economic gain to a more socially driven and conscious design which lets the consumer create or take information subjectively. The usage of persuasive tactics in "design activism" which is much closer to commercial advertising in comparison to design for information which lets consumers take more control about the information that they are exposed to.

What is the main theoretical framework for the article?

- Usage of key designers theories in their own books e.g. Victor Papanek's "Design for the World" and how "designers should be advocates for users".
-Thomas Markussen "representing design's central role in promoting social change, raising awareness about values and beliefs"

What types of design do they critique?

- Graphic designs that are create to create certain responses from the readers e.g. persuasive and designs which vary in relation to the theory that they are talking about in order to compare and contrast how they relate or prove their point in the argument.

What might you as a designer take from this?

- Reading the article, I can take away the way in which different perspectives and view about design activism is approached and analysed in a very objective way, which is supported by various theories and arguments that are referenced from other designers work within the topic. The use of differing designs which were used to support and argue the theories are also effective-

The Graphic Thing?

What is thingness as it relates to Graphic Design?

- Thingness is the process of how we construct meanings through mental processes rather than from meaning that are already derived from human comprehension or shared meaning. 

What is the main argument? What can graphic designers take from the research?

- Things and objects are opposites. Rather than having a physical form like 'objects', 'things' are processes that we go through, whereas objects are familiar to us and evades the processes that comes with 'thingness'. 'Thingness' and the idea of familiarity and unfamiliarity in relation to Graphic Design affects how we as designers can use these 'experience of thingness' to highlight or give attention to designs in order to give them new meaning. Jones embarks on a philosophical and scientific approach to his arguments about thingness and starts to use graphic design examples in order to prove how graphic design evades the meaning making process. 

Can you identify a coherent theoretical framework in the article?

-  There isn't quite a coherent theoretical framework for Jone's arguments as it almost seems too far fetched in a way, and how he feels the need to approach and understand 'thingness' in such a philosophical and complicated manner e.g. embodied realism, neurological reasons etc. 

The Future of Print Design Relies on Interaction

How does this research article differ from the previous two?

- It has a practical project built in to the research and is less critical but more informative and more of a discussion. 

What is the main aim or argument of the research?

- It discusses how user participation has an effect in a graphic designers conception level of a project. They suggest that there are limitation in interaction with printed matter as the users are only expected to consume the final object or that the printed matter already have a pre-conceived action that the consumer is expected to do. 

- How interaction with printed matter can be 'improved' with inferences of user interaction with digital media.

Does the author utilise the theoretical framework?

- There is no theoretical framework that's been used by the author, rather they discuss and describe Print design and it's uses. They also create their own project as a design reference and example to support their claims and derive from in order to create their conclusion.