0
1
0
0
0
0
0
I consider myself a fairly conscientious consumer (but I recognize I am still a consumer, after all). I am passionate specifically about food politics, and how our food systems affect our own health, environment, and the well-being of people across the globe. I buy locally, eat ethically produced food products, and make a conscious effort to reduce my impact on the world around me. I buy used items at thrift stores. I minimize my use of “disposable” items by drinking coffee from my own mug, water from a reusable bottle, etc.
That being said, I recognize that a big part of my job as a commercial graphic designer is to fuel the consumer economy. I design ads to sell client products and services. I design magazines and newspapers and websites that exist because of advertising revenue. I design logos and brandmarks that help to establish a brand identity for companies that sell products and services. My clients love me for it. My bank account exists because of it. This is all a good thing, right?
As part of my ongoing education as an artist and designer, I am currently taking a “History of Graphic Design” class at the university. I’m really enjoying gaining a deeper understanding of my profession and its deep social, political and artistic roots. Yesterday we watched the video below, which I had seen before (it was made a while ago) but enjoyed watching again. It’s worth watching and thinking about if you haven’t seen it:
Some of this information I was well aware of, but like most consumers I am able to conveniently ignore it in my everyday life. But what’s more pertinent is that I hadn’t really considered my role in this system as a designer.
Graphic design has a long and proud history of affecting social change, and its artistic intent has often been to be a vehicle for radical progress. Artists like John Heartfield are prime examples of this tradition. But there is a more mundane, more practical side to design within which most of us make our living. Instead of affecting change, we reinforce the status quo. We might produce clever, beautiful, informed designs, but ultimately our commercial work fuels consumerism.
I’ve decided I have no problem with this on the level at which I am involved. My clients are all small- to medium-sized, local companies and institutions. They are not contributing to the McWorld syndrome, nor are they exploiting women in maquiladoras. So I guess my work exists somewhere in the grey zone.
I can say, however, that I would not feel good about being a designer for Nike or McDonald’s or Wal-Mart or any other multinational featured in the film, even if the offered salary was astronomical.
How about you? What do you think about the film, about advertising, and about our role in the system as designers?
0100000
