Principles Before Style: Questions in Design History
Richard Hollis
Why do we teach design history? One important reason is that designers have to spend time not only thinking about their work, but also explaining their reasoning. And design history gives students the confidence to think and talk about graphic work without just saying, “I like it” or “It works.” Studying design history helps students find a language to talk about their work. If they have looked at a lot of other designs and asked the question, “What was the person who made it trying to do?” it may help them to answer the question, “What am I trying to do?”
In studying an individual piece of graphic art we can learn a lot by asking questions. The questions can be about three basic aspects of visual communication:
1. Social questions: Who made it? Who was it made for? Why? Where? When?
2. Technical questions: How was it made? What tools and materials were used? If printed, what were the processes, the mechanics, or the chemistry?
3. Aesthetic questions: What was the cultural environment? The current fashion or influence on style?
Then we can ask, “What functional category of graphics does this piece of work belong to? What is it meant to do? What is it designed to do?”
1. To identify? To say who or what something is, whom it belongs to or where it comes from? Is it a kind of label?
2. To inform or instruct? To say where one thing is in relation to another, to show position, scale and sequence?
3. To present and promote? To draw attention to something?
4. To direct? To say where something is—over here, over there, here!?
5. To demand a response or action? This may be added to the other questions.
And the piece under scrutiny may have more than one function, and may suggest other questions.
The next question is, if the task of graphic design is to communicate, how does this piece of work communicate? What form does its message take? How is it encoded?
There are two obvious problems in finding answers. First, there is usually only the evidence in front of our eyes, and this is likely to be some form of reproduction rather than the original. Second, we usually can’t talk to the people who made it or used it. So this demands some intelligent guesswork and imagination.
— — —
In addition to developing a vocabulary with which to talk about the meaning, context, and impact of a graphic design, another reason for learning something about graphic design history is to establish values. If we are looking at and talking about a particular piece of work, we should be able to answer the question, “Why it is worth looking at?” Any discussion will entail finding a vocabulary and language that everyone understands. (This will vary according to who is looking at and talking about the work. It doesn’t matter if the language is straightforward and based on the traditional language of the studio, or if it is technical—say, from semiotics—as long as everyone understands the terms being used.
Next, history helps deal with questions of style. Such questions solve themselves in actual design practice, but not so easily in the design school studio.
— — —
This brings us to the question of sequence in learning about history. Should it be chronological? The difficulty, if you begin with early cultures, is that you need, ideally, to understand that culture. But design history is not anthropology. If students look at how certain ideas have been conveyed, at different times and different places, it can be easier to grasp some of the principles of visual communication.
Some of the useful aspects that can be examined in the past and the present are:
• The use of the human figure—the head, facial expression, gesture
• The use of signs—nonalphabetic signs, sign systems, alphabets—discussing the differences and similarities among pictograms, symbols, emblems, and logos
• The use of graphic surprise, scale, or unexpected metaphor to grab attention and make items memorable
• The use of text and image together—how they make and change meaning
• The use of illustration and photography to extend the meaning of the text, to substitute for it, or to record an appearance or an event
• The use of maps, charts, and diagrams
• The effect of changes in technology
— — —
There is always a contemporary equivalent to a historical example.
There is no doubting the value of history. Eyes and brains have worked the same way over generations. The environment changes but the principles of visual communication survive. History helps us understand these principles. Principles come before style.