Tag: Graphic Communication

The first session of Myth-making in Art & Design expanded my ideas and thoughts about the way I work and approach design tasks. We began the session by examining Plato’s ‘Allegory of the Cave’, in which Plato argues we only see a shadow of the world – what those who hold the power of influence intend us to see – and that we must learn to look past this in order to fully understand what we see. This concept cemented the foundations of the study group, and my understanding is that Myth-making intends to provide us with the means to be look past this shadow and be more aware of the bigger picture – thus vastly improving the quality of our work as designers.

The session progressed into an examination of Roland Barthes’ ‘Death of the Author’ theory, where he insists that once an author or creator releases a piece of work they lose all control of its meaning, and whatever purpose or intentions the author had are made almost irrelevant – it becomes entirely up to us as the public to interpret it and set the meaning. Reflecting upon this idea, it seems almost obvious that this is true – everyone interprets objects, concepts and ideas differently depending on the context of their life, such as their age, where they live, what they’ve experienced. This theory proves Barthes’ to be a post-structuralist – someone who believes that everything we are presented with is constructed, and that we must learn to look beyond the constructions. I would argue that my discipline is post-structuralist, and that we as graphic designers must be completely aware that everything we produce will be viewed by a variety of audiences and interpreted differently. Thus, I think it’s almost necessary to be post-structuralist as an individual to fully understand my discipline.

Following this, we examined an essay by Barthes’ on the nature of plastic, and its ability to be anything and everything. Barthes’ believes plastic to be “the stuff of alchemy” – “the transmutation of matter” – and that its power lies in imitation as opposed to actual use. Though written in 1957, these concepts could still apply today as our world is still saturated in the unnatural material, and Barthes’ ideas on its malleability spawned several thoughts on my own discipline. Though in Graphic Communication we focus more on the visual nature of design as opposed to physicality, material is still something we must always consider in our practice – and plastic, though powerful and cheap, perhaps can be replaced with other natural materials that have the same effect.

Upon reflection, the session has expanded on my understanding of how I must approach my projects within Graphic Communication – everything I create will be interpreted differently depending on the context of who the audience is, where they are and what they have experienced. Though we will hold the power of influence, we must be aware of the polysemy of our discipline and use it responsibly within our ever-changing world. With that said, I’m looking forward to the sessions to come and hope that my understanding of my discipline continues to expand.

 

Sources:

Barthes, R., Plastic in ‘Mythologies’, Vintage, 2009, pp. 97-99