Interact1 and Communicate - conflicting territory.
Interact1 is a showcase of contemporary interactive work originally exhibited at London College of Communication, University of the Arts London, and designed to complement the Communicate: British Independent Graphic Design since the Sixties exhibition at the Barbican (16 Sep 04- 23 Jan 05). Both can be seen to share a common theme on the role of communication and graphic design; the latter starts in the 1960s whilst the former is firmly placed within current investigations into the rolesgraphic design plays in communication. Interact1 provided an exhibition and symposia to encourage discussion and act as a catalyst for future debate - but, the two exhibitions share an uneasy relationship; it was more than the river Thames that separated the two events. The Barbican show, safely ensconced in Chamberlin's 1960s complex of social housing provides a cerebral, reflective context for the development of graphics whilst at LCC the show felt more exposed, spread out in the new extension to the austere modernist structure of the old LCP campus building at the Elephant and Castle, London. Interact1 provided a more organic, performative - communication in progress - showcase of current ideas.
The Barbican show provides further evidence of graphic design’s acceptance into the international art circuit - taking its place along side Harley Davidsons, Armani, Lichtenstein et al. There is an irony to the fact that as countless artists try to free themselves from the gallery - both physically and mentally - graphic design, advertising and the the world of haute couture are all trying to pass from the streets to the interior of the art world; an enclosed environment which has been continually contested and debunked by a chain of avant-gardism for a hundred years or more. The Barbican show tries to provide a GPS reading for the position of graphic design within this circuit of institutional visual culture whereas the LCC exhibition is more local, everyday in its intentions, but no less internationally resonant - providing a snap shot of many of the debates that inform today’s visual culture.
The LCC show brought together established practitioners, graduates and final year students and, alongside the exhibited work was a variety of talks aimed at people involved in education and practice. Whereas the Barbican show is, essentially, one mans take on the history of Graphic Design, Interact1 was collaborative, without a single vision - where established figures from design acted as both mentor and curator and within this mix the exhibits materialised. Much of the work on view displayed a pare down vision of interactivity. A good example was the exhibit by Nic Mulvaney, Fudge, which, in essence, distilled the elements of type design into the simple manipulation of a single well engineered oversized alloy control-knob mounted on a waist high pedestal. The user can control a typeface that is projected on a screen in front of them and, in real time, manipulate the type via a straightforward menu of effects, which can be applied with a simple twist and a click.
Was there a coherent theme to Interact1? The exhibition reflects the current changes to graphic design as both a discipline and a language to mirror and communicate our lives. Today, it has become a cliché to talk of how we are bombarded by images and the effect they have on the way we imagine and create our experience of the world. What do you do when the world is full of images; beautiful, shocking, ugly, true, false etc etc. There is an increasing sense that an image-dominated world leads to a less ‘real’ existence once the simulacrum is punctured, exposed and simply seen as two-dimensional. As a form of communication, graphic design has to engage with this new visual turn and, along side the ‘traditional’ outputs of corporate, editorial and increasingly web design, a more visceral, tactile design is needed to create experiential rather than simply representational work - much of the work on show reflects this change or at least engages with the need to develop image beyond the two dimensional. This move towards the tactile is seen in the exhibit by Rebecca and Mike, both sophisticated multi-media designers but chose to exhibit ‘xylophone doorbell’ in essence a child’s multicoloured toy xylophone mounted on a door. It is a playful statement but in the world of CCTV, video entry phones and digital technology, it reunites us with the simple pleasures of visiting a friend, family etc…
A second theme, equally important to the discipline, is the move away from the problematic relationship that has haunted graphic design since the original First Things First manifesto in the 60s; that of client/practitioner, for many of the exhibitors’ the client/practitioner relationship is less material to how they work. Now, countless designers create their own market, working with both sub cultures and main (corporate) cultures in an apparently seamless way - The Light Surgeons, who participated in the interact1 show, are a good example of this phenomenon. This fluidity in client/sponsor reflects an equal fluidity of definition and output - increasingly the role of graphic design is multi disciplinary. This, of course, is not completely new, historically The Bauhaus encouraged a multi disciplinary approach and, closer to home, pure economics has forced many into ‘branching out’ beyond pure graphics. The difference now is, we would argue, graphic design is used as a methodology across different design disciplines; J. Abbott Miller, a partner at Pentagram and a advocate of this approach comments; “Graphic designers should be encouraged to ignore the boxes that ‘this is graphic design,’ ‘this is furniture design’ etc. We need to allow ourselves to move into 3-D environments. It looks different when graphic designers do it. Why can’t we join in?”
The first symposium was a fairly lively affair (note to organiser’s: do not put on a symposium when there is a free bar next door!) The panel was representative mix taken from publishing, journalism, private practice and the public sector. Each provided a broad introduction to their position on graphic design today and the role of interactivity - the debate was opened up to the audience where, led by a small coterie in the front row, some useful discussion flowed (if not always following the chair’s prepared route) Key points arising were; what should good graphic design aim to be? a new democracy of design led by web design and graphic design discourse itself. Just as the Fudge installation reduced the interface down to a single thing; the adjective for good graphic design was crystallised, by one commentator as ‘sexy’. Ignoring the problematics of the term, if you google ‘sexy’ you will experience the array of meanings! It does capture the physicality of Interact1 - and reiterates the theme of experience running throughout the show from the lo-fi insulation of sound and video image by LCC graduate Eyal Burstein to the Drum and Bass influenced ‘sound tracings’ of another exhibit.
A further comment during the evening alluded to the developing ‘industry’ based on talking about graphic design as apposed to producing- there is a truism here but equally we need to look at who, where and how the talking is taking place. The interactive1 symposium is an example of this burgeoning industry - but often during the evening, both panel members and audience, addressed each-other on a first name basis; a reflection of the often enclosed world of graphic design/education - graphic design needs to be able to address a much wider audience. The Barbican show, as already alluded to, is not addressing those who have already ‘seen the light’ but a much wider audience who will consume graphic design in the same way they might consume any art show - and expect the same rigour in intellectual engagement on the part of the work. Product design had a similar experience when, in the late 70s/1980s, it found itself catapulted to the front row of visual culture - family firms like Alessi or the design group Memphis becoming the iconographic representation for a whole generation of designers. There work entering the market to be consumed by an increasingly knowledgeable consumer, who themselves had been educated by the associated industry of design discourse; books, exhibitions, art magazines etc and now, many of whom, sleep cosseted in a Phillipe Starke hotel room across the world, an axis of design from New York to London. For many in graphic design including those participating in Interact1, this fate should be avoided at all cost. But with the advent of ‘visual culture’ in both education and the media - comes a democracy of the image, where in the matrix of international art logistics a crate holding an original Jamie Reid “Never Mind the Bollocks” will share airfreight space with a Wassily or a DeKooning on the way to the next Art blockbuster.
The term ‘visual culture’ may become the Tony Blair of the art establishment; promises much but is perceived to deliver little. But, for now, graphic design enters into this sphere - the Barbican show introduces design as a ‘thing’ to be consumed as one more aesthetic artefact and, equal to the task, interactive1 shows graphic design well prepared to engage with an ever more knowledgeable public.