Interpreting a Text - Essay Example

Running Head: INTERPRETING A TEXT Interpreting a Text [The of the Assignment here] [The of the will appear here] [The of the writer id will appear here] [The name of the course will appear here] [The name of the Programme Title, Module Number and Title will appear here] [Submission Date] [The name of the tutor’s full name will appear here] Introduction Andy Hamilton in the ‘Aesthetes of Design’ puts forward the view that design is the combination of a practicality and aesthesis. Hamilton in his article puts forward a variety of opinions by various writers on what constitutes design. His argument mainly revolves on whether design without aesthetes is design at all and whether design without a useful purpose is design. This piece of writing is a chapter from the book, ‘Fashion: Philosophy for Everyone.’ In this paper, the above mentioned piece of writing would be interpreted in the light of the views of other writers. Hamilton’s Text Discussion Hamilton in his text is trying to come forth with a reasonable definition of design. Design, like art, is an abstract term. It has different meanings for different people. According to Hamilton, ‘design has the dual purpose of solving functional problems, and improving the look or feel of the product through style, decoration or embellishment.’ (Hamilton, 2011:62). Hamilton discounts consumerism as an element of design and argues that design is not created keeping in mind the consumer but is created keeping in mind the aesthetics of the product. Thus, according to Hamilton, practical common use objects such as duct tapes are not designed products. Hamilton believes that design, without the above mentioned two elements cannot be considered as design. Design needs to have a functional purpose; such as the purpose accomplished by hair dryers. A hair dryer can be considered as a design but for it to be considered as design; it should be aesthetically pleasing as well. As such, industrial machines that are bulky and are not meant to be beautiful cannot be categorized as design in the mind of Hamilton. However, one can argue against this claim put forward by Hamilton. It is not always that design is beautiful or aesthetically pleasing. If this was so, posters of Dada Art would not be considered design and should not be taught as part of the design curriculum. Similarly, a beautiful piece of art is not design if it is useless. Design should be created as a result of problem solving. A piece that has only aesthetic element would not be design in the view of Hamilton. Hamilton, in his article, also sheds light on the opinion of Pye who held the view that adding beauty to an object is useless work. According to Pye, aesthetics is useless work and actually detracts from the whole purpose of the object. Another claim put forward by Hamilton in his text is that design is not a response of what the consumer needs. Here Hamilton gives the example of goods that are not mass produced and where created purely for the purpose of solving problems or to apply to already invented applications. Hamilton further argues that certain designers before the advent of consumerism produced design for the purpose of pleasing Gods. They had no intention of serving the people. Would then such pieces of design not be labeled as design? This leads us to the next argument given forth by Hamilton where he claims that design was not created after the advent of the industrial revolution as Grove Dictionary of Art defines design. Hamilton, rather argues, that though the profession of designer was named after the industrial revolution but design continued to exist before that since the Neolithic Ages where weapons and other artifacts were created for solving problems as well as to be aesthetically pleasing. These designers were less professional and more self-conscious of the art that they produced. When Hamilton says that he does not believe that design is influenced by consumers, he does not mean that design is not linked to consumerism. What then is graphic design? Hamilton, here makes the distinction that design allows for consumerism in the sense that once a piece of work is problem solving and aesthetic, it attracts consumers to itself. A good piece of design thus leads to consumerism eventually. Hamilton, in the end, connects his entire argument to that of fashion. He comes forward here with the idea that fashion may not be conventionally problem solving. Fashion clothes, unlike clothes for specific professions and functions such as diving, are not meant to serve an ultimate function. But they do serve a function. Their function is to develop an identity. Fashion serves a social function. It can never take on an abstract form as the clothes designed by a fashion designer always should be wearable; wearable here refers to clothes taking the form of the human body to a great extent. A point worth mentioning here is that Hamilton fails to discuss important design principles that define who designers in this era perceive and create their designed pieces. One of such theories is the Gestalt Theory where the pioneers, Kurt Koffka, Wolfgang Kohler and Max Wertheimer, converted design into a science; a claim that is rejected by Hamilton. Since Hamilton’s Text was written after the development of the Gestalt Theory, it figures that Hamilton would have had a view about this theory that he did not incorporate in this text. Relating Hamilton’s Text to a Piece of Design Figure 1shows an illustration of a man whose hair is being shown as chains. This poster has been created by Chaz Maviyane Davis to depict the slavery prevalent for men of color and specifically those in Zimbabwe. The caption of the poster reads: ‘No one should be subjected to slavery or servitude’ (Maviyane, n.d). In this paper, we shall analyze this poster with respect to Hamilton’s text discussed above. The main argument put forth by Hamilton is that design is a combination of aesthetes and practicality. For a piece of design to be considered as design, it should be useful, that is, it should serve a purpose. Secondly, the design should not be without embellishments. If one is to consider the argument but forth by Hamilton, the poster by Maviyane does classify as a piece of design. However, Hamilton also argues that design attracts consumerism but design is not meant for consumer. Here, however, Hamilton’s claim is proved wrong. Firstly, this poster serves the purpose of shocking the readers into the conditions prevalent in South Africa. Most people are aware of the issue pertaining to the country. In this manner, the purpose of the poster is to inform the viewers about the condition in Zimbabwe and additionally about the UN Charter. However, unlike most graphic design posters, there is no call of action in this poster. This poster does not prompt the reader to take an action, as posters such as those of Aids do. The designer, here, fails to incorporate a call of action or rather the call of action is subtle. The call of action here is to change the perception of the people regarding South Africa. It shows to the government the autocracies they are committing. It serves to bring the plight of the oppressed to the people in power. In this regard, the designer has used the element of shock. Secondly, the poster also has aesthetic qualities. It uses a black man with prominent features. Some would argue that the poser is not aesthetically pleasing given the use of chains which revolts the viewer rather than pleasing them. Therefore, here one needs to dig deeper into the definition of aesthetics. Aesthetics as defined by Palmer and Dodson, 1996 involves using one’s subtle judgment to appeal to the viewer. Hamilton, when defining aesthetics in terms of design, refers to aesthetics as adding embellishments to the original purpose. In the case of this poster, the main purpose was to focus on the UN Right 4 and to inform viewers of the existence of this right. The designer, Maviyane used visual aid to make the poster aesthetically pleasing. If the purpose of this poster was to be just informing, Maviyane would only have used text to inform. Rather Maviyane depends greatly on visual aid of the black man with prominent features and chains for his curly hair to get the message across. Maviyane keeps the text quite simple and the poster is controlled by image itself. It would seem that the text is secondary to the image which brings one across to the words of Pye that Hamilton mentions in his text; specifically that most often embellishments in design detract from the purpose of the message. But here the aesthetics do not detract from the main purpose of the message but rather bring it into full focus. A reader may well forget the message or may not notice it altogether but he would never forget the image that the designer used. Thus the image rather forces the viewer to accept the message. Coming to the last point, Hamilton also claims the consumerism is not an essential part of design. Rather consumerism is an after effect of design. Good design attracts consumers to poster but they are not meant for the consumers all the time. This does not hold true for any piece of graphic design, be they poster or television advertisement. Posters, such as the one developed by Maviyane, are made keeping in mind the viewers who would be consuming the poster in the end. When Maviyane designed the posters, he wanted to bring a reaction from the people. Thus, when designing this piece of work, the designer kept in mind the consumer. He did not detach himself to produce just a piece of design, he wanted a reaction. Maviyane used an image since designers depend on visual aids as they capture the attention of the reader more easily when compared to plain text. Conclusion In conclusion, we could say that Hamilton has put forward a convincing argument of defining what design is really about. However, design is an abstract term quite unlike fashion and furniture design. It cannot be defined in such simple terms. What Hamilton fails to address is the growing awareness towards capturing the weird, and the grotesque. Fashion is no longer what looks good but also what explores another perspective of the situation and that may not always be pretty. The poster by Chaz Maviyance Davis serves an excellent point of example. Figures Figure 1 References Hamilton, A. 2011, ‘The Aesthetics of Design’, in Jessica Wolfendale and Jeannette Kennett (eds), Fashion Philosophy for Everyone: Thinking with Style, Oxford, Blackwell. Palmer, J. and Dodson, M. 1996, Design and Aesthetics: A Reader, New York: Routledge Maviyane, C. n.d,. Human Rights: UN Rights 4, [online] Available at [Accessed January 3, 2012] Read More