Task 5 Triangulation

Use the seminar texts discussed in last weeks session to write a short triangulated review of the First Things First manifesto (2000), published originally in AIGA Journal of Graphic Design, vol 17, No 2 (1999).

Make sure you use, and quote from, at least three texts in your critical analysis.


First Things First Manifesto 2000, most notably published by Adbusters, with help from journalist Rick Poyner  is an updated version of First Things First, originally published by Ken Garland in 1964.


Both manifestos discuss the cultural force of the media of advertising and how it has led to mass consumerism. 
In wanting to propose a reversal of priorities "in favor of more useful, lasting and democratic forms of communication" (Adbusters, 2000:P5) the manifestos both turn to the generative source of these impermanent products, the graphic designers.


The differences between the two include a more broader mention of the industries concerned from graphic designers, photographers and students in 1964 to graphic designers, art directors and visual communicators in 2000 noting a greater shift of concern to be held. Also the products that they perceive to be commercial have slightly moved on to products of more luxury from detergents and fizzy water in 1964 to diamonds and heavy-duty recreational vehicles in 2000. 


Rick Poyner argues that designers have grown uncomfortable with this view of design and that by encouraging this form of design we are endorsing commercialism so much so that it is having a docile body effect on our society. He goes on to argue that;"There are pursuits more worthy of our problem solving skills. Unprecedented environmental, social and cultural crises demand our attention." (Adbusters, 2000:P5) 
But I question that if such pursuits are made essential before others such as design of toothbrushes then surely we will begin to have stagnant design of day to day products and without innovative design of such regarded inessential products will society be ready and able to accept advances in wider universal issues?


Both however are leading to be critical of the Western commercial culture that is based on economic and political freedom which has enabled such signatory members the freedom to write such a manifesto and afford the luxury goods they deem inessential. An alternative society that they could be suggesting is the rejection of the Western capitalist society to that of  a communist regime where a single group choose the right to decide what is inessential. It is important that such groups consider not only what their first things first are but also the first things first of others whilst not ignoring the framework that has allowed them to speak so freely.


Michael Bierut, partner of design studio Pentagram and president of AIGA criticises the 33 signatory members of First Things First Manifesto 2000 as "...specialising in extraordinarily beautiful things for the cultural elite" (Bierut, 2007:P55) who thereby do not have the chore of reproducing the inessential products that they speak of as they have never been invited to and goes on further to say "A cynic, then, might dismiss the impact of the manifesto as no more than that of witnessing a group of eunuchs take a vow of chastity" (Bierut, 2007:P55) 


Bierut argues that Graphic Designers are in fact envious of the advertising the world; "Whereas the effect of design is secretly feared to be cosmetic, vague and unmeasurable, the impact of advertising on a clients bottom line has a ruthless clarity to it" (Bierut, 2007:P55). 
He seems to suggest that advertising appears to be offered more chance at subjective control than graphic design, where they come up with the big ad campaign and tag line to the clients message, and secondly they use a graphic designer to produce their ideas, leaving the designer, as Bierut puts it "...at the bottom of the pond" (Bierut, 2007:P55) Further suggesting that it is the advertiser that generally convinces the consumer to buy, not the graphic designer. 


Bierut argues further that whilst the manifesto criticises the design of inessential objects such as fountain pens and rubber flooring it is designers that have transformed these products and have made life that little bit easier for society. 
So he questions, what makes dog biscuit packaging an unworthy object of our attentions as to say some cultural project? Because to someone out there it is more important. (Bierut, 2007:P56)
In his final note he agrees with a statement made by Ken Garland; that we should aim to identify with our real clients; the public who may not be the ones who pay us but who are the final recipients of our work therefore they deserve a well designed dog biscuit package. (Bierut, 2007:P60)

Task 4 Annotation

Annotate a key page (or pages) of Adorno's (1954) essay 'How to Look At TV'. Your annotations should evidence that you have conducted a close critical reading of the text and show deep level understanding and an ability to relate Adorno's ideas to examples of contemporary TV. Underline and explain key vocabulary and critical terminology.