Catch-Up #8

Journal #8

Design Observer

“Type Means Never Having to Say You're Sorry” is an article about how the font Futura is overused and abused. The font, probably most famous from use with Wes Anderson, is everywhere. While I can’t necessarily identify too many fonts by quick glance, this is one I can now. I’m not entirely sure why everyone insists on using it either; It’s not an ugly font, it’s pretty simple and has a decent size family for multiple purpose use, but there’s nothing overly spectacular about it. Personally, when I find myself using too much of it, I switch to Gill Sans, although I know another popular alternative is Frutiger.

Ten Graphic Design Paradoxes-

The article has several interesting points, some I agree with, others I don’t.

1. There’s no such thing as bad clients: only bad designers. Yes and no. There are some real assholes out there. That’s all I’m really saying.

2. The best way to learn how to become a better graphic designer is to become a client. I can definitely see the point in this. It’s like taking a walk in someone else’s shoes. Although I do this more through looking at other people’s work and not really making other people do design work that I could do myself.

3. If we want to educate our clients about design, we must first educate ourselves about our clients. Regardless of who is educating who, if you’re working with someone, it’s always good to inform yourself first. I do this a lot before interviews so I know the ground I’m walking into.

4. If we want to make money as a graphic designer, we must concentrate on work – not the money. I think this is a good rule for any profession. You’re getting money from work, so do your work.

5. For designers, verbal skills are as important as visual skills. I can get onboard with this idea. Non-designers, especially people paying for design, are always curious about what the product is about.

6. Ideas usually fail not because they’re bad ideas, but because they’re badly presented. Meh. Even with bad presentation, I can usually see a good idea from a bad one. Although I turn out wrong sometimes, so I guess I’m on the fence with this one.

7. “I’m a professional: I know best.” – Not. I agree for the most part. Designers do work FOR OTHERS. If the others want something, we can guide them, but in the end, they’re going to want what they want. Jeremy Shellhorn once told me that one thing he enjoys about design is that even with not so great material, you can always problem-solve and create great design.

8. “All the good jobs go to other designers.” – Not. Man, just be happy with what you’re given. Mmmkay?

9. The best way to run a studio is to be domineering and forceful. Not true. Agreed. No one likes working with jerks.

10.If we believe in nothing, we shouldn’t wonder why no one believes in us. I love it. So much.

Catch-Up #6

Journal #6

Conversations on Design

Ze Frank: Frank is inspired by social design. He talked about the design and format of a video game he used to play and how the point of the game was driven by social interaction of characters. I think this also relates to the problem he wants to solve. He said he wanted all problems to be redesigned, but he specifically pointed to how the process of design could be changed. He thought it would be cool to see a group of designers interact in a group to solve one problem since it’s normally the other way around.

Marc Lathuilliére: A book and a bottle of vodka. The book because not only does it have a nice cover, it’s very “transparent;” You start reading and you know exactly what it’s trying to communicate. The vodka is the opposite. The branding doesn’t tell you the vast amount of power inside that alcohol – it remains a mystery until you indulge. For him, it’s all about the language and communication. That’s also his problem for solving: learning to communicate in this design language and using that to recreate diversity

Jake McCabe: He is inspired by a blank 8.5x11” piece of paper. It’s so simple and clean and represents open opportunity. Yet in order to get there, it takes so much effort to produce. It’s just “a beautiful thing.” As far as solving with design, since the paper is a resource, he’s into sustainability. Our resources are having to be rethought; that blank paper is becoming a type of luxury.

Georgia Christensen: I didn’t just pick her because she talks about Texas. She’s inspired by a chimney. I was named after a fireplace/chimney piece. She finds it neat that her father, who designed the chimney, had to work with a construction worker to construct it to achieve the perfect lines and how this group effort created something so beautiful and simple. What’s not simple is public transportation, which is what she wants solved. Amen.

Daniel Pink: This guy must be my hero because his inspiration is an eraser for the pure fact that it allows you to make mistakes. “If you can erase, you can create.” Wasn’t it Thomas Edison who mentioned something about failing 1000 times before he got the light bulb right? Mistakes suck, but they help you grow, and with an eraser, you can help change those mistakes into something better. As for solving problems, he believes that instead of designing for single pieces, design should be tackling systems, or the bigger picture.

Catch-up #5

Journal #5

Johnathan Harris

When I fist decided to come to KU, it was because I couldn’t decide between doing design or meteorology; two entirely different things, which is probably why only like eight schools in the country offer a good program in both. This made relating to Johnathan Harris easy. In short, I think Mr. Harris is a pretty interesting guy. His field of interest is so broad and illogical, but yet he seems to make everything work together, and I like it. Here, he describes his biggest hurdle between combining his art with computer science. He explains how compared to the free creativity of art, computer science is so overwhelming since it’s restricted by the code they use. Whilst art is used as a social piece meant for people to interact with, when Harris did programming he felt so secluded from other people. It was from this he realized how all of this overwhelming technology is invading our lives more and more and people are becoming dependent upon it, as outlined from his online dating project. Agree? Yes. And it is scary. Why would I want to date someone via the internet? As much as I love technology, it scares me to think that going forward I’ll have to rely so heavily on it.

Typography Speech First Animation

Rough First Animation for Speech from Ashley Detmering on Vimeo.

British Declaration of War Radio Broadcast by Neville Chamberlain; 1939

Who is speaking?
Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain

Why was/is the speech important to society?
It was the official announcement that the British empire was going to war against Germany in WWII. It was also ironic for Britain since it's Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, had tried so hard to defend Germany and appease Hitler to avoid a war from ever happening, or at least spreading throughout Europe, let alone the world. So when he had to declare war on Germany, it was against what he had tried to avoid.

Why do you feel it is important or interesting?
Just the way he delivers the speech is impressive to me. The spacing and emphasis really makes me hang onto every word he's saying. Not to mention it was a big deal for the British to entire a world war.

What is the emotion, mood, tone, personality, feeling of the speech?
At first the Prime Minister sounds sad and disappointed, but I mean he's telling his country, and really the whole world, that he has to go to war - and who really wants to do that? Understandable. Then he goes totally officer in command and is stern and inspiring.

What is intonation, emphasis, what is loud, stressed, or soft? Where are there pauses?
He starts out fairly soft and regretful sounding. Then he proceeds to talk about why they are going to war; how Germany basically said "screw you" to any sort of peace treaty. This clearly made the Prime Minister angry and it shows in that his voice rises a little in volume. He is more forceful, trying to prove to his country why they must go to war. He then defends Poland, seeing as his country is going to war because Germany invaded Poland like they said they wouldn't. Neville Chamberlain uses that same forceful, yet calm voice as before, except now there is a tone of pride, like he's talking about a family member or his hero. He pauses between almost every sentence in the second half - probably to take deep breaths and keep his cool.

What do you FEEL should be loud or soft, long pause, etc.?
I feel like Neville did a pretty good job. He could have let his angry voice come out a little more... maybe a little earlier as well, like when he mentions that he's going to war. Make it sound like my country is about to go kick some ass perhaps? While he does a good job as a politician keep his cool, I feel the ending, while inspiring, lacked that "300" drama that really makes me passionate about fighting a war.

Is there a call to action? When listening to it what are key/emphasized words?
He calls to action the fact that his country is going to war.
The whole beginning 30 seconds where he explains that Germany screwed up and they are now at war is pretty emphasized. He pauses after every... two words... or so.
A few words while just listening to it that popped out were: peace, attack, now, not, no, stopped, intolerable, finish.

How does it make you feel?
Makes part of me dislike Germany... or more-so Hitler I guess. Makes me feel like Neville Chamberlain was a pretty cool dude too.

How do you imagine that the audience felt?
They were probably feeling pretty sunken and raged. I would imagine it would be a strange mix, like anytime you go to war, of feeling discouraged, but also prideful in your country that it's strong enough to stand up for something.

Could there be another interpretation of the speech?
Since Britain was one of the first countries to declare war against Germany, perhaps one could construe the tactic as a political advancement on behalf of Neville. One could also be very confused since Neville had spent so long trying to defend Nazi Germany and make peace with them, then all of a sudden he's declaring war. Fishy? Maybe.

Write/find a short bio, of the person giving the speech.
Arthur Neville Chamberlain was born on 18 March 1869 in Birmingham into a political family. His father, Joseph, was an influential politician of the late 19th century and Neville's older half-brother Austen held many Conservative cabinet positions in the early 20th century and won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Chamberlain was educated in Birmingham. After a successful career in business, in 1915 he was appointed lord mayor of Birmingham. In 1916, Lloyd George appointed him director-general of the department of national service, but disagreements between them led Chamberlain to resign. In 1918, Chamberlain was elected Conservative member of parliament for Ladywood in Birmingham and was rapidly promoted. He served as both chancellor of the exchequer (1923 - 1924) and minister of health (1923, 1924 -1929, 1931). In 1937, he succeeded Stanley Baldwin as prime minister.
Like many in Britain who had lived through World War One, Chamberlain was determined to avert another war. His policy of appeasement towards Adolf Hitler culminated in the Munich Agreement in which Britain and France accepted that the Czech region of the Sudetenland should be ceded to Germany. Chamberlain left Munich believing that by appeasing Hitler he had assured 'peace for our time'. However, in March 1939 Hitler annexed the rest of the Czech lands of Bohemia and Moravia, with Slovakia becoming a puppet state of Germany. Five months later in September 1939 Hitler's forces invaded Poland. Chamberlain responded with a British declaration of war on Germany.
In May 1940, after the disastrous Norwegian campaign, Chamberlain resigned and Winston Churchill became prime minister. Chamberlain served in Churchill's cabinet as lord president of the council. He died a few weeks after he left office, on 9 November 1940.