Words and Images: Nike

Courtesy of nike.com

     In this recent Nike Ad, the image does a fantastic job of using word and images to boost the brand's public perception. Here, the brand is honing in on a specific demographic: athletic women. Nike aims to use words and images to associate the brand with relatable female empowerment more than an unrealistic standard of female beauty. The whole design of the ad just screams strong, defiant, energetic, empowered, beautiful, feminine, and yet is very relatable.
    The diagonal angles of the sentences and words add energetic rhythm to the composition, just like the energetic and athletic woman they portray in the ad. The continuation between the end of one diagonal sentence the beginning of another makes a punchy, angular zig-zag trail down the ad, the non-traditional way of arranging words reflecting this image of an obviously independent-minded woman who refuses to measure herself by other standards of beauty.
    The differences in sizes and colors of lettering also add emphasis to the sentences "I have thunder thighs" and "Just do it." Both are in pink, and "I have thunder thighs" is in the biggest lettering, standing out, just like the thighs of the woman in the ad. All the words are in a traditional serif font, made very non-traditional by being in all caps, and tilted at angles. This makes the font look very assertive and unyielding, just like the thighs of the woman in the ad. The words look almost masculine except for the sentences in pink, but still associates femininity with strength. That quality expressed in words is also represented in images: first of all, the kind of female body that is represented here isn't the typical rail thin model type, but a more every day body type or the kind of body type that that the average Nike customer would see at the gym. The splashes of in-your-face pink and purple in the background and text juxtapose well with the feminine curve of the woman's hip right and then the hard muscle of her thighs. Both words and images, through their visual representations of both boldness and beauty work together to express how strength and empowerment and can still be considered feminine and beautiful. That being said, it implies that through Nike, this everyday woman became stronger, more confident and empowered.
    It seems that more often, the most effective design in advertising is one that communicates directly to the everyday experiences of how that product will fit into our lives, using words and images to communicate that. In this case, words an images express the same thing, complimenting each other by expressing the same strong message in their different mediums.

Form and Content: "Objectified"

images courtesy of objectifiedfilm.com

     In the film Objectified, filmmaker Gary Hustwit, encourages us to notice our surroundings, and the thousands of objects that we interact with everyday in our lives.   He asks us to think about our relationship with these items, of why they look the way they do, how they are designed, who designs them, how they improve our lives, their cost to the environment, and how they are a reflection of us. In the film, the relationship between form and content is shown to be undergoing much change in a fast-paced world.
    Increasingly, form on the outside of designs does not appear to relate to content, for example if someone was looking at a spoon or a chair for the first time ever, they could probably guess through the form what their intended function was. Compare that to an iPhone, where outward appearance doesn't give much clue to function or content, an common aspect of products of the age of microchips.
     Apple is one company whose designs that seeks to pair down form so that it focuses on how you're going to use it, not really expressing its content on the outside so that it seems like a natural, organic aspect of our lives. Their intention is to make products that look un-designed; one way they do that is to simplify form, for example: making six parts of a product into one, and picking materials that express a clear sense of the company' and the content of their products: like slick aluminum surfaces or smooth white plastic frames.
    Designers also have to think about that their design end up in landfills, things shouldn't necessarily be built to be permanent or recyclable. Here, form should be designed with its whole life cycle with consumers in mind, expressing conscious content that is aware of its impact on the environment. All products, not matter how well the designers think they designed them, end up in landfills and one has to think about how those products affect the environment after they've been used.
    It seems that Hustwit is suggesting the future of form and content in design calls for much more conscious design: forms that better accommodate how users are going to experience their content, from first purchase to easy efficient use to disposal and how they impact the environment after they've served their purpose. Conscious design has the ability make the world a better place and improve our daily lives, when form and content work together to solve problems.

Consumer Products: IKEA

courtesy of ikea.com

   
     There is a lot you can glean from careful examination of any consumer product: a reflection of the times and of the attitudes towards design. The IKEA Norden four-seater dining room table couldn't look homier at first glance, a simple chic design for a cool $80. Like a lot of furniture, it boasts perfect symmetry, scale, straight lines  balance, and the absence of a focal point, emphasizing the whole over its parts. However this symmetry doesn't make for a boring piece, for the contrast of the visible lines between the light blond wooden boards emphasize a more rustic look, as if it were a piece you'd find in a country farmhouse.  Each board has asymmetry through the differences in the grain of each board, and knots in the wood here and there add variety, as opposed to a perfectly uniform surface that would seem more cold and clinical. Though these add variety, these repeating elements unify it as well. The different angles of the table also add variety: instead of following the lines of a static cube, the different angles that the legs and the frame make under the top of the table make it look more interesting. 
    Despite all these homey touches, the entire table has a smooth sheen to it, and a protective layer of lacquer protects it and is thick enough so that one can't feel the lines between the each board. Another outside layer is actually the wood of the table itself: only a thin layer of solid wood covering a thick core of particle board. The table, which comes in pieces, is assembled by the consumer, lowering the price. The structure is fairly simple, held together by little screws screwed into particleboard, not solid wood. It's pretty sturdy, and looks good on the outside, but particleboard is not known to hold together as long as solid wood, so I'll probably be buying another one in a few years.
    In terms of the design process, it seems that IKEA really emphasizes the sixth step of production, of polished surface sheen, designing the price tag first and then creating a design that fits it. Though the designers at IKEA probably go back through many of the other steps, this emphasis on the surface first raises many questions. In "making good design available to everyone," it seems they're redefining "good design" as ephemeral, and disposable, nothing but a shiny lacquer over an cheap and empty core. Though more consumers can now afford simple, yet sophisticated products that used to only be available to wealthier consumers, it seems that "making good design on the outside available to everyone" is a more accurate way to put IKEA's philosophy.

The Worst Font in the World?

    

Photo courtesy of espn.com

A few months ago, during all that media coverage of Lebron James' "Decision," Dan Gilbert, the owner of the Cleveland Cavliers, wrote a scathing letter about his departure to disappointed fans in Cleveland.

    Somehow, it lacked punch. It wasn't the biting prose and the bruising tone of it. It was the font. Which was entirely in Comic Sans. The ridicule towards Gilbert lasted for weeks, for the use of a font deemed more appropriate for a six-year old.

    But what's so bad about it? Who could hate the friendly font that headed childhood lemonade stands or made typed cards made on the computer look more personal? However, to some its use is offensive, immature and in very bad taste.
     Designed in 1994 by Vincent Connare, who worked at Microsoft as a typographic engineer, Comic Sans exploded in popularity: used everywhere from advertising, store fronts, college exams, and even medical documents. Simultaneously it inspired a backlash, with people ridiculing its use in professional settings and sites like Bancomicsans.com, springing up.

Photo courtesy of passiveaggressivenotes.com

    Written words can never fully recreate the bodily experience of hearing and seeing and feeling  words said to you by someone in person. However words take on a different meaning in Comic Sans; for example is someone sent you an e-mail ending with "I'll see you later," in Times New Roman it would have a very different feel than "I'll see you later," in Comic Sans. However if the intention was truly sincere, that could be made more clear with a friendly font like Comic Sans. Time New Roman, with its perfectly straight lines, curves, and rigid serifs looks less human than Comic Sans, with rounded edges where feet would be, slight irregularities where lines are straight in Time New Roman, and asymmetry in curves. It lacks sophistication and is often printed in bright colors. It captures the imperfection and human presence in handwriting.

Photo courtesy of Rebecca Creger

    It's more misused than it is a bad font, for it does have its place in the world. However, its design makes it impossible for it to give off a serious vibe, something that would not lend a professional manner to a slide-show presentation to a room full of investors, or an angry team owner like Dan Gilbert who public role demands a businesslike professionalism to give him credibility. Otherwise he would just seem like another angry intoxicated fan booing Lebron in his first game with the Miami heat. The importance of recognizing the different roles that different syntax and fonts give you is very obvious in this case. Here, the many aspects of the written word are designed to play different roles in society, roles that will keep being evolving and being misused for decades to come.

See articles:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11582548
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-07-09/tech/comic.sans.cavs.james_1_font-comic-book-letter?_s=PM:TECH

Design As A (Gleeful) Conversation

Courtesy of eonline.com

    
 The combination of Lady Gaga and Yoko Ono makes for a a nice (but weird) musical conversation: one between the past and present, between the boomers and generation X. During this era of music, many types of conversations like that are going on, as music keeps evolving, referring more than ever, to the past.
    Dozens of radio hits sample old songs; these days artists couldn't do without it and some rely heavily on it. Flo Rida's dance hit "Right Round" stole from another 80's dance hit: Dead or Alive's "You Spin Me Round (Like a Record)." Passion Pitt's energetic electronic "Sleepy Head" sampled a vocal from an Irish Folk song.
What if those samples had just stayed in the past? We'd just be looking back at them as another "cheesy" 80's song, or an obscure folk song, instead of them being kept alive in the conversation, relevant and newly appreciated. Take the show Glee: it has spawned more Top 100 hits than the Beatles and nearly all of the songs are old hits they have adapted for a chorus with a pop sensibility. Every time their version of the song shows up on the charts, the original sees an increase in downloads too. Whether or not Glee is a good show, a younger generation gets more exposure to the past and experiences a renewed appreciation for these old songs. 
    The point is, for the sake of keeping good design alive we should always intrude upon sacred ground, otherwise that sacred ground becomes collects dust and is put on a pedestal, where it is mourned for a greatness that will never be matched. Referring to, stealing from, and being inspired by idols of culture and design keeps the conversation alive, otherwise they lose their value and turn into an archaic cliche. A great achievement in design is not just said and done, it should keep evolving with the times so younger generations can appreciate it and benefit from it.
    These days, with the internet exposing everyone to good design, it is almost impossible for a designer to deliver a monologue with product reviews, and people blogging, twittering and facebooking their opinions on the online community. Whether designer like it or not, by designing they are forced to enter the conversation.

Vanishing Traditions: Textiles and Treasures From Southwest China

   
   This exhibition at the Design Museum showcased elaborately embroidered and constructed garments, textiles and ornaments from the Guizhou Province in southwest China. The curator spoke at length about how at risk these traditions are of being lost, given that the province they come from has not indigenous written language and all traditions and crafts are inherited through oral traditions, from one generation passing it down to the other. However with the influx of modern culture and conveniences into this once isolated province, there is little incentive to keep these traditions alive.
     The Guizhou Province was isolated for centuries from the outside world, so life revolved mostly around the family. For centuries, women were the keepers of these traditions, and their sewing skills were of great social importance in their villages. Different styles and details of textiles and garments, (which were all hand made) indicated specific group identity in this Province.

    One culturally important garment was the sleeve panels, a major element on jackets. They are intricately embellished, referring to a  specific village or group. Many families have a large collection of them, collected over generations. They are part of a person's inheritance, making them an important part of one's cultural and ancestral identity.
     Though improved personal well-being came with modernity, so did the loss of cultural purity. With more affordable consumer products, there is less incentive to protect and be a part of their identities when it's more convenient to buy a cheap quality, factory-made garment than spend thousands of hours sewing and embroidering a silk jacket.
    In this case, design identifies one with a certain group or area, and connects one to their ancestral and cultural identity. What does it mean for the people in the Guizhou Province to lose that part of their identity? We are not only losing the culture that comes with that oral tradition of design but the values that come with it. What does it mean when people are no longer willing to commit thousands of hours of care and attention to make those incredibly detailed, beautiful garments? Could that lack of care in design indicate a careless society, rushing forward without looking back, ravenous to consume every new technological convenience that comes our way?
   In a society that is rushing towards uniformity, how to we preserve culture? Cultural purity is impossible, but we should still preserve these traditions, and adapt them to the 21st century, so that they can live on in relevance.

Photos Courtesy of http://designmuseum.ucdavis.edu/

Comparison and Contrast

Courtesy of cnn.com

  aWithout referring to the outrage that ensued when the Gap proposed a new logo, let's compare the old and the new logo objectively. By comparing the two logos to find out how they work and what makes them visually successful, we can better understand Gap's reasons for introducing a new logo. Gap spokeswoman Louise Callagy stated that "the logo change was part of that evolution of the brand from “classic, American design, to modern, sexy, cool,” We can infer from this that Gap is seeking a logo that is "modern, sexy, cool", while the old logo represents "classic American design." Though the success of one of these designs is currently up for debate, let's take a look at both of them to see if they fulfill Gap's goals.
    The old classic logo is in a tall, narrow, classic white serif font, the letters spaced relatively far apart compared to a generic typeface. The word is centered in a navy blue box, the contrast between white letters and dark blue making the logo stand out. Gap's classic logo is a perfect example of visual unity, for all the elements in the old logo seem to belong together, with the matching fonts and serifs in each letter and the perfect symmetry that exists between the word and the box surrounding it. The old whole logo has a very static look to it, like a square laid on a surface that will never move or get knocked over.  If the tall narrow letters had been placed closely together it would have looked visually unstable with the height being taller than the length; the space between the letters gives it a stability and durability and enduring quality. These qualities express iconic and classic in every way, because like a square, iconic is enduring and ever stable.
    Gap's new logo expresses modernity, with its sans serif type face and geometric mechanized overall look.  The new logo lacks visual unity because the awkwardly tacked on small blue square attracts negative attention to itself. As its focal point, the blue square has more visual weight to it than the bit "G" in the logo, throwing off the balance of the composition.Since the composition has an imbalance of visual weight to it, the whole look is hardly one of stability and permanence. The overlapping of the letters with the box in the new logo implies depth, making the iconic blue box seem diminished and far away. The value difference in gradient blue square expresses visually that the iconic blue box is degraded. The shrinking of the blue box and making the letters lowercase in the new logo deformalizes and takes weight away from the meaning of their brand. Asymmetry gives a whole composition like the new logo a less formal look, as well as the lowercase letters and generic Helvetica typeface. Whether that is desirable in a big clothing brand is questionable.
    All the visual elements in the new logo are unsuccessful, even amateurish, therefore one can only conclude that the Gap was not entirely serious about its new logo. A multi-million dollar company can surely acquire the best design team money can buy, one that wouldn't create a logo as unsophisticated as this. Even if Gap wants to sell cool "modern" clothing with their new modern image it still has to coincide with the brand's image of selling classics, albeit ones that are modern and cool.
    However, despite the apparent embarrassment of this whole "fiasco," what did the Gap achieve in the end? Intense media attention on a brand whose sales had been steadily slipping? Customers getting emotionally involved with the brand for fear it would lose its identity? Everybody talking about the Gap again? Those don't sound like bad things to me. The great design isn't in the logo here, but in this brilliant ploy. Even the president of Gap is "thrilled to see passionate debates unfolding" One thing is for certain: this has proven the power of social media and set a precedent for other mega brands to communicate more with a perpetually online society when it comes to matters of brand identity design.