Benetton's "World Without Borders" - Buying Social Change

Benetton’s “World Without Borders” - by Henry A. Giroux

From the book 'The Subversive Imagination - Artists, Society and Social Responsibility' Edited by Carol Becker

‘Benetton’s move away from an appeal to utility to one of social responsibility provides an object lesson in how promotional culture increasingly uses pedagogical practices to shift its emphasis from selling a product to selling an image of corporate responsibility. Given the increase in sales, profits, and the widespread publicity Benetton has received, the campaign appears to have worked wonders.’ (page 189/190)

• Benetton's promotional methods are selling something to stand for, not directly selling their goods. 
• Is this an appropriation of real world issues to indirectly make money from increasing their sales?
• Are they using this process to gain the trust of their customers or are they genuinely working to better the world?

‘Benetton is not about selling sweaters but social responsibility, and it is a company that represents less a product than a lifestyle and world-view.’ (page 191)

• The selling of their products comes secondary the sharing of their view of the world. 
• At a first glance this seems like a highly moral thing to do, however is it as clean cut as this? Is it still so moral when they are making a profit from it?

[Peter Fressola quote] “We’re doing corporate communication. We’re sponsoring these images in order to change people’s minds and create compassion around social issues. We think of it as art with a social message.” (page 191)

• Fressola is Benetton's director of communications. 
• It seems like their methods of communication within and beyond the business are based around sharing current world issues. 
• Does doing 'good' make people sceptical of what you are doing. Can good intentions backfire business wise?

‘Among the various means available to achieve the brand recognition that every company must have, we at Benetton believe our strategy for communication to be more effective for the company  and more useful society than would be yet another series of ads showing pretty girls wearing pretty clothes.’ (page 192)

• This statement suggests that their advertising strategy is to make them stand out from more generic clothing brand advertising campaigns, which it does. 
• I find this quote more realistic as it makes the intentions of their advertising strategy sound like they are trying to see clothes but at the same time they want to do something good for society. I find it harder to believe that the advertising was totally selfless because at the end of the day, their business is selling clothes and ultimately, their advertising needs to help them do that. 

‘Of course, the “joke” here is that anything is for sale and social commitment is just another gimmick for selling goods.’ (page 199)

• This is the quote I have been looking for! The idea of social responsibility being a gimmick in the world of sales is what I have been getting at. I think this is a really important quote to keep hold of, I feel like I am starting to narrow down onto what I actually want to write/argue about. 

Pedagogical: the function or work of a teacher; teaching. the art or science of teaching; education; instructional methods.

Corporate communication: is a management function or department, like marketing, finance, or operations, dedicated to the dissemination of information to key constituencies, the execution of corporate strategy and the development of messages for a variety of purposes for inside and outside the organisation.

Dissed and Disconnected

Dissed and Disconnected - Notes on Present Ills and Future Dreams - by B. Ruby Rich

From the book 'The Subversive Imagination - Artists, Society and Social Responsibility' Edited by Carol Becker

'Indeed there is much more, from the record, to fear when art is locked in to courts and academies, or when, at the opposite extreme, artists are pushed by neglect into isolation and there is no flow between them and a wide diverse public.' (page 223) Raymond Williams, The Politics of Modernism

• The two extremes of art being of a really high status and a really low status mean it is not accessible to 'a wide and diverse public.' 
• This quote is saying that pretentious gallery culture and a disregard for art are both damaging as they do not allow the artwork to flow within a community. 
• The accessibility of artwork is important, especially relating to social responsibility. If you create work with a message that needs to be seen by people then how it will reach that audience has to be taken into consideration. Not only can an artist feel a sense of responsibility to create work with a message, they may also feel a responsibility to ensure it reaches its intended audience. 

'It is through the arts that influence can be exercised.' (page 225)

• This quote is pretty self explanatory, you can influence through the means of art. 
• What is it about the arts that allows it to make an impact? Is it the lack of restriction on what can be done or the enjoyment people get from it that makes them take notice of what is being said?
• Again, thinking about status. Does this sense of status link to authority. Do people see art as authority or more like a rebellion against authority?

'... the arts could offer a route out of the status quo.' (page 232)

• Similar to the quote above. Art can break the traditions of what is 'normal'. Because often in society, what is normal is not always what is right. In some parts of the world it is normal for individuals of a certain race, religion or gender to be persecuted but this does not mean it is morally the right thing to do. 
• Moving away from the 'status quo' does not necessarily mean doing the right thing instead of the wrong thing. It could be a case of opening up opportunities and allowing people to view things from another perspective. 

'Unlike other professions the arts occupy a special, anomalous position in our society. Practitioners aren't licensed. Its members are entirely self-declared and self anointed, lacking any visible signs of status' (page 235)

• The societal placing of an artist is not the same as a doctor or policeman, it is a position within society that is earned through their practice and through proving themselves to be what they say they are. 
• Anyone can be an artist - is this true? Can you be taught how to be an artist or can you just be taught how to make things? Why isn't this the same thing?

'Although the romantic legacy of the art world mitigates against any such institutionalized forms of redress, such systems of regulation are not unimaginable and could easily be as useful to artists as to the public.' (page 235)

• I am finding this quote difficult to understand. I am trying to re-word it into simpler terms. Although the romantic legacy of the art world alleviates the instututional forms of remedy/correction, these systems of regulation are feasible and could be useful to artists and the public. 
• I think the start of the quote is saying that art can do a similar job to more structured methods social remedy, and in turn will take some of the pressure off them. I'm still struggling with the end of this quote, does this mean that artists and the public can also benefit from more structured methods of reformation or does it mean the opposite?

'An ombudsman structure could be established to handle situations of conflict or distress.' (page 235)

• An ombudsman structure would be where someone's job is finding out the issues people have with a govenrning body. Is this what an artist's job is within society, find out about problems and making them known, making people aware and working to ensure something is done about it?
• If this is not your intention as an artist/creative, are you neglecting your social responsibility to do so?

'It is precisely at such a painful, troubled, yet potentially inspiring and empowering time that the arts have much to offer, if only artists are up to the challenge.' (page 236)

• Art often stems from bad events and injustice. This supports the idea that artists feel a responsibility to do something about the bad things that are happening in our society. If things were perfect all the time, would there be a need for art? 
• The 'arts have so much to offer' suggests they have power and a voice that people will listen to in these times. However, the final part of this quote is questioning whether the artists, as people, are strong enough or whether they actually want to do what they have the power to do. 

'Artists can produce work, not solely in the splendid isolation of the individual ego' ... 'but in the call-and-response connection that links each one to some sort of community' (page 238)

• This quote almost splits the art discipline into two categories. Work for yourself as an individual and work to be shared with the outside world. This connects to the image by David Shrigley which I analysed stating that the artist has no social responsibility when working for himself but this changes when the work is shared with others. 

'Why not broaden the notion of arts spaces beyond the old apartheid system of art world galleries versus community arts centres?' (page 244)

• Again, a point relating to making art more accessible. Do artists have a responsibility to make their work accessible to a wider range of people. Is it necessary to break down social status barriers of art for it to truly make an impact. 

'Imagine a world, then, in which it would do as much for an artist's career to show in a fast food restaurant as in a bank.' (page 244)

• Relating to the point above, this could develop into an argument about money vs social responsibility. I suppose it is down to an individual whether they would take more money to display their work in a prestigious location full well knowing that its message wouldn't reach the people it matters to most.

Ombudsman: an official appointed to investigate individuals' complaints against a company or organization, especially a public authority.

Redress: remedy or set right (an undesirable or unfair situation).

Podcast - Design Matters with Debbie Millman: Lisa Congdon

http://designobserver.com/feature/lisa-congdon/39265

Notes from podcast - BLACK
My annotation - BLUE

Lisa Congdon wanted to go into politics, that was the career path she was pursuing after leaving school. Studied history. 
She questioned herself when she found herself miserable working in a law firm, she wanted to do something meaningful with her life. Gained a teaching certificate. 
I think this is where Lisa Congdon's approach to her practice differs from Shrigley's. Congdon knows she wants to do something meaningful and to make positive changes but it takes her a while to find what that is. However Shrigley knows what he does, he puts his thoughts onto paper, and the effect this has on society is comes secondary. 

Social change was something she was really interested in - education felt important to this. 
Lisa Congdon went into teaching for a while, nurturing young minds. I do agree that education is important to making social change but maybe not in such a direct way as this. People are still being educated at all ages by what they see in public, what they read, what they watch on television so there are other means of educating people in the media. I feel like this form of education is more relevant to my topic at the moment. 

She could give something back to the world - this is what made her feel good about herself. She is a sensitive person. Making an impact on other people is important to her. 
This links to the argument of selfish and selfless work. By giving something back to the world you are being selfless in a way, however the selfish aspect is that this makes you feel good about yourself. It would be interesting to hear Congdon's opinions of money in relation to this. Would the situation become more selfish/selfless with payment. 

When she became an artist she felt guilty because it felt like a selfish act and she wasn't giving back to the world. 
This makes it sound like she saw art as something only for herself, a very introverted process. 
Can social responsibility play a part in the way you conduct yourself as a business person as well as as a creative?

Finding what you want to do is about finding what makes you want to get out of bed in the morning. 
"This is the dirty part of the business that no one ever talks about. All of the other stuff, making art, working with clients, promoting the business, etc, felt easy and fun. But I was in debt after years of careless spending while I had a decent paying full time job. I knew that if I was going to be self employed I needed to pay off my debt and become as adept as possible at managing my money."
Co-owned a shop/gallery - learned a lot of valuable business skills though this process. 
Connecting with people all over the world at this point in time was easier than ten years previous but not as simple as it is today. 
Tipping point - its not one single thing that propels you to success, people start to show and interest and it just grows from there. 
'A collection a day' - Book ( a year long challenge )

Making a living out of being an artist becomes "a source of great controversy".
"People who have nothing to do with the exchange between you and those who would enjoy your work start to pass judgement. Money, they proclaim, bastardises both the process and the output."
If you're making money from your work then it is seen as far less pure and maybe you are driven by different motivations if you're doing commercial work. 
This implies that making art for money makes the artwork itself corrupt. In relation to the 'Design for Social Change' essay, would producing artwork for no money also corrupt the work as a creative would may use this to promote themselves rather than the actual cause. 

Lisa Congdon takes an 'I don't care' attitude to this and says she will still be true to her core values. 
This is a similarity between Congdon and Shrigley. It is probably relevant to most practitioners with morals. It would be interesting to find examples of people who keep their personal morals separate from their creative practice, if there are any.

You need a strong sense of how much you deserve to be paid - you learn this as you go but having an agent to begin with is helpful money-wise. 

"At some point somebody is going to realise that I don't really know what I'm doing or I sort of like taught myself how to do this. Like I'm not really a real artist, I'm sort of faking it."
What makes you 'a real artist'? Do you need structured training to be creative?

Own it as something worthwhile and as something we should be paid to do. 
There is an element of 'shame' that you can't proclaim to be an artist until you have become successful, this is especially bad in women.  

On reflection, there are some differences between Congdon and Shrigley's practices. Lisa Congdon talks a lot more about her desire to do something meaningful and make a difference which strongly relates to the concept of social responsibility in creatives. She also speaks about feelings of shame and guilt which I think connects to what Milton Glaser said about the status that comes with being an artist. I am starting to realise that maybe this 'status' comes with a certain pressure. I think it is interesting that people like Lisa Congdon can feel this pressure and are wanting to do the right thing. I can see that she still retains her core values however when you look at the work of David Shrigley and the attitude that comes across in the essay I analysed, I feel that he is less affected by this pressure of status and is going to remain true to what he believes and get across his own opinions.

There are elements of these notes which I feel would be more relevant to talk about on my PPP blog. 

The Evil Genius of David Shrigley

http://design observer.com/feature/the-evil-genius-of-david-shrigley
Essay by Rick Poyner

This essay isn't strongly related to my topic but I thought that reading about Shrigley's practice might mean I could analyse it in relation to social responsibility. 

'Until Shrigley was 15 or so, he dutifully attended Bible study classes and Sunday school in Leicester, England, where he grew up, but then decided enough was enough and stopped going. He isn't complaining, though, since those years left him with a peculiar way of thinking and enough material to last a lifetime. "I find the language of religion, particularly the language of Christianity, something amusing to subvert, I suppose. But then I think I'm a moral creature," he says. "I believe in right and wrong." 

• This tells us that Shrigley has made strong decisions about what he believes and what he doesn't. 
• Having the experience of being a part of something that he doesn't believe him has provided him with 'a peculiar way of thinking' which suggests that maybe going against your own beliefs for a brief or project might actually help you grow and evolve as a practitioner and person. It doesn't have to water down your own opinions. 
• The concept of what is right an wrong will differ between people. There is the obvious but there is also a big grey area.

His books 'connect with a broad, non-art audience.'

• Is connecting with a non-art audience the key to making social change? Making work only relevant to people with an art background does not allow a concept to grow and spread.
• Does the broad audience that his work reaches entail a stronger sense of social responsibility?

'He presents his intuitive scrawls unrevised, exactly as they come to him.' 

• This suggests he is true to himself and shares exactly what he thinks. 
• Does he have a responsibility to censor his own material? 
• In relation to an image of Shrigley's that I analysed this summer, he states that the artist only has a social responsibility once the work is displayed for people to see. 

'Shrigley is an affable, easy-going person to spend time with, and this gives added force to the emotion in his reply when asked a direct question about his view of humanity. "We exist in times when wars are fought for financial reasons rather than to protect human life," he says. "Human beings, it seems, are just horrible, greedy, terrible creatures. All they're interested in is the accumulation of wealth, and they have an obsession with tittle-tattle and the most tedious, tawdry aspects of each other's lives." '

'... these are the terms in which we should understand his endlessly repeated scenes of violence, anomie, social breakdown, and unthinking callousness towards others.'

• Again, he has formed strong opinions about society. 
• These are reflected in his drawings. 
• He seems unafraid to share his own opinions. Does he feel like this is what he should be doing as an artist?

Reading through and analysing this essay in relation to my starting point has made me think about the topic a little differently and start to ask more questions. I think Shrigley is a very open artist, unafraid to share his views and opinions of the world, however I don't think I have reached the root of whether he feels a sense of responsibility to do this or whether this is just what he wants to do. 

I think I need to do this same process on and essay about or interview with another practitioner to see whether there are similarities and differences between their approaches. 

Designing for Social Change

Essay by William Drenttel
http://designobserver.com/feature/designing-for-social-change/33188

Drenttel begins his essay speaking about a workshop he attended called "Design for Social Impact" and a topic they discussed at this workshop was 'whether design could be an avenue for poverty alleviation.' I feel this could be relevant to my dissertation topic as I am looking at the morals and social responsibility of creatives.

'We might make our living producing branding for large companies, but we carved out a portion of our design practices to do "good work".' 

• This quote makes me think that the writer only considers his work to be 'good' if he is not getting a wage from it. I think this is an interesting point because I feel it should be possible to do work for a good cause but to also get paid for it, however this makes it sound like it should be totally selfless for it to be considered 'good'. 
• Maybe this is something I need to investigate further to understand whether it is possible to do good with your work but still make a living from it. 

The essay goes on to talk about 'non-profit' work which is done for no money, but it says this is the type of work where you have your most creative opportunities and it formed 'the basis for many a creative reputation.'

• This implies that the work done for no monetary profit was still profiting the designer in terms of publicity and building a name for themselves. Is this enough? Is it too much?

'It was often about the work we could showcase, not the people we were helping.' 

• This is an interesting point because it contradicts the previous idea that 'good' work should be selfless. 
• Focussing more on the work and how you will be perceived as a designer rather than the intended purpose of the work makes the production of it a selfish act. 

'It was too often design about design, design for the sake of design, designers preaching to one another about design's capability to create impact.' 

• Too much focus is on arguing the point that design is able to make an impact but not enough time is spent actually doing it. 

'Social design cannot be a subspecialty of the design profession' ... 'but is a larger activity that depends on design in all its forms.' 

• This makes me think that social design is not a discipline in itself but a way of thinking and how you go about making work within your chosen discipline. It is a broad thing, linking to the morals and intentions of your work rather than the process of making.

Social innovation: is a novel solution to a social problem that is more effective, efficient, sustainable, or just than current solutions. The value created accrues primarily to society rather than to private individuals.

Social justice: justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society.

Systemic change: Perhaps the most broadly valid definition is “change that pervades all parts of a system, taking into account the interrelationships and interdependencies among those parts.” We find it useful to distinguish systemic change from piecemeal change. Piecemeal change entails changing one or several parts of a system.

Nascent: (especially of a process or organization) just coming into existence and beginning to display signs of future potential.

This article does have significant relevance to the areas I am researching at the moment. I may be able to use links stemming from this essay to find potential case studies of where design, or more specifically illustration, has been used for social change. It links strongly to the concept of social responsibility but almost rejects the idea that creatives producing work for non profit are doing this as a selfless act. 

Questions

• Is it possible to produce a piece of design or art that is entirely selfless?
• Would creatives be more inclined to work for the intentions of the project rather than for self benefit if they were actually getting paid for it?
• Can 'good' work be produced as a self directed project or does it need to be justified by an organisation or charity for the cause to be justified?

Big Think Interview with Milton Glaser

http://bigthink.com/videos/big-think-interview-with-milton-glaser
Quotes from video interview

'The nice thing about a career in the visual arts is there is an accurate record of what you once thought about the world and how you perceived it.'

• This implies that the work you produce is a reflection of your own thoughts. 
• Is this truly relevant in the field of design when you are working for clients or a cause whose beliefs and view of the world differs from your own?
• Does this, in turn, imply that creatives should only work for cause and along with beliefs that match their own?

'...one hopes that the change is to become broader, deeper and simpler and more compelling.'

• Speaking about the change and evolution of your perception of the world, as mentioned before, Glaser suggests that it becomes more enriched over time.
• It suggests that there is a learning process so maybe at the beginning of your creative career you need to work alongside various viewpoints to decide which ones truly fit in with you. 

(speaking about the progression of his own practice) 'more effective in communicating ideas in a way where they remain potent.'

'less involved with issues of style and more involved with issues of clarity and effectiveness.'

• Again, it is a process of learning and growing. 
• The second quote implies that it becomes more important for the work to fulfil its purpose and less about what it actually looks like. (Links to Lawrence Zeegen quotes from 'Where is the content? Where is the comment?' in my proposal.)

'Everybody wants to be an artist because in terms of status there almost nothing better you can be.'

• I am intrigued by the concept of status around art and design. Some designers would say the status is low whereas others, like Glaser, disagrees. Is this social status? Or is it the power they have to change things?

'Art at its fullest capacity makes us attentive.'

'...beauty, which is very often something we confuse with art, is merely a mechanism to move us towards attentiveness.'

• I love this first quote, it really gets across the idea that art can make people pay attention and listen. Surely this itself tells us that art does have the power to make a change, and in turn, there must be a responsibility that comes with this for creatives to do the right thing. 
• Glaser describes beauty as coming secondary to the art itself but shows that it is still important. I can see links here to Zeegen's 'eye candy' quote which shuns work that has nothing more to offer than just beauty. 

'The art world is concerned primarily with money and status ... that is not the standard way which people really interested in art would judge art.'

• When hearing Glaser say this I immediately thought of gallery culture but have been thinking now about how this can relate to commercial artwork. People who design and create for a living need to be concerned with money to earn enough to live. However, is status really necessary. 
• Its hard to find the balance between creating 'good' work and also running a viable business. 

'...it is also a real exploitation of the innocent, people are so desperate to find a way of becoming visible that you can get anybody to work for nothing.'

'You wouldn't go into a butchers shop and ask for a pound of steak without anticipating that you would have to pay for it.'

• This basically says you are being exploited if you work for free.
• Is it fair to say that a creative practice is a business and whatever that business produces deserves payment? Is this always true? Is it every ok to work for free?

'People spend their entire life trying to learn how to draw ... and then finally you learn that you can represent what is in front of you accurately, at the same time you learn that is not the point, that is only the beginning of the real point which is how to engage what is real.'

• This links to the previous quote about beauty. Visuals come secondary to the concept and purpose of the work.  

'Simply don't get stuck in your own belief system. Continue to understand the issues not about style or whats going on at the moment but things can be deeper, more profound and more influential and you can't stop working.'

• Is it ok to turn down work because it doesn't fit in with what you believe?
• I think this quote might be suggesting that you can learn new things and broaden your views if you step into the unknown. Maybe being too caught up in your won beliefs and opinions is how you 'get stuck'. 

I found watching this interview really interesting and here I have written about the quotes I picked out that are relevant to the topics I am reading around at the moment. However, Glaser has so much to say about so many interesting topics relevant to the creative industry and I definitely feel that I would benefit from listening to or reading more of his material. 

Philosophy - John Wilson

I found this book in a tiny little bookshop in Somerset and thought i'd give it a whirl. I have been reading it on and off over summer and it has totally baffled my brain. I found it really hard to understand as whatever the book was saying just kept going round in circles, but as I read and re-read parts of it things started to make sense. It talks about themes of morality, fairness, art and society but not in a way that makes its content specific to the topics of my interest. So, the book itself has no direct connection to my essay but I feel like the way of thinking that it teaches you could be relevant when analysing other texts. It analyses every detail and possibility and from this process, you reach a conclusion (or non-conclusion) which is often far from your initial thoughts.