Triangulation and Referencing

Triangulation

The degrading use of creative talent through advertising is a topic explored by numerous writers. Garland (1964), Adbusters (2000) and Kalman (1998) have all made comments on this topic. In “First Things First’, Garland proposes that ‘there are other things more worth spending our skill and experience on’ when speaking about advertising. Kalman takes a similar view in ‘Fuck Committees’ when he speaks of the ‘thought-free, passion-free, cultural mush’ which is created by corporate committees. In ‘First Things First 2000’ by Adjusters, it is stated that 'there are pursuits more worthy of our problem solving skills’ which reiterates the message that creative talent could be put to a much more helpful, principled and beneficial use. These articles all take the approach that design should be put to good use and the talents of designers should be respected. By using them for advertising purposes, encouraging people to buy into the corporations churning out worthless products, their discipline and practice is being undermined by the high profit, low moral standard.

Analysis

Kalman speaks of ‘faceless corporate committees, which claim to understand the needs of the mass audience’ (1998). Describing them as faceless suggests a lack of emotion feeling and personal connection. It implies that they have no interaction with the real world and therefore don’t understand the needs of the public, even though they claim to do so. Using the term ‘mass audience’ suggests that the committees are purely business minded and void of any interpersonal connection, this in turn implies that their sole drive is monetary. 

Evaluation

In ‘First Things First’, Garland (1964) writes about how designers are being raised in a world where advertising is seen as a rewarding way of utilising creative talent. Garland is very critical of the corporations who feed this mentality and labels designers as the victims in the situation as they have been ‘bombarded with publications devoted to this belief.’ What Garland fails to recognise is the responsibility the designers have for their own practice, their morals and priorities. Instead of ‘proposing a reversal of priorities’ (1964) in society and amongst salesmen, Adbusters (2000) brings forward the idea of designers taking responsibility for tackling the issue themselves. 

Summary / Paraphrase

Adbuster’s manifesto (2000) explores the issue of advertising being presented to designers as ‘the most lucrative, effective and desirable use’ off talent. Instead of solely blaming corporations for this, the manifesto goes on to place the blame on the market and the designers themselves as well. It is promoting a change of attitude amongst designers, asking them to consider the ‘unprecedented environmental, social and cultural crises’ that need their ‘expertise and help’. It places the issue at the feet of the designers themselves and proposes that they take control of their own practice in order to change the way things are done on a larger scale. 

Bibliography

Adbusters (2000) 'First Things First 2000' [Online]. Available at: www.manifestoproject.it/adbusters/

Garland, K (1964) 'First Things First' [Online]. Available at: www.manifestoproject.it/ken-garland/

Kalman, T (1998) 'Fuck Committees' [Online]. Available at: www.manifestoproject,it/fuck-committees