Modernist vs. Postmodernist/ We got to watch porn in class

Alright... deciding if I am a modernist or post modernist. First off what exactly are the two of these things. So there was modernism which was about stripping everything away except for the very basic communication and function. There was nothing extra in the design that did not aid the function. The reaction to this was postmodernism which notes a break with modernist principles. It emphasizes feel more than rationale and function. But if postmodernism grabs your attention more and in the end communicates better then I guess your again being a modernist for focusing on communication. Confusing. So i guess that I am a postmodernist who is striving to communicate so well that I'm a modernist? I don't know. I think this kind of relates to what I was discussing last week in the blog about having the perfect blend of form and content. I would rather get caught up in in the quality of my work than where my work fits in but, maybe understanding how my work fits into the scheme of things will help me to improve my work. Craziness... or should it be  CrAYzeeNesS!!

Form and Content

Tonight we learned about the swiss and international design and why we should not just view them as styles. These types of designs have important ideas and tools behind them such as asymmetrical organization, mathematical grids, and being socially useful.

I think the most important thing I got out of this weeks class was form and content and how good design is successful in both of these. When I thought about all of the different things Paul Rand showed in the movie as examples of having good form and content I realized that the idea can be applied to anything, like ANYTHING... I can't stop seeing it. I also realized that while some of my designs have communicated a strong message, some of the them I focused too much on the form and not enough on the content or idea behind the piece.

So, at the end of the day, lesson of the week for me ... don't just make pretty designs, design with purpose and content just as much as form.

"Don't try to be original; just be good."

RAIN

Started off with an overview of last week. The Bauhaus was about the unity of craftsman and about ideas from all the different movements being explored and applied to functional design. Some of the teachers were Paul Klee, Moholy(?) Nagy, Johannes Itten, Herbert Bayer, Kandinsky,......and some others. Nagy eventually replaces Itten and becomes Gropius right hand man. Nagy did things like typophoto, photograms, and photo plastiq. Herbert Bayer was the one who designed the Universal typeface. It has no capitals and because of that it is difficult to read. He said it didn't make sense to have to alphabets. We watched Bauhaus in America, I thought the beginning was really interesting and I really tried to stay awake, but no sleep the night before kept me from seeing the second half. Evidently it talked about two different models of teaching. One has restraints and deadlines which usually assures success and the other is opened ended and does not assure success. Jan Tschichold did the hand lettered advertisment. He went to the first exhibition of Bauhaus in 1923 when he was only 20 years old. By 1923 only a year later he work had completely changed to look like the work of the Bauhaus and he was writing about the typographic style of the Bauhaus, in 1925 he wrote a book on elementary, and in 1928 published The New Typography. He used the golden ration and other grids in his designs. He was eventually arrested by the Nazi's for using un German typography. They found Soviet Posters in his possession and held him for six weeks. After that he returned to more traditional work and moved away. He did work for Penguin Books later in his life.


I really loved Lester Beale's posters for the Rural Electrification Administratioin

Alrighty, what I know about the Bauhaus. I think it was in Germany... just before WWII. The first head dude of it was Walter Gropius. I think Kandinsky, Itten, and maybe Paul Rand worked there... or was it klee? It was a school of arts that was teaching new ideas and ways of thinking/doing art. ummm SANS SERIFS AND GRIDS! The building had a lot of glass... thats all I got right now.

The Bauhaus existed from 1919 to 1933 in between WWI and WWII and moved twice. It started in Weimar Germany in 1919 and stayed there until 1925. In 1923 The School had its first public exhibition so the community could see what they were doing. In 1926 the school was moved to Dessau, and industrial city. It stayed there until 1932. In 1928 Walter Gopius resigned as head of the school and was replaced by Meyer. Meyer turned to be even more unpopular with the authorities than Gropius had been and was soon replaced by Van derRohe in 1930. In 1932 the school moved to Berlin and in 1933 the school was closed down. While the school was in session it had 33 different instructors. More details about Walter Gropius: He begins thinking of a new school during WWI. He thinks that the studies of architecture, sculpture, and painting should all be together. Itten: he is a crazy weird teacher into this weird religion that requires him to shave his head. He was the instructor for the core program where students tried their hand at a little of everything before moving on. His ideas for his program are still used in many art schools today. Even at Ringling! Eventually Itten is replaced by Nagy; a Hungarian constructivist. He did the pneumatic poster with the car. He used something called typo photo. He is using photography to make new art for a new age. He developed photo plastics?


Conclusion: the Bauhaus pretty much fuckin rocks.