Saturday, March 24, 2012

Your turn #7

Alicia Olink with Ray Gun, Fancesco Locastro, 2011
There is plenty to talk about: Bauhaus and its ripple effect, the war poster, information design, the masters: Lissitzky, Gabo, Moholy Nagy, the independents: Tschichold, Zwart, The New York School: Liberman, Herbert Matter, Saul Bass, Brodovitch, Sutnar, Lubalin, Pineles, the International Topographic Style, advertising vs. propaganda.

Go ahead!

26 comments:

Anonymous said...

Alexandra Roe:

Because I missed our last class, I am not quite sure where to begin my post. However, the Bauhaus movement is a subject that I have some familiarity with. The idea that form follows function is a major tenant that I remember and that are illustrated by Meyer’s teaching manifestor applied to Bau. He lists the motives thought of when building a house and then says that the form is based off of that. I really enjoy the aesthetics of 3-D works that exemplify the movement, such as Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’s Barcelona chair and Marcel Breuer’s Wassily Chair. I also enjoy the more colorful examples posted from Kandinsky, klee and Itten because of the way that color complements, but seems to also take a backseat to shape and composition. It was an extraordinarily productive movement in the sense that we derived the designs of many of our modern conveniences from it.

Luzyanis Fraga said...

The philosophy of Bauhaus of combining all types of art is what differed them from other modern art schools. I believe that all arts are complementary to each other. The Bauhaus style became known as the “international style”; in which there was an absence of ornamentation and there was a direct connection between the function of an object and its design. After the Bauhaus school in Germany was dissolved it continued to influence other countries arts and architecture, including the United States. The modernist architect Louis Kahn built on ideas from the International style movement to design low income public housing. Later on in his career he was able to practice based on ideas he admired in ancient and medieval architecture. He was considered to move beyond the International Style in order to express original ideas. His work offered new intellectual possibilities to the younger generation of architects searching for alternatives to the International Style. Convinced that contemporary architects could produce buildings which were as monumental and as spiritually inspiring as the ancient ruins of Greece and Egypt, Kahn devoted his career to the uncompromising pursuit of formal perfection and emotional expression.

Luzyanis Fraga

Ana Trinchet said...

Bauhaus "School of Building", interesting name however architecture was not part of the program after several years. Nonetheless it became, In my opinion the father of modern architecture, it's like the Greeks with classical architecture. Architects look back to learn from the masters. The characteristics of the Bauhaus are very fascinating, a school where arts and crafts were combined, from one the other one derived. This thank to its founder Walter Gropius a man who was not scared of the new, and this is one of Bauhaus's characteristic; whenever new creative challenges presented they will embrace it. There was creative freedom and the reason why from there so many talented minds emerged .

Ana Trinchet

Emilee Lau said...

Last class we talked about artists using photograms to create an image that stimulated and combined the senses. This led me to further research a disorder I knew existed but never really looked into: synesthesia. Synesthesia is the condition where any one (or more) of the senses is simultaneously perceived by one or more additional senses. For example, someone with the disorder may taste blackberries when they see a city’s skyline or feel a tickle on their left knee when they hear a violin or even feel completely convinced that “April” is turquoise blue. Famous people who were possibly synesthetes include: Wassily Kandinsky (proposed), Charles Baudelaire, Franz Liszt, Duke Ellington, and Richard Phillips Feynman. And although some of these people may have merely expressed synesthetic ideas in their individual works of art, others undoubtedly were diagnosed with the disorder, which thought of at first as excessive creativity, is now known to be a neurological condition. In short, a synesthete has a “cross-wired” brain where their sensory synapses cross over from one sense to another. Some scientists speculate that many children have crossed connections that later lose them, and that synesthetes are simply those who retained their crossed synapses. The five types of synesthesia include grapheme→color (letters and numbers associated with colors), sound→color (sounds produce colors), number form (procure mental map of numbers), personification (ordered sequences have personalities), and lexical→gustatory (words evoke taste sensations).

Synethesia-- YouTube Video

Anonymous said...

I really enjoyed our discussion of the Bauhaus and how it represented a totality of all creativeness in different fields of art, and how its influence quickly spread out of Germany. From the typography of the name itself, within a few years its highest form became architecture, as building as proclaimed "as the ultimate aim of all creative activity." A truly modern style with a shift from aesthetics to functionality kept Germany, much of Europe, and even Israel at the forefront of new design. I enjoyed our discussion of propaganda vs advertising--though in many ways I essentially view them as the same purpose, depending on who is considering them. I think one of the most important differences may be that propaganda appeals more to an emotion, whereas advertising more to a rational/intellectual need. Though they are both presenting information, propaganda prevents it in a way that makes the information itself fairly irrelevant, but the support and message behind it crucial.

-Stephanie Kryzak

Anonymous said...

One topic discussed in last weeks class that I thought was particularly interesting was the concept of advertising vs. propaganda. Although they are two separate things, people often get them confused or fail to see how the two differ. From my understanding, propaganda deals more with politics or issues; trying to sell a belief, position, or idea. It has an intent to change someones personal beliefs which is why it has such a negative connotation. Advertising, however, is about selling a product to a consumer. I do think that in today's world, the line between the two things is starting to get blurred. Advertisers are constantly trying to find new ways to connect to their target and get them to respond to a message, and sometimes this is done by selling a lifestyle or an idea, instead of just a product. Although they have seperate definitions, I think that advertising is starting to blend with propaganda more as the years go on.

-Maddie Nieman

Anonymous said...

From last class, the topic of advertising vs. propaganda stood out to me. As an advertising major, I have learned about the advertising and propaganda and the importance to differentiate between both terms. However, it seems that both terms are difficult to differentiate because of the similarities found between the two. Propaganda is often associated with politics and advertising is the promotion of a product, service, or idea that is influencing a specific target audience. Both, propaganda and advertising have been criticized as manipulative and deceiving because of their influences on the masses, but I believe propaganda to be more deceitful because the masses are not always made aware that they are being exposed to propaganda. Advertisement must identify itself to the public because of FTC regulations. If advertising is false or deceitful, then corrections must be made o the advertising unit because advertising is not meant to misdirect the masses. Fines must be paid and the corrected advertising must be released to inform the masses. In conclusion, advertising and propaganda are highly influential towards the opinions of the masses. It may be difficult to differentiate between the two terms but they should not be used interchangeably.

Ashley Bahamon

Isaac said...

I think the ripple effect of the Bauhaus on the world, especially America is very interesting. America’s design intelligence exploded with invasion of Gropius, Mies, and the like. Every part of America became highly Bauhaus designed due to the influence: Corporations, propaganda, art, architecture, commercial products, etc. America became cutting edge in design, and set the standard for Europe, and the rest of the world for progressive and successful designs.
Is the reason America is so cultural prevalent to this day because of the influence of Bauhaus? I think so.

Anonymous said...

I found the topic of propaganda versus advertising very interesting. In today’s media the lines seem to be thoroughly blurred. Our current political situation seems to be following along the lines of Russian Marxist Georgy Plekhanov whose definition of propaganda / agitation was "the reasoned use of historical and scientific arguments to indoctrinate the educated and enlightened" and "the use of slogans, parables, and half-truths to exploit the grievances of the uneducated and the unreasonable." He believed both strategies were essential to political victory. When I see what politicians are now calling “paid political advertisements” I think of the above definition. Millions of dollars are being spent on political “spin” which is basically brilliant designs or slogans used to push the sponsors ideas or ideals onto the masses. This is just like a large company spending billions of dollars on a prime TV ad trying to convince the masses that their product or service is an absolute necessity to make their lives better. As far as I’m concerned, today there is very little if no difference between propaganda and advertising. They both involve clever uses of graphic design to get their messages out.

Link for some interesting images for political propaganda

http://www.google.com/search?q=political+propaganda&hl=en&prmd=imvnsb&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=KZp0T_3KKpPMtgfbyZD9DA&sqi=2&ved=0CF0QsAQ&biw=1186&bih=700

Some interesting images for clever advertisement

http://www.google.com/search?q=clever+advertisements&hl=en&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=MJt0T76GNYXYtgefnP2MBg&ved=0CD0QsAQ&biw=1186&bih=700

Suelyn Chong

Anonymous said...

Can Zarb

Advertising and propaganda are two things that always lead to confusion in people when it comes to explaining it. At first sight, yes they do look similar; they both try to sell an idea. But the difference between them is that in propaganda the message seems to be beneficial to sell itself while in reality it is not. It is used to spread a thought either verbally or visually to recruit people by distorting a fact or adding false statements. We don’t see propaganda today that much when we compare it to the past years but there is still something out there to get people by misleading them. The main idea behind propaganda is getting the actions under control. In other words make people believe and obey in a specific movement. The content doesn’t have to be true, it just has to be persuasive. What’s important is to make people believe what is told to them is true.

Anonymous said...

Last class was very interesting for me, because I've always been interested in propaganda. Propaganda is different than advertisement. In advertising, a product is sold however in propaganda and ideology is presented whether if the information is correct or not. In advertising the idea that they are selling must be true for sure. This is the main difference between them.

Ela Apa

Anonymous said...

Since I was not in class last week I do not really know where to begin, but I am going to to discuss what I think is the difference between propaganda and advertisement. Propaganda and advertising are very similar however at the same time different. Propaganda is used to get a message across in a way that is understandable. They also want to present it in a way that people can relate to. Propaganda is presented in different forms; some examples include t-shirts, videos, music, posters, etc. Advertising is a way of selling something to someone. It has more of a short term affect and impression on the people. If somebody wants to sell a product or just get the name of that product or company out in public is usually through advertising. I see propaganda more as a movement. There is positive and negative propaganda. Propaganda, I think, causes people to react and or act in a certain way.

- Erika Gonzalez-Rebull

Anonymous said...

Advertising vs. Propaganda is a hot debate today. Now, while I believe advertising and propaganda both possess strong differences, I understand that it is undeniable that they are both powerful media tools used in society today, as well as societies of the past. Both propaganda and advertising use different forms of media to spread a certain message to the masses. However, in contrast to advertising, the goal of propaganda is not to create a brand identity and encourage the sale of product, services or ideas. Propaganda is made to change the attitudes of society about certain people or subjects (most commonly political topics.) Advertising is not meant to be propaganda. Yes, they do try and show the audience what things to purchase; however, it is not intended to be deceitful. In a society run by commercialism, there needs to be advertising so people can see what options are out there to purchase. This is how our world runs today, and advertising is actually crucial and necessary to spread the word.

- Kaitlin Stevens

Jamie said...

Russian artist El Lizzitsky followed the belief that the artist could be an agent for change. In pursuit of that change he experimented with exhibition displays, propaganda, and constructivist works that greatly contributed to the Bauhaus movement. For the past week I have been contemplating this notion. Are we, as designers, able to initiate change through the creation of a visually stimulating work of art? Taking this a step further, I began to contemplate the role of art in politics. The main purpose of propaganda is to influence the opinion of an audience. History supports the success of this type of powerful art that is loaded with messages. I have come to the conclusion that yes, art is able to instigate change, but the gravity of its effect on the world depends on how it is presented, to whom, and how much passion is projected by the artist themselves.

Jamie Shankman

Jacinta Yong said...

With all the ongoing talk about advertising versus propaganda, fortunately in the US we have such administrative organizations like the Federal Trade Commission to regulate commercial speech, yet I would like to bring to light how close propaganda and advertising can be. Propaganda is a planned form of communication designed to affect the minds and emotions of a given group for a specific purpose, economic, political, etc. It can be organized into three categories: White, meaning the source is acknowledged; Grey, there is not a clearly identifiable source; and Black, which means the message emanates from a source other than the true one. Keeping this in mind, there are just a few foreign advertisements that I would like to point out that are arguably, on the borderline of white propaganda and advertisement.

Video 1

Video 2

Nan Gallagher said...

Something I find extremely interesting about the artwork that emerged from the Bauhaus movement is that while there is one manifesto for the movement, there seemed to be a dual existence of artistic theories/interpretations. On the one hand there is the clean, harsh modernism seen in design that is based on minimalism and everything being designed with a specific purpose in mind so that there is nothing more and nothing less than necessary. This style is reflected in many buildings, furniture designed by Breuer and van der Rohe, and artwork by the likes of Meyer and Lissitzky. But then there is this whole other side to the movement that is so much more passionate, colorful and expressive, and seems to be much more along the lines of being art for the sake of art. I see this in the works of Kandinsky, Feininger, and Klee among others. I think that this just goes to show how personal art can be even when people are all supposedly part of the same movement. Even with a specifically written manifesto, each artist was able to bring something different to the Bauhaus table.

augie Kazickas said...

The popularity of the International Typographic Style was primarily due to globalism. Post-World War II saw the expansion of consumerism and the interconnectedness of global markets. The ITS was the de facto typeface of the time because it was objective enough to cross borders. ITS used 'mathematical grids, sans serif typefaces, and black and white photography' to achieve an internationally rational and clear type design.

I thought ITS figure Josef Muller-Brockmann's comments on graphology(handwriting) were interesting by the fact he parallels the way an employee writes to his/her job performance.

Typography is very important in design but too often overlooked. I think more designers should share Lubalin's belief that typography is "designing with letters."

Alexa Prosniewski said...

Advertising and propaganda are extremely similar in nature. Their difference lies in the openness of their purpose. Advertising is blunt in its intention, to sell or promote the object being advertised. Whereas propaganda's message is usually more hidden. It tries to persuade the viewer to do or believe something. The act of persuasion is a lot sneakier than that of advertising. Propaganda also has a more negative connotation incorporated with it. This is because of its more "under the radar" intentions that I previously mentioned. The content of which these tools are promoting can overlap, however it can also be a distinguishing factor between the two. Advertising is usually geared towards selling something to a consumer, whereas propaganda is more about changing the viewer's perception and ideas on an issue.

Lindsey Reiff said...

I am intrigued by how the difference between propaganda and advertising has evolved over time. While in the past propaganda dealt with political and social movements/ideas and advertising dealt with products and services, things have become incredibly ambiguous. As I have expressed before, I am very skeptical of the techniques and motives of advertisers today. Due to the nature of the field, it has always been manipulative, but with infinite new technologies and information regarding consumer decision practices it has become so disingenuous and a bit reprehensible. The emotional appeal is perceived to be more important than ever because consumers have become numb to many advertisements, as they are bombarded by brands and corporations all day every day. These appeals, formerly reserved (for the most part) for propaganda, have made it extremely difficult to differentiate between the two, leading to further disillusionment of the consumer.

Patty Alfaro said...

I do not think we can truly differentiate between advertisement and propaganda, save for the political connotation propaganda always seems to carry. Yes propaganda tries to sell a belief or idea, but advertisements do that all the time too. Make-up commercials try to make girls think they are not pretty enough without it. Beer commercials make guys think they need alcohol to fit in and have fun. Both are designed to manipulate the thoughts and actions of their audiences. Of course, if we are trying to uphold what little distinction advertisement and propaganda do have, even this line is blurred. After all, isn’t everything ultimately political? Every little thought and decision certainly adds up to a collective viewpoint, which can be viewed and used politically.

Anonymous said...

What I find particularly interesting about the Bauhaus movement is the amount of influence it had on all fields of art, especially on typography. Paul Renner was inspired by the Bauhaus and designed the Futura typeface based off of the movement's principles. The typeface is intended to boast efficiency and forwardness through the use of simple geometric shapes. Like the Bauhaus movement, Renner wanted the typeface to be modern. This is just one example of how the Bauhaus influenced all areas of artistic expression.

-Kristen Vargas Vila

joyce sosa said...

As discussed in class , bauhaus movement was one of the most influential modernist movements in history. It didn't include only a kind of art but its purpose was to eventually merge all of them , architecture , typography, gtaphic design , etc into only one name , bauhaus.It is amazing how you can actually have a glimpse of the influence of all these kinds of art in one bauhaus piece. You can see architecture, design , type in one solely piece. In addittion , when we talked about the war posts were a result of this era of cultural experimentation that was taking place in germany suring the war . Which lead to the making of these " not typical " posters , that went off the limits of the cultural traditions Of the time. I really like this movement because it is not going only on one stylistic direction , but is creatiing an unity of styles that come from a big variety of sources.

Anonymous said...

One of the most interesting topics to me in last class was the war poster. According to the “A brief analysis of propaganda” post, one of the definition of propaganda is “…tries to manipulate people's beliefs, attitudes, or actions by means of symbols.”, the war poster may be perfect way to express this definition. In the class, we saw the propaganda of both sides (America and Germany) in the World War II. From artistic view, both of them did a brilliant job. I can imagine people in that kind of special period could immediately translate the information in the poster to what they want to see. People say what really matters it’s not the idea, but how to sell it, look how seditious these posters were and I’m sure they really played an important role in the war. Look how powerful the art design could be!

Qiansongzi Chen

Ernest said...

One of the most interesting topics form last class was the Bauhaus, and the way that it affected all forms of art and culture. I found it very interesting the way it took off and over pretty much every single aspect related to the arts. It affected from architectures to dance; I think is very interesting how its main goal was to unify art, craft, and technology. The idea that the “machine” was relevant, and imitating it in their design was an important element. This is what we know today as Basic design, and is the way in which architecture and other arts are taught. Most of all the modern architecture master pieces were either directly influenced or indirectly by this great movement; a great example is Ludwig Mies van der Rohe.

Lisandra said...

One of the topics that I really enjoyed from last class was when we talked about the Bauhaus period. When we think about the Bauhaus period it is impossible not to mention Walter Adolph Georg Gropius. He was the founder of the Bauhaus School. As an architecture student I believe that this movement is one of the most important ones because of the big influence it had over modernism. It is very simple to identify a building from this movement they usually have flat roofs cubic shapes and smooth facades. The colors are white, gray black or beige and floor plans are very open. This type of architecture was more functional and not so detailed like the Gothic Architecture for example. One of my favorite architects from this movement is Mies van der Rohe, he is one of the architects I look up to when designing a building.

Haley said...

El Lissitzky designed many pieces, including propaganda for the Soviet Union in the 1920's and 1930's. His use of technique in his work shows a conceptual understanding of the relationship between typography and geometric shape far beyond his time. Lissitzky was an artist, designer, and photographer. In addition he was a typographer and an architect! His work proves that his interdisciplinary interests contributed to more dimensional exhibitions. One of his most famous pieces is a propaganda poster "Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge" (1919). In this poster, you can see his application of his different mediums/careers. The artist is represented not only by the piece itself, but by the expression and interpretation of style and propaganda. The designer shows through in the use of space, balance, harmony, repetition and unity. The application and playfulness of the negative space and colors exude an expertise in photography. The typography itself is clearly shown with excellent craft, and also demonstrates the use of interdisciplinary studies. The architecture is shown in the geometric shape, balance, and carefully constructed design of the piece. Lissitsky was a major influence to the Bauhaus, art history, and the development to what graphic design has become today. In a world where the medium of graphic design has become the computer, Lissitsky's execution of multiple concentrations into single designs goes beyond tangible art, and implements conceptual ideas, construction, and the unity of a more self-actualized mind.


Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge