DESIGN IDEAS MADE MANIFEST Assignment 2: Hindsight Essay 2000 words [40%] manifestos 1. proof, a piece of evidence [L touched by hand, tangible] 2. A public declaration or proclamation ... by an individual or group of individuals whose proceedings are of public importance, for the purpose of making known past actions, and explaining the reasons or motives for actions announced as forthcoming. (OED 2nd ed. 1989) This assignment asks you to explore some of the key design ideas of the past, and to compare one graphic design theory with the work of a contemporaneous designer to determine the degree to which the idea(s) expressed in the manifesto were manifest in the work of a designer at the time. In other words, this is a historical comparison of three key research questions: the ‘why’ of theory with the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of practice. Brief Select ONE of the manifestoes listed overleaf, and write an essay of 2000 words that historically contextualises and explains the key idea(s) and why they were important to graphic design at the time. Compare the theory with the practice of ONE designer, who was contemporaneous with the manifesto and/or author. Learning outcomes Critically analyse key historical, technological and theoretical developments and their influence upon contemporary communication design Compare and contrast business practices and creative, conceptual practices in communication design Assess the interrelationships that design industries have with each other and community/society. The future lies ahead of us, but behind us there is also a great accumulation of history—a resource for imagination and creativity. I think we call ‘creative’ that dynamism of intellectual conception that flows back and forth between the future and the past (Kenya Hara | Designing Design | 2007). Titiro ki mura kia whakatika a mua | Look to the past to proceed to the future (Māori whakataukī). Suggested essay structure You may structure your essay however you please, but a possible structure is provided here, which you may choose to use. Introduction (250 words): Give a brief description of your chosen manifesto and designer, and what links them. Section 1 (500 words): Explain the the key ideas of the manifesto and why they were important at the time of writing — did they challenge established practices and/or suggest new directions? Was the source or form of publication important, and what was the response at the time Section 2 (500 words): Briefly introduce your chosen designer, identifying any major shifts or changes in the designer’s practice and how these responded to changes in industry and society. Explain what made the designer’s practice significant at the time. Section 3 (500 words): Discuss, using examples, the extent to which the designer’s body of work demonstrated the ideas set out in the manifesto, or differed from them. Did the designer’s approach change over time, and what were the reasons for this? How influential were the ideas set out in the manifesto on the designer you chose, and how did they shape the profession? Conclusion (250 words): Summarise your principal findings and argument(s). What were the strengths and weaknesses of the manifesto References and images Your essay should be supported by references to relevant literature: you should refer to at least FIFTEEN references when constructing your essay. (You may include more than fifteen references, and you may refer to each more than once if required.) Online sources are permitted, but not more than 50% of your references should be online sources. Please refer to the referencing guide to ensure that all sources, including images, are cited correctly. Assessment Please see the assessment rubric for this task for details of the assessment criteria. Requirements Length: 2,000 words Written paper due: 4pm, Friday 5 May (Week 9) Final paper to be submitted electronically, through Blackboard Manifestoes who we are: manifesto of the constructivist group | Aleksandr Rodchenko, Varvara Stepanova, and Aleksei Gan | c. 1922 our book | El Lissitzky | 1926 typophoto | László Moholy-Nagy | 1925 the new typography | Jan Tschichold | 1928 the crystal goblet, or why Printing should be invisible | Beatrice Warde | 1930 grid and design philosophy | Josef Müller-Brockmann | 1981 good design is goodwill | Paul Rand | 1987 my way to typography | Wolfgang Weingart | 2000 typography as discourse | Katherine McCoy with David Frej | 1988 the macramé of resistance | Lorraine Wild | 1998 https://designopendata.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/graphicdesigntheory_helenarmstrong.pdf GRAP2081 AT2 Assessment Criteria HD+ (90–100) HD (80–89) D (70–79) C (60–69) P (50–59) N (0–49) History 30% Discuss the historical significance of a canonical work of communication design. An outstanding, accurate and insightful discussion of the historical significance of a design manifesto and communication designer. An excellent, accurate and insightful discussion of the historical significance of a a design manifesto and communication designer. A very good, accurate discussion of the historical significance of a design manifesto and communication designer. A good discussion of the historical significance of a design manifesto and communication designer, but with some errors or historical inaccuracies. An acceptable discussion of the historical significance of a design manifesto and communication designer, though compromised by a number of errors or historical inaccuracies. An unsatisfactory discussion of the historical significance of a design manifesto and communication designer: numerous or significant errors or historical inaccuracies. Assess 30% Analyse the influence of the same canonical work upon contemporary communication design. An outstanding and insightful assessment of the relationship between design industries and society, with clear articulation of the impact of the ideas expressed in your manifesto. An excellent, accurate and insightful assessment of the relationship between design industries and society, with clear articulation of the impact of the ideas expressed in your manifesto. A very good, accurate assessment of the relationship between design industries and society, with clear communication of the impact of the ideas expressed in your manifesto. A good assessment of the relationship between design industries and society, with good communication of the impact of the ideas expressed in your manifesto, but with some errors or inaccuracies. An acceptable assessment of the relationship between design industries and society, with some examination of the impact of the ideas expressed in your manifesto, though compromised by a number of errors or inaccuracies. An unsatisfactory assessment of the relationship between design industries and society, with little examination of the impact of the ideas expressed in your manifesto, due to numerous or significant errors or inaccuracies. Compare 30% Compare and contrast conceptual and creative/ business practices in communication design. Outstanding comparative analysis of the relationship between design thinking as expressed in your manifesto and the creative/ business practices of your chosen practitioner. Excellent comparative analysis of the relationship between design thinking as expressed in your manifesto and the creative/ business practices of your chosen practitioner. A very good comparative analysis of the relationship between design thinking as expressed in your manifesto and the creative/ business practices of your chosen practitioner. A good comparison of the relationship between design thinking as expressed in your manifesto and the creative/ business practices of your chosen practitioner, but with some errors or inaccuracies. An acceptable comparison of the relationship between design thinking as expressed in your manifesto and the creative/ business practices of your chosen practitioner, though compromised by a number of errors or inaccuracies. An unsatisfactory comparison of the relationship between design thinking as expressed in your manifesto and the creative/ business practices of your chosen practitioner, due to numerous or significant errors or inaccuracies. Referencing 10% Depth and breadth of sources and accuracy of referencing. Outstanding referencing: an outstanding selection of relevant and scholarly sources, characterised by breadth and depth, and with no errors or inconsistencies in referencing style. Excellent referencing: an excellent selection of relevant and scholarly sources, characterised by breadth and depth, and with no errors or inconsistencies in referencing style. Very good referencing: a very good excellent selection of relevant and scholarly sources, and with few or no errors or inconsistencies in referencing style. Good referencing, but with some issues: the selection of sources could be broader or more scholarly, or there are errors or inconsistencies in referencing style. Acceptable referencing, compromised by some issues: the selection of sources could be more scholarly, and/or there are errors or inconsistencies in referencing style. Unsatisfactory referencing: the sources are too few, not scholarly, or entirely missing, and/or there are numerous or significant errors or inconsistencies in referencing style.