Study Task 3 - Deconstruction, Pastiche and Establishing a Research Question

Deconstruction

Jaques Derrida observed that in western thinking, everything has an opposition that relates to itself that is either superior on inferior. For example, speech is superior to writing as it has more emotion involved and is therefore more powerful. 

Deconstruction is a way of questioning the balance between the superior and the inferior in western thinking to further understand how our society functions. The idea of feminism is based on this, as it is innately assumed that men are superior to women because of how many men are in positions of power compared to women.

Application

The idea of deconstruction lends itself to graphic design because it strongly supports the idea that the context in which something is in will affect the meaning of the thing itself. 

If you can manage to change the two things that are in opposition to each other so that one of them can be found within the other, it makes communication clearer. This can be seen in Swiss design, where rather than the typography fighting for superiority with the text, the typography is found within the importance of the text.

Pastiche

Frederick Jamerson same up with the idea that we use design styles from different eras of history in the modern day history to show our interest in the present. Pastiche is the theory that doing this takes the importance out of the history of the design because they're removed from their original context to become somewhat arbitrary.

Application

Examples of this can often be found in alcohol bottles. Jack Daniels and numerous brands of wine use old fashioned design styles create a more traditional look for their brand, which can be used to sell their product.

Establishing a Research Question

General Theme - Advertising
Issues - Consumerism, Financial Crisis, First Things First Manifesto, Desire

What I Want To Take From This

In Studio Task 2 we took an in-depth look at the First Things First Manifesto and a couple of other texts about it. I personally disagree with the underlying point the manifesto makes, particularly the updated 2000 version of it. I got a bit carried away with my disagreement in my triangulation exercise and think that the essay could be the perfect opportunity take a more in-depth and forcibly balanced look at the manifesto in the expectation that I can maybe start to accept it a bit more.

This doesn't seem particularly relevant to my practice now, that's because it probably isn't, but in a more long-term sense it could potentially be an important factor in what I do in the future. My first impression of the manifesto was pretty negative and I pretty much dismissed it straight away, but by doing the research question on it I'll be able to form a much more rounded opinion of it.