Lecture 9: What is Research?

When talking about research, it isn't something that is confined to just Context of Practice, with separate research for Personal and Professional Practice and another isolated approach to Studio Practice. Research is fundamental across all areas of my practice and it should underpin all modules continually; not singularly. Research isn't just about collecting data - it is also organising, documenting, analysing critically, interpreting, evaluating and reflecting. It is a practice where going to places, experiencing things and talking to people drive independent learning. Activities drive ideas. Trying and applying, bringing together the results of findings into a coherent output. Research is practice. 

---

• PPP - research of practice: research into practitioners, researching about practice and reflecting on my own practice.
• COP - research as practice: making up a fundamental part of my written responses as essays and visual journal.
• SP - research put into practice: through experimentation, conceptual ideas as making.

---

There are a range of different ideas as to what research is. The process of research is more important than the outcome, it isn't about a defined end point but about exploring a plethora of possibilities appropriate to the brief. Without research there is no development or innovation - only sameness and familiar solutions. Not knowing should propel me forward. Research itself isn't clarifying the world but posing more questions, problem solving, experimenting, discovering. Everyone is a genius at least once a year. As a professional I need to be able to come up with idea after idea after idea... with strategies, methods and models as a foundation to success. I need to evolve strategies to go into a situation where I am inspired and want to innovate and generate visual communication.

I have to get over my fear of failure and accept that I will get things wrong and make mistakes - otherwise, I will forever sit in my comfort zone. I will have a stagnant process that won't evolve. Failure is central to developing my practice. 'Practice makes perfect!'. Knowledge will come through iterating, repeating, making mistakes, failing quicker. I need to learn to get it wrong straight away, rather than later on, to improve quicker. More time to get it right next time. 'You won't know the outcome until you engage with the process'. As humans, we want to get it right before we get it wrong but developing work will help from the mistakes that are happening - rather than doing no work at all in fear of failing in the first place. Even when I do get it right, I need to push further!

When considering research, in its many guises, if we knew what we were doing it wouldn't be called research... it would just be doing. Part of the process is not knowing, it should be embraced. Ultimately, the Context of Practice module is based on not knowing. Stupid people don't ask questions - be open about not knowing! - by discussing and talking to people a path can be found to lead to solutions. Ideas are the currency of what we do as practitioners. Technical skills and practical work are the core of our work and we should be able to draw connections between ideas and research. They are not separate entities but part of a whole practice. Ideas are what drive our practice and form possibilities but research drives our skills, understanding and knowledge. We all live in the same world, in the same city, go to the same university, see, hear and taste the same things - but how we make contemporary or historical connections forms our opinions, interpretations, responses, visualisation. Research is about looking at what is there but thinking about it individually. Conceptual thinking, ideas generation, design theory and design principals. Collect information and material from a range of sources - online, library, lectures, seminars, magazines, podcasts, ephemera.

---

Approaches
• Stimulated approach: Looking for inspiration all around us. Putting ourselves in situations to see, hear, touch, taste and smell. Listening, watching, visiting, talking, being inspired by what's happening around us. Going to the library, watching a film, looking at an artist's work and practice. Making analogies to it; relating to your own work the exhibition you visited or the work you've seen. Drawing connections to the problem that needs solving.

• Systematic approach: Taking something that exists (images, collected items) deconstructing and reconstructing to see how it works. Draw it, redraw it, using systems and processes to restructure what has been collected. For creative people it is the core of their practice. You know your process of developing ideas and experimenting in your sketchbook to creating a visual journey to publication. We set ourselves up to do that.

• Intuitive approach: The previous two are an external processes; working physically. An intuitive approach is different. It is an internal repertoire of what we know, the skills we have developed and a reliable, successful approach to a problem. Not copying but acknowledging what has worked for someone else. It is something that comes from experiences. This approach is what we aspire to in relation to practice, in my profession as an illustrator... Where I become the person that people come to with a brief, an issue, a problem. My internal repertoire is my practice.

---

Research Types
• Primary Research: Collected for a specific end use and for solving a certain problem. Physically doing something we have never done before. Generating new experiences for yourself and new knowledge.

• Secondary Research: Facts, data, stuff that is already out there. Written by someone else, researched for something else at a different point in time. Analysing that research, considering tis relevance to your project. Secondary research has an analytical angle.

• Quantitive Research: Numerical data, figures, provable facts through measure. Objective.

• Qualitative Research: Observation, opinion, talking with people and finding out what they think, quality rather than quantity. Not necessarily provable but doesn't mean it's wrong. Subjective.

---

Process
• Assimilation: Process of analysis. Accumulating, processing and organising data in such a way that it turns into body knowledge.
• General Study: Structured, stimulated approach leading to ideas generation.
•Development: Identifying possibilities to move forward and develop further. Concepts, content, composition. Refining and solving.
• Communication: Understanding who is receiving the information and creating a sense of meaning.

---

For an essay, we need to read and research in order to form the basis of our writing. It is the same for other aspects of the illustrative practice. Finding facts leads to knowledge, which forms the basis of an intuitive approach. Innovation is born out of research. How do we use our starting points, initial concepts and ideas to go into the unknown? It isn't just about physically creating and being happy with the outcome - but also trying something else. Extending points of resolution. Asking questions is central to being an intelligent, forward-thinking practitioner. What are those questions? How do we identify the right methods of questioning? How? Why? What if? Developing answers and possible solutions. Research is driven by a question. In terms of research having an output, we need to understand that information has to be sufficient, competent and relevant.

Start anywhere! We don't know where we are going and we can't predict the outcome but we can make a start on finding out and making connections. The process is what is important and will lead to resolutions. When given a research problem or essay do not worry about getting it right from the start - just start doing it and a body of work will be created. You are at the centre of your research; you are the research tool, the interpreter, generating the material. You are the person making sense of the experience and the world unique to you. Research is what i'm doing and I don't know what I'm doing. Negotiate the space of what we know and don't know. Get it wrong, evaluate any mistakes and don't do it again next time. It is an ongoing process through blogs, test pieces, roughs, ideas and drafts - developing a body of research to document, reflect on and evaluate. Avoid panic and putting things off - just do!

Lecture 8: Digital Production & Distribution

There is a chronology to everything and exploring it can ensure that I make informative decisions in my practice. Making connections and establishing between knowledge from the past and present will help to strengthen my understanding of what came before and what I can create for the future. This was the last of the lectures where I would be looking at lineages, histories and chronologies. 

The digital world is part of my everyday life as a young person living in the 21st century. Information is a significant part of the human condition. Embracing and using technology has been the single biggest step forward we have made. There has been a moderate development over the past 7,500 years through the creation of language, written language, recorded concepts and ideas, through to the alphabet. In the last 100 years our development has escalated and in the past 10 years even more so. Technology has moved beyond anything we could have imagined; we have new ways of working, new ways of organising and new tools to help us with this.

Before we even had the internet and world wide web, Marshall McLuhan had realised the idea of a global culture and connectivity across the globe; a global village where we can barter, discuss, exchange dialogue between people. His theories were very forward thinking and progressive to further to human condition in relation to the development of industry and science. It formed the basis of how we engage with technology. Once we start to develop and use these tools to help live our lives they ultimate begin to shape us and we become dependent on them. Our point today is not the end point and things will keep developing and improving. Aesthetic judgements, society, culture and a historical context have all played a key part in why we now have accessories such as the iPhone, iPad, social media, and so on. Our developments have not finished yet and as it continues to evolve it will have an impact on culture and society who use these tools. What McLuhan suggested was the relationship between the medium and the message - in a Tetrad of media effects - elements of technological progress and the impact on society as well as its use. What does it enhance? Improve? What does it reverse and make obsolete? In technology going forward what has been retrieved from history?

In 1990 the low-priced Mac Classic was released, presenting an affordable access to digital production. In regards to type and what is allowed us to do was that we could now investigate and explore a range of ways to use typography. It enhanced productivity meaning we could work quicker and more effectively. There were very slow methods of production before but now we could correct mistakes within seconds without wasting materials. What did it retrieve? Typography became a mechanical and corporate process but the Mac brought back individual creativity, not just a standard set of fonts.Where there were only the methods of traceable type, letraset and hand-made methods we now had a graphic interface instead. What happened when pushed to its limits? Problems came down to speed, access, cost, memory. So the Tetrad works in relation to the introduction of the Mac Classic and type design and can be applied to most things.

34 years on we now have touch screens, smart phones, iPads - all enhancing individual experience in a learning context. People can learn in different ways and develop interactive approaches to learning. Old work stations, laptops, taking notes with pen and paper and large scale computers aren't necessarily needed anymore to connect. What happens when the iPad is challenged? Access. cost, limited space, memory, iOS apps only. From an educational aspect you are able to record and document your own learning. From the Gutenberg printing press to the Mac Classic has been a slow and arduous process; but the Mac Classic to the development of the iPad has been much quicker.

The shift of analogue into digital in terms of aesthetic has been considerable. New aesthetic has grown out of production and design and a whole shift in visual language. Technology has it's own visual language. It is very much about seeing the world and how we associate that with how we see technology. When looking at the digital clock, the way the interface looks and how that layout works we associate with technology. Likewise, virtual reality creating environments, websites, film sets; creating an aesthetic around digital processes. When we see the clock on the right, we associate it with precision, accuracy and science. The clock on the left is far more visual and provides a cognitive  response. For most people, the clock on the right will be easier to read as it shows a map of what has come before, what will come next, a sense of consequence and is cyclical. Visual cues and seeing the dial physically affects how we interpret the time. The digital clock only shows what is, not what will come next.

From my own individual standpoint, I much prefer the digital clock and everything it represents for me as a severely sight-impaired person as opposed to the analogue clock which is far too visual and, when displayed on a wall, impossible to read. Because of the advancements of Apple technology specifically, I have the ability to partake in the aforementioned 'global village' and have the same even footing as everyone else with the plethora of accessibility options available to me. From zoom, VoiceOver and a Braille keyboard I am able to read the time, blog, document, shop, socialise and browse at my own leisure and I sometimes prefer the online landscape to the real world; where obstacles are far more prevalent in day-to-day life. While other tech manufacturers are catching up in terms of accessibility, I will remain true to Apple as they have provided so much for me in the past 16 years - right from owning my very first desktop iMac in 2000. While I was being made fun of at school for not being able to see the time - and had to set aside time with my mum to puncture holes into a wall clock so I could physically feel what the hands were pointing to - I was ahead of everyone else in the virtual reality.

Paddington Bear is another good example of analogue and digital processes. With the 2014 film, the real world was green-screened into hyper-real character development, blurring the lines between the cyber world and the real world. Realistic hair and fur created the basis of Paddington who was super-imposed into filmed footage. It develops a sense of nostalgia mixed with the transference and visual attributes to a human being; associations with reality even though it is super real. Digital aesthetics grown out of and in response to the digital age we are living in. Minority Report, Blade Runner, The Matrix, Iron Man, Star Trek - all impacting on the way we see the real world aesthetically, digitally, technologically. Shaping the environment we live in and the way we develop products. This creates new technologies. The ear pieces from Star Trek have become our bluetooth headphones, their clam-shell communicator became the flip phone, Iron Man's suit interface has become Google Glass, Minority Report's shopping centre personalising itself to a customer has influenced the virtual Dior store in the States. A key factor in digital production isn't just about what something does - but what something looks like. We have to engage with and consider the relationship we have with technology - physically, emotionally and technically. Rather than just a straightforward acceptance of something, we go through psychological changes as humans to train ourselves to use and implement these tools.

The mechanical aesthetic of the past has similarities to the digital aesthetic of today. Our current / present will change. The next generation of digital natives are now coming through. Who are they? How is that going to affect technological development and how will that affect me as an illustrator and visual communicator and, ultimately, citizen of the world?

Lecture 7: Print Culture - Part 2

In the 21st century we are now in the Late Age of Print and truly within a Digital Age where all forms of art and design exist. Before this, the traditional forms of artistic practice included painting, sculpture and poetry. New media and mechanical revolution paved the way for textiles to be produced on a mass scale, print production, art reproduction, printed pattern wallpapers and mass-manufacture. The aura of the traditional art practice was seen as being something superior, mystical, magical; the product of geniuses and great men reinforced by the art institutions of the time. Fine art began to diminish because of the creation and multiplication of printing and reproduction means. New forms of art smashed through the elitist club and fought for culture and representation of everyone. Collectives were emerging among practitioners, William Morris and Merton Abbey Mills for example, where independent studios and spaces were organised as a form of rival practice against entrepreneurial practice. New tech was implemented into anti-capitalist art projects that proposed different ways of organising the world.

In the illustrative discipline there has been a noticeable return to to older methods of handmade production, as well as in other forms of visual communication such as graphic design and animation. Screen printing, linocut, wood block printing, letter press and mechanical type on old machines are taught in art schools now - whereas in the '90s everything was purely digital as that was the landscape we were entering at the time. There are whole print festivals dedicated to graphic arts showing that there is a real taste for it again. Why is the case? Why retain an interest in these methods of production? Especially since we have easier to use, quicker, reliable, and proficient techniques to hand now. Why retain an interest in the hand-made?

The first proposal is that using analogue methods provide an explicit retreat from instant gratification.  In a world where we can pull up any answer on our phone from a Google search, and there are apps and software that can recreate any digital technique we want - things have become dehumanising, and using older methods of production is a symbol of rebellion against our world of mass-information and quick turnarounds. The Slow Movement, as an example, is a manifesto to contemporary society. It is an attempt to reclaim your life where humanity should re-engage with raw materials, think about and consider the world around us and connect with other people using physical capacities. Avoid rushing when going about your daily routine, even in creative production, and seize the opportunity to enjoy what is around you in its simplest forms. It is about doing less with an increase of quality; taking regular breaks, clearing space, not being reactionary, being nostalgic and changing the structure of our society. Locally sourced methods of production are favoured, implementing a small network of producers and consumers, using grown ingredients rather than pre-packed foods, and working so that you are more environmentally conscious. Learning skills and taking charge of your own life rather than having everything handed to you instantly.

Similarly, there is a Slow Fashion movement reacting against the quick overhauls of the catwalk and seasonal trends. Throughout high street stores, every retailer is selling the same clothes - even the same things that were sold a few years ago - but as consumers we are tricked into thinking these are new things that we need. Retailers rip-off the couture and mannequins are dressed to show you how to assemble your dress sense. There is no individuality; no personal identity. Slow fashion introduces the idea of using local, independent producers and / or using what couture discards and would eventually become landfill. It focuses on humanity and prioritises a model of practice where economic growth is not the most important thing. Creativity is! Genuine human qualities of sharing knowledge, being affordable, being inclusive - not unlike what William Morris was doing back in the day. Slow Design follows the same principals - focusing not on the end product or the quick solution, but how a practice can relate to environmental issues in a harmonious way. Progress rather than regression. Print culture is important because of these subtle policies in the example Slow Movements.

Flyers from the Leeds Print Festival in 2013 uses letter press printing and vintage poster techniques, harking back to older methods of production and presenting a feeling of nostalgia and the simpler times of yesteryear. Anthony Burrill's posters were inserted into the circuits of mass markets and makers of capitalism, who have no thought for real creativity or art, commenting on publicity, society and the environment. It created an interesting rupture in advertisement. Their works appropriate the aesthetic of print culture but are explicitly political in nature.

The Print Project reclaims old industrial printing presses and puts them to use again. The studio space looks like a museum of defunct machines from 500 year old ago. The machinery, which has been killed off by modern society, is reused and provides comment on sustainability, how our culture has no regard for maintaining and reusing anything and disregards the old in favour of the new. It is an educational project as well as a graphic design project where part of it is about using the antique machinery in modern briefs but part of it is also about setting up workshops so that the public can learn the process and see their prints being made in front of them. It's not just about nostalgia, The Print Project explores the ways in which old-fashioned print mediums can take on the digital age on its own terms. Older processes such as glyphs, letter press and woodblock are blended with glitches of the media age - testing the aesthetics of old and new.

The Pink Milkfloat, a creation of Richard Lawrence, houses a simple hand-operated press that is transported to events allowing visitors to create keepsakes of their own. People can invest in and learn about printing processes rather than just buying a print and not seeing the craft behind it. It adds value - human and social value - to creative practice when an audience can participate and engage. People have a much more bonded relationship with the artist when they understand the complexities of your practice. In creative practice we are making social relations happen; creating networks, providing fun, happening upon chance meetings and sharing skills. Building collaborations rather than transactional relationships, in a participational world. How many social spaces are there where we don't have to buy something? Social relationships are seen as commodities by big corporations such as Starbucks, who rely on your financial transaction while providing you with the shared warm space, with a treat, for £5. Is this what friendships are built upon now?

The Glastonbury Free Press, an off-shoot of The Print Project, marries the audience as journalist and reporter. A Vandercook printing press is housed in a tent and used at every Glastonbury festival to create a free political newspaper; designed by the people for the people. Visitors come to the tent, talk to the printers inside about burning issues and turn it into a physical newspaper edition. It is typeset, printed, documented, co-authored, spat out and relayed around the festival free of charge. A relational piece spotlighting equality, inclusion, co-authorship, participation. Older methods of communication are partnered with modern opinions and sharing that with festival-goers. It isn't just about a technical process that is a legitimate and valid politics to it. Humanising politics in a digital age. Reclining and reusing what our society and culture has thrown away in a creative way - a defence of revivalist practices. Post-print culture?

In the digital age there is an infinite amount of software available to use where people can edit their photographs, create their own fonts, paint their own pictures. If we are angry at that then are we being the elitists? Instead, the majority share cat pictures on Tumblr and Facebook. New technology should be providing creativity and inspiration - the possibilities of infinite knowledge. There is an argument to be had that actually the resurgence of hand-made production methods have recreated aura again; aura is the admiration for the traditional, using a high level of skill, mystification around it, respect for the master craftsman. In our digital environment screen prints and letter press, rather than just drawing on a tablet, has aura now. The mechanical arts have aura. There is a negative politics to this as, while small print runs will allow you to have aura and a solid community of consumers, things can be sold more expensively. However, the real radicalism and the real social consequence is to be found in digital printing. We are in an era now where the radical practices are through digital printing; the capacity of a computer to steal any image and share it online for free. An interconnected network of creatives outside the studio partaking in a commodity exchange.

Print culture has the capacity to be exponentially greater within the digital age. When used right and used for the benefit of humanity it can achieve some amazing things. The digital age takes the art out of the gallery and into the online landscape so that we no longer need to behave in a certain way in a space and towards a piece of work. The parameters are removed and we are free to browse and behave at our leisure. There is a politics to popular art and to print culture. Digital print is not just about the output but the capacity to steal and use knowledge and imagery and use it to our own gain - just like Duchamp did when scribbling on a reproduction of the Mona Lisa - but it is the death of aura and a revolutionary shattering. Art being deactivated and recycled in a democratised way with contemporary mass-movements being reinstated.

Study Task 3: Image Analysis

• Fight the Nothingness by David Shrigley (2012)

• Why have I chosen this image? Shrigley's illustration is one of the works Zeegen is dissatisfied with in his quote, stating that it 'says nothing - a call-to-arms or bland sloganeering, a statement of intent or another vacuous dictum?'. This is a good starting point for my image analysis task and allows me to draw from Zeegen's downcast text directly; debating as to whether he is correct is his comments.

• Descriptive analysis: It is very limited in its colour palette with only 2 colours (a salmon pink shade and a forest green shade) plus basic stock. The text is emblazoned across the top centre, underlined for possible spotlighting and attention-grabbing purposes. With mostly a central composition, the clenched fist is placed ever so slightly more towards the left-side of the canvas. The message is one of rebellion, uprising, revolt and revolution; though in a very subtle manner. Created using gouache, the main motif and icon is the clenched fist of the 'people'.

• Contextual analysis: Painted and displayed in 2012, the illustration is rather recent from a political standpoint - which is my overarching theme for my context of practice work. It was displayed on a large scale at the side of the Hayward Gallery in London alongside Shrigley's Brain Activity exhibition inside the gallery space. The target audience would primarily be gallery-goers and art enthusiasts, fans of his work and the London public walking past. I imagine Shrigley had intentions of the message travelling farther afield with news sites and social media. It considers and aims to critique race, class, culture, society and gender. I have contacted David Shrigley for more clear answers on his intentions with this piece as the outcome is so vague - and I hope to be able to provide a more detailed contextual and theoretical response soon.

• Theoretical analysis: I believe Shrigley's piece has both Modern and Postmodern qualities. It is Modernist through the use of departure from classical and traditional forms; preferring to be simplistic, streamlined and free of ornamentation. The image has themes of progress, collaboration, utopia which were ideals intrinsic to the Modernist movement. Vague Postmodern undertones are prevalent through Shrigley's sense of dark humour, scepticism, cynicism of our society, subverts older concepts and themes and uses his own unique, childlike drawings and paintings to communicate complicated notions.

---

• Donald Trump Balloon by Stanley Chow (New York Times, 2015)

• Why have I chosen this image? Even though Chow's illustration was created a few years after Lawrence Zeegen's "Where is the content? Where is the comment?" opinion piece. I feel it fills the void that's been present in recent political illustration. The interdisciplinary nature of this piece also sets it apart from other politically-based illustrations and provides a sense of departure from what we usually see in politics pieces - cartoons, comics, caricatures, etc.

• Descriptive analysis: This is a multimedia and project creates using different media - vector shapes in Illustrator printed onto a balloon and photographed for the front cover of the New York Times. A simplistic colour palette has been used incorporating black, white, red, orange and glossy blonde - alluding to Trump's false exterior? Wealth, self-importance and self-obsession? Compositionally, the balloon is floating towards the right of the canvas - more than likely suggesting the right-leaning Republican political party that Trump was spearheading at the time (now, unfortunately, President-elect). The metaphor of using a balloon represents Trump's ego - largely inflated and full of hot air. He is flighty, volatile, unsophisticated, a tycoon who feels he is untouchable, floating above the rest of us. If a sharp object (threat) came into contact with him, would he pop? Subjects and themes include people and politics within a magazine cover context with the certainty of having a supporting article or opinion piece to go along with it.

• Contextual analysis: A New York publication  with primarily an American audience but has global appeal with the illustration created by an English (Mancunian) illustrator. Trump himself is a white male who is very privileged as a billionaire born into wealth and influence. His views of race, gender, class and ability are highly archaic and controversial; with outdated views of culture and society. "Make America Great Again!" indeed!

• Theoretical analysis: The final work is Modernist in aesthetic in that the outcome is very functional, minimalist and deprived on unnecessary decoration. It can also be considered as Postmodern as anything goes, an illustration can be applied to a balloon, there is subtle humour, a bricolage of artistic media with hints of pastiche and parody. In regards to Zeegen's quote, it provides both comment and content, form and function, materials and message, design doing and design thinking. The illustration involves itself within the big debates of our society.

---

• Britain's Media are Ignoring Issues by Sébastien Thibault (The Guardian, 2015)

• Why have I chosen this image? I believe this illustration has both form and function, is both aesthetically pleasing but also has a clever, thought-provoking message. It is a contemporary illustration, involving an overarching theme of politics, which I can use as a counter-argument to Zeegen's quote. While this image in particular was created 3 years after Zeegen's comment, Sébastien Thibault's work was very much in demand near to the same time (as seen in this "You can see why Québec-based illustrator Sébastien Thibault is so in demand" article by It's Nice That (http://www.itsnicethat.com/articles/sebastien-thibault)

• Descriptive analysis: Thibault focuses his illustrations on conceptual and symbolic colours and shapes with a print-based aesthetic. Using a limited colour palette of red, blue, black, white and red he is able to clearly define the British flag, presented as a metaphorical rug, an authoritative figure with a brush and speech bubbles. The message is very clear - Issues during the 2015 General Election were being swept under the rug but powerful figures such as the media and the Government.

• Contextual analysis: In context, this illustration was created for an opinion piece on The Guardian website by George Monbiot called "There are issues that really matter at this election. But Britain's media are ignoring them" (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/05/election-issues-media-ignoring-nation-arrested-development). Gossip and speculation seemed to be more important than genuine matters regarding the UK election. Facts we should know about, such as the country's poo paying more tax than the rich elite, was not being commented on at the time and swept aside. We have a broken system that no one is willing to try and fix. Genuine matters such as mental health, climate change and soil loss are silenced and traded for tittle-tattle and parties being at each other's throats. Do the opinions of the public really matter as we are not the rich elite? Or can our voices unify and outnumber those in power?

---

• Voting by Pawel Kuczynski (2013)

• Why have I chosen this image? I have enjoyed Kucsynski's satirical work for some time and feel his Voting illustration is one of my favourites and one of his most powerful. Using a very simple concept, of politician as farmer, he successfully shows how the general public are seen as nothing more than a herd of sheep - with a master who has a great need to steer 'us' towards their side. We need to be governed and kept under control or all hell would break loose.

• Descriptive analysis: Using a muted colour palette, the eye is drawn primarily to the coloured box as well as the herd of sheep being led towards it. The illustration is hand-drawn with shadow and texture coming through and it generally has a cold feeling about it. Nothing is inviting or warm and it is made up of mostly blank space - a sense of emptiness? Devoid of feeling and compassion from the political system?

• Contextual analysis: Aimed towards the working classes who make up the majority of a nation. We are one - all identical with no regard for race, gender, age or ability. We aren't a race of individuals but a body of sameness where only our vote is required and not our thoughts or opinions. There isn't much information that I could track down about the illustration, as Kuczynski's website is limited in content and doesn't detail the thought process or context behind his work.  From what I can gather, he creates work on a freelance basis, in a satirical context, without the work necessarily going to print as editorials. His work is open to interpretation but he states he is anti-war.

• Theoretical analysis: Postmodern tones with satire and humour as the main focus; parodying a voting card and marrying different concepts in an illustrative way. The grass is greener if you vote for this politician. Political ideology. Manipulation. Mass behaviour. We are bound, sub-servant and must break free. "Foucalt's insights on how learning and information are the best forms of power in governing masses, are pretty insightful in understanding how morality and indignation can easily be used to direct and influence the masses." (Life on Mercury, 2015. https://lifeonmercury.org/category/politics/)

---

• Guns Cause All of This Trouble! by Rob Smith, Jr. (2012)

• Why have I chosen this image? Created during the same year of Zeegen's article, this illustration by Rob Smith, Jr. comments on how American society can be shocked at mass shootings while their children are playing video games involving the very same thing - only virtually. Video games today are being used to train soldiers, in fact. What does this tell us?

• Descriptive analysis: With a cartoon / comic aesthetic, this illustration comments on gun control, mass shootings in schools and violent video games aimed at children - and how all are linked together in an ironic way. The main subjects at play are people and technology.

• Contextual analysis: Created in 2012, at the same time as Zeegen's comment of illustration being void of any meaning, I feel this is a prime example of good political illustration with content and comment. Though focusing on American politics, Smith Jr. is making a link between video games, mass shootings and the lack of gun control - something many people don't seem to want to face and associate. How can change be made when politicians and celebrities have a colourful gun collection and post selfies of themselves hunting for sport? How can you purchase a violent video game for your child and not see how bloodthirsty they are towards pixelated populations? Is the development of technology detrimental to us as a human race? Have we come too far that we are now reverting back to our archaic, animalistic ways? However, it isn't just video games. TV shows, movies, music videos and toys all portray guns in a 'cool' light, often used as a powerful phallic metaphor in old Spaghetti Westerns.

Lecture 6: Print Culture - Part 1

The "age of print" began around 1450 with Gutenberg's printing press. The invention of new technologies enabled the availability and accessibility of art and design to widen through the use of processes such as lithographic printing, screen printing and photography, and had an effect on art establishments (galleries and academies) as well as culture and the wider world in general. 

Traditionally, the fine arts were seen as encompassing painting, sculpture, architecture, music and poetry. These were taught in art schools and academies and the only forms that art could take. There were a couple of institutions per country and they were usually linked to the aristocracy. There is a big history of paintings that glorified rich people and their world which was seen as the standard style of art. Academies taught this certain style of artistic practice - which was the same for hundreds of years and reproduced throughout the 1600's and 1700's.



When the Industrial Revolution happened, sometime between 1760 and 1840, society really shifted and huge factories were being created to new products on new machines. Textiles were being produced, books were printed, objects were manufactured at an astonishing rate. As a result, more factories were made to generate more profit and cities were erected from small villages, expanding ever larger, to compensate people living and going to work in the same areas. The working class.

The first sense of a class divide was present, exposing a class structure and ladder of labels, from the industry workers (living in terrible conditions) to the factory owners (of relative affluence) to the upper middle class and the aristocracy. Before this, there was just royalty and everyone else. There was now a noticeable, physical segregation between divides in society. Because the working class were isolated and confined to their machines and presses, a working class culture emerged - pubs, music halls, papers, pamphlets, penny dreadfuls - the birth of popular culture arrived because of industrialisation. The snobbery emitted from the upper classes is still echoed today; what is considered the fine arts and the graphic arts? Fine art of sculpture and painting is still seen as the upper class art whereas graphics are the popular working class arts.

Because of capitalism, new ways of experiencing paintings were fashioned. Instead of being commissioned from the aristocracy to paint a portrait and the notable figure then unveiling the piece in front of a small circle of wealthy friends, artists found that setting up their paintings in a gallery and charging people admission to look at the portfolio of work generated more money than selling a single piece of work. Selling through making reproductions of art as prints make fortunes; though the status of the artist is lessened. New institutions taught new forms of art and print, schools of design, and spread over the provinces. These are the inheritors of the art schools today, of which Leeds College of Art is a part of. Others were subsumed into wider universities. These art schools are the inheritors of schools of design; they aren't academies or universities. They give people the skills o work in production. New products and new machines gave way to new forms and new institutions - resulting in new markets and culture being rewritten because of new technologies.

Instead of going to a gallery, printed items such as the London Illustrated News were circulated and relayed where famous artworks come to us and we can have our own printed copy of the work to display. It then demystifies the art as it can be owned by anyone and placed above a fireplace. Technological reproduction of art removes the "aura" surrounding it; creativity, genius, external value, tradition, authority, authenticity, distance and mystery. The status of the creator of the art is lessened as well as the art itself.

When photography emerged, portrait painters were out of business; people preferred to have their pictures taken rather than commissioning a portraitist and sitting for hours on end while they were painted through a representation. Graphic design and new technology democratised culture; what was the culture of a few became the culture of many - which is a positive thing. Print capitalism developed where entrepreneurs who were looking for a "quick buck" profited from popular art and ripping off famous paintings. Fine art is commercially driven, there is a certain practice that is solely just based around profit.

William Morris as an example of a practice emerging that was pushing against print capitalism. He was a radical socialist who used new mechanical productions of making and printing as a weapon against the system. He created work that was beautiful, that showed the natural world and its beauty complexity. He was all for using the democratic potential of new mediums to create beautiful and affordable works. William Morris is often associated with his wallpapers - often seen in the houses of the rich elite - which he was against, so perhaps he failed in a way? He worked with Merton Abbey Mills in a collective, co-operative and collaborative studio where every crafter was not just a mere labourer and had a stake in the work made and the profits. Beautiful things were created that were affordable to everyone and they strived to work towards a fairer society. 

Popular art was created through the industrial revolution. Before this there was a divide between high art and popular art which can still be seen today. I am the product of the working-class side of that divide as is the institution I study at, Leeds College of Art. Making art commercially, art that is understandable, and art that is for everyone is still an underlying motive a lot of what we do at LCA. It is still at the heart of the problem whether something is considered art or not. Maybe this is a false question? Is everything art? The popular arts and graphic arts want to be inclusive to everyone and previously Fine Art never did - preferring to align itself among taste-makers and the rich elite - and continued to disassociate itself until the Modernist art movement. What happens at this time is that culture, and those in charge of deciding what is considered a masterpiece, then gets democratised and the whole world is in control; no longer at the decision of just the taste makers. A deep political battle is at the core of all print practices today. There are printers striving to be artists or illustrators and some not wanting to be either. This frames everything and creates an interesting way of reading into print produced works.

Contextual Research for Essay

---

Who is Lawrence Zeegen?

The first thing I want to research is  - just who is Lawrence Zeegen? I have a vague recollection of purchasing one of his books for the illustration course and reading the majority of it back in August - but who is he as a practitioner? I feel this will help me to understand his sweeping statements if I can understand him as a person... Is he a seasoned illustrator? A newbie? A scholar? From my research, I have discovered that he is, in fact, a Professor and Dean of Design at London College of Communication at UAL London.

From the Ravensbourne website: "Professor Lawrence Zeegen has lectured at conferences and institutions and acted as a design education consultant nationally and internationally - across over 20 countries. Having practiced as an illustrator since graduation with BA (Hons) in Graphic Arts (1st Class) from Camberwell College of Arts in 1986 and MA Illustration from the Royal College of Art in 1989; Lawrence's clients include major international newspapers, magazines, book publishers, design companies and advertising agencies. Lawrence was a regular contributing illustrator for The Guardian newspaper between 2005 and 2010. He is a Trustee of D&AD, a Trustee of the De Le Warr Pavilion and a member of the Design Council Sounding Board." He also has a lot of accolades in terms of being a founding member of design agencies across London and as a design writer for websites and 9 published books.

In conclusion, he is a major figure in the contemporary illustrative world with vast knowledge, insight and understanding of the field. He has written articles, books and lectures and is involved with the practice in an academic setting. Despite his achievements as a respected figure-head, I cannot help but think his original article for Creative Review is quite snobbish and boils down to personal taste... in that he disregards contemporary illustration, particularly at a commercial print fair as 'contemporary eye candy' which is exactly what it is supposed to be, with immediacy without looking beyond the aesthetics on the surface. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the argument he is trying to get across, but I don't think the work of David Shrigley and the Pick Me Up print festival are the places to look to for Earth-shattering responses to society, culture and politics.

---

Context of the Quote

The meat of the article has a shrewd, condescending tone of voice - commenting directly on an artist whose work is entirely based on parody, satire and pastiche and a print fair that exists to showcase designers' work for them to sell commercially as prints. I do, however, start to agree with Zeegen mid-ay through his rant - in that the 2012 Olympics should have encompassed the work of UK graphic designers, illustrators and creatives, rather than / or alongside fine artists, and that more could and should have been said and done by illustrators and designers in response to this missed opportunity.

"So where does illustration go next? How does the discipline move forward? If the subject has stalled, isn't interested in reflecting upon the big issues or commenting upon the here and now, where is the future for the graphic arts?" He poses some interesting questions and also mentions successful contemporary print publishers that are keeping the discipline interesting (Nobrow, Ditto Press, Landfill Editions, Panther Club) - but isn't that for him to facilitate as a Professor and lecturer? Enthusing the new generation of illustrators and designers he teaches to question forms of communication and visual output? It isn't an undertaking that only falls onto Shrigley's shoulders, surely!

---

What is Illustration?

The first place I wanted to look was in the works of Lawrence Zeegen himself... What does he define as illustration? Good contemporary illustration? Does he encourage readers to push the boundaries? Honestly, his introduction was rather vague, saying everything and nothing at all - ironically, just like Shrigley's poster! Illustration is hard to define, pinpoint and put into a box which I feel reflects the practice perfectly.

"Illustration is not so straightforward and it isn’t easy to describe or to classify, to type cast or to pin down. It sits somewhere between art and graphic design. Illustration came into existence to help us make sense of our world – to allow us to record, describe and communicate the intricacies of life. It has never been more diverse or disjointed. The concern for contemporary illustration is to resist classification, to surprise its audience, and to remain true to the concept that it is anything but straightforward."

---

David Shrigley: Brain Activity

http://distortedarts.com/david-shrigley-brain-activity-hayward-gallery-london/

The exhibition in question targeted by Zeegen, David Shrigley's Brain Activity exhibited at London's Hayward Gallery in 2012. Shrigley's work is known to be skeptical, witty, questioning, humorous and silly. He himself commented, "The responses I would like are laughter, intrigued confusion and disquiet."

Looking at Shrigley's portfolio of work, it is clear to see he is an artist of a simple nature. His work doesn't scream 'fancy aesthetics' to me and he purely wants to communicate silly thoughts, ideas and pondering. He focuses on line quality and how to use that to convey his humorous thoughts to share with the people of today through is various social media platforms. There is nothing serious or thought provoking to be found, just a snapshot of someone's mind.

He does have a particular 'style' though and this communicates his wacky personality and message through equally wacky doodles - odd proportions, strange characters, mistakes in writing that are scribbled out, hand-written thoughts - it doesn't concern itself with prettiness or decoration.

---

Pick Me Up
http://pickmeup.somersethouse.org.uk/2016/

The Pick Me Up: Graphic Arts festival is another target of Zeegen's, but what is it and what is its function? Looking at the website, it appears to be a very popular staple at Somerset House as it has returned for its seventh year this year. It 'features top emerging illustrators and designers as well as more established names in graphic arts.' Therein lies a diverse program of workshops with artist, designers and illustrators, specially selected by an industry panel, showcasing 3D, animated and illustrated installations. Collectives, galleries and studio can take up residence in their own space to meet and network with an audience and platform their work.

---

Reflection
Now that I have researched my quote in a much wider context, having a more informed opinion the comments made by Zeegen... where do I want to go with my research? What do I want to investigate? Is it the politics of illustration? Political illustration in itself? Trends in illustration? Taste and aesthetics? Style is popping out a lot to me, and I am considering whether this is a question of style driving content and communicating a message. Style can be an extremely important element in conveying cohesive communication. There's quite a lot of angles to go at and consider and I will need to give this some thought. For the next steps in my research I would like to read Varoom's Style Issue, the Design of Dissent by Tony Kushner and Propaganda by Edward Bernays to support me from a theoretical standpoint and hopefully generate some ideas and content.

Lecture 5: Type Production and Distribution - Part 2

"Since typography is a communication method that utilises a gathering of related subjects and methodologies that includes sociology, linguistics, psychology, aesthetics, and so much more..." There's a whole chronology around type and visual literacy. The lecture is not just focused on type or image but the relationship between those and my practice in regards to history, politics, society, culture, technology and aesthetics. In order to innovate and present new methods of communicating visually, I need to understand the basic building blocks of line quality, mark making, texture, pattern and drawing so that I can reassemble these elements for future communications. I need to understand how and why things are as they are now and how they were in the past.

How does culture, society, technology, etc. influence type? How is it relevant to my practice as an illustrator? There is a connection between these and the work I am producing. Typography is a communication method taking content and meaning to relay information to an audience. Linguistics and language is a communication system. In order to understand type I need to develop an understanding of where it came from and the cultural, historical and societal reference points from where it originated. Mediating knowledge coming forward from history; redefining the future of this discipline.

When defining terms we have to be clear on the history and the location of when and where we are describing. Type is the physical development of printed media. This can range from being carved in stone, to using metal letterpress, to a thick brush; all of these impact the aesthetic and have a culture and history surrounding the techniques. Mesopotamia (ancient Sumer) in 3,200 BCE and Mesoamerica around 600 BCE is approximately where the written word as symbols began to emerge. Language is something that has developed over time; it is man-made, not naturally occurring. Literacy and the ability to read and write holds its roots in oral communication and it's thanks to trade and commerce around the globe that the oral became the written. The key thing to remember is that type is language-based and there was a movement from oral tradition to something that happened visually; a physical representation of signs and symbols that make up the alphabet today. There is a parallel chronology through the Orient. We need to be specific about about reference points.

There is a relationship between the visual literacy of type and technology. A design element has always been there. The alphabet and the English language are both robust and durable and will last. For any language to exist there needs to be an agreement between a group of people that one thing will stand for another; a phonetic sound or letter will associate or represent a thing. Our alphabet as we know it today came from a series of signs and symbols that were representations of cows, fish and homes. These condensed down to Occidental symbols. They are instantly recognisable, legible, embedded in how we learn. It is a coded system of a commonly held understanding which forms visual literacy. True alphabets consistently assign letters to both consonants and vowels on an equal basis.

Above is a typographic timeline of classification tracing through the development of type from classical old style through to transitional, modern, Bauhaus / Swiss Style and contemporary. We are now at the Post Digital age of type. Post-industrialisation across Europe and America, after World War 1, saw society having a new way of looking at the world. There were many displaced people across the globe witnessing new environments, new ways of living and emerging technology. The Bauhaus, in Germany, especially wanted to rebuild the world creatively. Manufacturers, engineers, makers, artisans, drawers, letterers, carpenters and artists were working alongside each other for the first time. Previously, carpenters created wooden chairs but now industrialisation saw chairs being made from metal on a mass scale. This signified a shift in production. A series of type faces developed during this Bauhaus period, by graphic designers and typographers in the Bauhaus, that were driven by the prevalent mechanical production which governed how type looked.

The Bauhaus drew ideas through future-making connecting technology with photography, theatre and costume. Factories were nearby feeding into how craftsmen developed their work. The Bauhaus introduced the idea that 'form follows function' feeding through all creative practices. Function drives the object, disregarding decoration. It's a reductionist view of design, purpose and functionality. It is not a dead concept - it still rings true today.

The Bauhaus looked at form and function in terms of the clarity of communication, legibility and designed elements around that. Things like weight, visual balance, communication, type, graphic design, promotion and illustration worked together to present clear ideas. There is still resonance and relevance today especially in 3 dimensional images, modern methods and contemporary design. Nothing has gone away, the same ideas have been reinvented, reimagined, recycled and reiterated. The same principles are laid down. Hitler eventually shut down the Bauhaus in 1933 because it had too many ideas. On the back of that blip was the development of the Swiss Modern period in type.

• Pre modern - God put it there and that's how it has always been
• Modern - Post-War global culture. Why is it there and why does it have to be that way?
• Postmodern - Onward and upward development of technologies in a linear way but with relationships to other areas. Pragmatic, one into another.

In 1957 the Helvetica font was developed and created by Max Miedinger; the epitome of a very Modernist typeface. It provided clarity for the mass production of information and communication. Helvetica stripped away anything decorative and irrelevant. Function drove the form - form followed function. It was used in clocks, letters, posters, and other printed ephemera and was the benchmark of modernist type. 25 years later, Microsoft stole the typeface and used it as the base to create their Arial font. They did the bare minimum to avoid copyright infringement. This represented a shift in the phase of visual literacy driven by technology, globalisation and commerciality. Type could be used in many different ways and had to adapt. Previously, Bauhaus and Swiss Modern typographers were the innovators of creating effective ways of applying type to a culture, society and product. This was carried forward to 1990 with the birth of the Mac Classic computer. It was the first computer that could be used by designers, in their own studio, incorporating a keyboard and mouse together as one desktop package.

This was where type design was democratised. We moved away from brushes, letter press and hand-crafted methods to digital type that was convenient and created instantly on screen. Any style could be created and mimicked digitally. What it allowed type to become was part of the way we see the word now. Type became the focal point on tape and CD covers, magazines, t-shirts, logos. Type was no longer a special thing that typographers produced; designers, graphic designers and creatives now had the power to create their own typefaces.

Through the development of the world wide web, by Tim Berners-Lee in 1990, type was distributed through websites and e-mail - no longer requiring printing for communication purposes. A publisher and printer were no longer needed. This global opportunity only lasted for 5 years, before Bill Gates created Internet Explorer which went on to become the first globally adopted browser. This laid the foundations for template-based browser design and layouts placing many design restrictions and governing how we designed online for the next 25 years. It also established the Windows font set as a global standard for browsers, including such abominations as Comic Sans MS and Arial.

We now communicate very differently because of the web. The size of documents reduced considerably - from long papers and essays to bite-sized chunks that we can consume on the screen. Technology drove that change. Mobile technology changed how we communicate again; because we have the internet, and it is so accessible, we are making less phone calls than ever before. Instant messaging and video calling are now the most popular communication methods. Typing is in a state of flux, as seen with dwindling SMS and texting figures, because of social media's ability to micro-blog and become our own publisher.

Emojis are a global language, taking us back full circle to pictures. We have gone from oral to symbols to the written word - back to symbols again. A small picture is used, rather than a word, to communicate. Language is fluid and in a state of flux. "Typography fostered the modern idea of personality, but it destroyed the medieval sense of community and integration" What is community now? Community is online; multicultural, global. How does that affect language? Modernism is linear with discipline and rules. Postmodernism welcomes the challenging of and breaking of those rules, where anything goes.

In the modern day as a practitioner, it isn't just about making something move, making type or making images. How do I contribute to visual culture? I need to make commercial and aesthetic decisions; choose the people I want to work with and for as I now have the ability to distribute through a wide range of media. This should shape and drive my practice as I develop. How do I present my work - with a political, social, historic, aesthetic or cultural slant? I am responsible for how people interpret illustration in today's world. How does that impact my portfolio? If I take a positive view into the world I can shape things effectively. If I don't, I am leaving it up to chance. I am part of a culture of questioning and how I engage with the world around me.