In Hal Foster’s article “The ABCs of Contemporary design”, he presents us with a mock glossary of terms. The definitions of the 26 terms (one for each letter of the alphabet) is instead a critical reflection on designs relationship with corporate philosophies.
Foster seems to suggest that it is the corporation that dictates style and creates fetishized objects (architecture in America in particular), using the designer as a tool to accomplish this, and in the process eliminating (or at least discouraging) critical thought. What he seems to otherwise describe is that there is a lack of engagement with the audience and that they are but a collection of statistics and trends.
I don’t really agree with what he is arguing. While I do concede that there is a tend to recycle the past even today, or being stuck to strict guidelines for designers to follow, I don’t think it’s as locked-in as Foster makes it out to be. I think designers are, in fact, afforded the “running-room” that they need to explore and create, but how much is more dependent on which company is backing you.
Could Foster apply his arguments to artists?
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure, after reading Matt's article here's what I see thus far. It seems to me designers are artists for hire: someone hires them to make an artistic/creative piece that they want done...and it runs like that.
ReplyDeleteThe "artist" uaually makes the piece first, and THEN it is sold, almost as a product. Only the artist has a say for how/what the piece comes into being....
Now that said, corporations commission artists to do things from time to time....and in so doing they want a specific thing in mind.
But usually the artist has full control.
I'm not so sure it would apply to artists.
I think it really depends on the artists situation though. I've worked for a commercial gallery, and know from that experience that once gallery representation is acquired the artist becomes somewhat tied to the Gallery and what that gallery's clientel buy. Artists often get stuck having to make one landscape painting after another. An example would be Cal Lane who finally said enough is enough and she was not going to make any more of her shovels even though people were buying them up and the price kept going up. In many ways, artists are as tied to, or more so, to providing what the market demands lest they risk being dropped by their gallery.
ReplyDelete