Elevating Graphic Design Criticism
I have been reading/listening to a lot of articles/podcasts on the current state of graphic design criticism. I’ve heard opinions on the issues and where designers would like to see it go. There is an awareness in the industry of the low quality, and quantity, of design criticism today and a hunger for elevated participation in the profession.
In the reactionary world we live in today, many agree there needs to be more people writing (or talking, I love podcasts) about graphic design in a more enlightened, non-reactionary way. Now, if there were no snarky, drive-by comments on the internet, there would be no internet at all and my idea is not to “kill all trolls”, but simply add better quality to the mix.
Quite a few suggest non-designer critics should be critiquing graphic design. Reason being, those who are not practicing designers could bring a valuable perspective to design critique, and could constantly write about it as opposed to writing in their spare time as designer-critics do. This is not something I am opposed to completely, but if the argument is that film and food have non-creator critics and so should graphic design, I’m not so sure that’s a great point in support of the idea.
My question is, how many critics in those fields are actually good at critiquing it and elevate the field because of what they bring to it? I’m no film expert, but when I read a review of a film from a critic, rarely do they write about why it is good or bad, but weather they liked it or not. That is what we already have in graphic design and what so many want to get away from.
No matter who critiques graphic design, I want that person to actually understand it and be able to to talk about it with an informed opinion; not just an opinion. Someone who thinks “I like it” means “Its good” is not a good critic of design. I also don’t want more people talking about it just to have more people talking about it, because the real issue isn’t just that there is a low quantity of graphic design critique, but a low quality of it.
An idea from Rory King on an episode of the Sway podcast is there could be outsider critics and designer critics that discuss design together. You get the perspective of someone disconnected from the trade and someone who is on the inside. This idea I actually like a lot, and I think would make an excellent podcast. Someone get on that! King in another episode of Sway proposes the idea of a travel show like Anthony Bourdain’s where instead of exposing the audience to a place’s culture through food, it is done through art and design. Another great idea!
“The best criticism comes from a place of love — love for the field, love for the work, and love for the audience. It’s about caring. In caring about the craft, the writer can build a world that invites others to care as well.”
Graphic design is in a state of celebrating skills and statistics. Of course, this is an important piece of what we do, but when we discuss design, we often talk about skills anyone can learn. We go on about kerning, alignment, and whether or not a font is being used too much; we are missing the bigger picture and our profession comes off as a joke. We apply stats to design to measure its success — if a new design caused an increase in likes and follows it must be good and the vice-versa.
Which ever way it needs to go, or will go, the only thing I can control is what I do with it. I’ve always taken design critique seriously because I felt it was the best way to learn about design. Critique is not about exposing flaws or belittling a piece, it is about learning.
I am by no means any design expert, but what I can give to the profession now is my own perspective on design critique. I’m not saying I have any answers, but right now we need to get the conversations started and that’s what I aim to do with this post. If it means or helps anything at all, below is how I approach critique of art and design.
My Principles of Design Critique:
- “I like it” does not mean “It is good”. “I don’t like it” does not mean “it is not good”.
- It is not enough to just “know”. Understand the principles, elements, and theories of design.
- Be familiar with the history of graphic design and its styles. Know what lasted, what died, and why.
- The basic definition of graphic design is to communicate visually and/or organize information. Graphic design then must communicate its message without using text, or organize information for clear delivery.
- To critique well is to understand clearly, not to tear down.
- Every piece of design has a goal. Understand that goal, then have an opinion on if the design can accomplish it.
- The difference between simple and boring is simple is effective. Simplicity does not mean a lack of intricacy or detail, that is style. Simplicity is the opposite of complexity. Simplicity communicates well.
“It is time that theoretical issues be expressed and debated to provide a forum of intellectual tension out of which meanings spring to life. Pretty pictures can no longer lead the way in which our visual environment should be shaped. It is time to debate, to probe the values, to examine the theories that are part of our heritage and to verify their validity to express our times. It is time for the word to be heard. It is time for Words and Vision.” — Massimo Vignelli
Also, if you’re looking for some people who are very good at writing/talking about graphic design, I recommend these:
