It is clear that after reading critical essays on the new era of type design in the 90s, there are two sides that dictate the validity of each others design ideology. The modernist views on typography are heavily grounded upon objectivity and that form follows function. Experimental designers of this period were influenced by subjectivity and individual interpretations of laid type. Post modernist designers aimed to communicate more personal attributes into their designs such as culture. Their personal ambitions define the personality that their typefaces take on, which is opposite to the utilitarian aims of modernist typefaces.
What can be commonly seen in these essays is the eventual dismissal of experimental typography as a valid form of new design. Legibility got favoured for more artistic expressions of typography which got used to an extent where it outweighed the rationales behind the design. This is not to say that post modernist type design was a total failure, designers such as Wolfgang Weingart exercised restraint in his compositions and based his experimentation on similarly modernist principles. What he created was a more approachable form of new wave design that is still celebrated today as compared to the work created by the Cranbrook Academy which demonstrates the extreme of the movement.
Experimental design today however has taken on a new face and is gaining exposure, already becoming a trend. Therefore it seems that post modernist design still resonates to a certain demographic within the design community.
The supporting arugments on both sides and the revival of similarly post modernist examples of design today lead to the forming of the essay question, "To what extent can "ugly design" successful?"
No comments:
Post a Comment