OUGD401 - Essay

Could it be argued that fine art ought to be assigned more 'value' than more popular forms of Visual Communication?

This essay will consider five different aspects of the contemporary fine artist and graphic designer to determine whether art should be assigned a higher value than graphic design, and why it is perceived as being a higher regarded practise. The artist and designer have a very different role in the media, and this essay looks more closely at the group Young British Artist’s, who emerged towards the end of the 1980s. Their careers begun with the recognition and sponsorship of the art dealer Charles Saatchi, and because of that, artists such as Tracey Emin and Damien Hirst are well recognised in the public eye, and have caused much controversy over their work, possibly due to the fact that the ‘artists do rather little to their material but nevertheless garner huge rewards’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 18). They now have a celebrity status, and their life is just as publicised as the work that they produce, whereas the designer isn’t mentioned half as many times in the mass media. The second point this essay will look at is the commercial value of fine art and graphic design, and how this has an impact on dividing high and mass culture. If it is commercial value what determines which practise should have a higher value, then it is fine art, but if it is the social value that is the most important factor, then the next point on the priorities of graphic design and fine art, suggest that it is graphic design which is more significant. The fourth point leads to the argument about the meaning and intention of fine art and graphic design, as design has the intention of helping solve global problems visually, while the young British artists have caused distress to society in the past, most notably with the painting Myra by Marcus Harvey, who described her as someone ‘we all want to shag’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 213). The final argument will discuss why art has a perceived higher value than graphic design, and whether it deserves to be assigned more value, or whether this is a misconception which has been fuelled by art dealers, art critics and contemporary artists alike.

It could be argued that one of the reasons why contemporary fine art is seen to be of a higher value than graphic design is because of the attention that the Young British Artist’s have gained in the mass media. The artists personality can sometimes be ‘overshadowing their work’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 18), and this has ‘greatly expanded’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 18) during recent years, possibly due to the highly publicised and well documented lifestyles of these artists and their work, which are often intertwined very closely.  However, the designer is relatively unknown; packaging, logos, promotion or way-finding graphics aren’t signed by the designer or presented in a gallery or have the publicity, and therefore don’t have the celebrity status that many contemporary artists have. Even though graphic design is placed everywhere – billboards, bus shelters, television, shop signs etc – the designer is often overlooked, as they aren’t being featured in tabloids and broadsheets, unlike these artists. This leads onto the next point which discusses the value of the work, as opposed to the artist.

One of the things which distinguish fine art and graphic design apart is the high and mass culture which surrounds them. There are two reasons why graphic design is seen to have less ‘value’ than fine art; firstly because of the commercial value of it, as design isn’t sold to one person, it is created for mass production so that it is affordable for everybody, whereas the contemporary fine art discussed in this essay is targeted at people part of an avant-garde group. Secondly, graphic design communicates to everybody, making it a universal form, whereas art only targets upper class people who can understand it. Tracey Emin supports the idea that art is seen as high culture as she says ‘art is often meant for a privileged class’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 36) unlike her work which she says is ‘meant for everyone’ (Emin in Stallabrass, 2006, p. 36). These statements can be seen as hypocritical of her as one of her pieces sold for £130,000 and this shows that her work is aimed at a specific elitist market, as this is not affordable for the vast majority of the public. This can be supported by Michael Findlay’s statement that is if people were to be given a large amount of money, ‘the overwhelming majority would choose the house’ (Findlay, 2012, p. 13) rather than a piece of artwork.

A lot of modernist designers saw their work as a way of ‘eliminating aristocracies’ (McCoy, 2004, p. 40) and had a ‘fervent hope for a levelling’ (McCoy, 2004, p. 40) of the class division which engulfed Europe. Even though this statement was written about designers in the mid twentieth century, the clash of high and mass culture still exists today, as I discussed in the previous paragraph. This also shows the difference between artists and designers as this is a high priority for a designer, to create something which is aimed at people from all different cultures and class. However, it can be suggested that artists just create art for art’s sake, as Julian Stallabrass says the current Brit art has a ‘fuck-you attitude’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 21). This suggests that the artist doesn’t care about the effect their art has on people, and they will create anything they want to.  This differs to designers who wanted to have a ‘symbiotic agreement’ (McCoy, 2004, p. 41) amongst ‘mass societies’ (McCoy, 2004, p. 41) and create a design language which was understood by everybody, which leads onto the next point about designs priority being problem solving and how this can be seen as an uncreative process; which could suggest why fine art is seen to be more highly regarded than design.

 ‘Design is first and foremost a process of analysis and problem-solving and isn’t always tied to the making of artifacts’ (Nakaruma, 2004, p. 55). Terry Irwin suggests here in her essay ‘A Crisis in Perception’ that the design solution doesn’t always involve an artefact. She considers the analytical side of the problem-solving to be enough; not contemplating that the craft and the ‘making of artifacts’ is a fundamental part of the process, and is how the solution communicates and informs the audience the message which is trying to reach them. Her ignorance to the complete process and concept of design only fuels the idea that fine art should have a higher value than graphic design. This is supported as Nakamura wrote that ‘It always seems like design will be the bastard child of the art school’ (Nakaruma, 2004, p. 57), as though the practise is looked down upon by the people who regard fine art to be superior.

However, part of Irwin’s statement is true where she says that design is ‘first and foremost … problem-solving’, as there are some problems which to be solved means the aesthetic quality has to be compromised.  An example of ‘contemporary issues’ (Bilak, 2004, p. 27) are discussed in an interview with Peter Bilak, who discovered that when designing type, he is now faced with several problems such as making the font work in both high and low resolution, and how to work on both print and screen, therefore supporting the idea that practicality and functionality come first, and perhaps compromising on the design of his work. These are contemporary problems as they only began when the computer was invented, and designers started to use computers for design involving type.

It can then be argued that contemporary fine artists, for example Tracey Emin who is part of the visual group Young British Artist’s, can completely avoid any type of issue within her work because it ‘takes no principle terribly seriously’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 21) and it can therefore consist of whatever she thinks is creative without having to think of the functionality of the practicality of whatever she creates. Although a recurring theme in her work is her personal life which people can relate and respond to, she doesn’t have a specific message directed at the audience. As the art dealer Charles Saatchi collects her work, and other pieces from the YBA’s for an extremely high price, this allows her to able to be in a financial position where she is able to recreate similar pieces, without having to aim it at anyone, unlike design, which isn’t featured in galleries or sold to a dealer, and has to solve a public communication problem in order for the designer to earn money from it.

The idea that artists are a lot more ‘creative’ than designers is also supported by this statement that ‘fine artists enjoy much more artistic freedom and independence’ (Barnard, 2005, p. 164). The ‘freedom’ and ‘independence’ that Emin has could arguably come from her financial security and celebrity status from being what is known as a ‘Saatchi artist’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 207), as he, and the work that he collects, is very well known in the art world and in the media. Charles Saatchi collects contemporary art, which is often very shocking, and because of the price which he buys and sells the art, he has helped define the value of contemporary fine art. This doesn’t mean to say that art has a higher value than graphic design though, as Stallabrass says that the artists ‘produce half-hearted crap knowing he’ll take it off their hands. And he does.’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 207). This suggests that the artists don’t value their own work, and it can be argued that it doesn’t deserve to be a more respected practise than graphic design, which leads onto the next point, which is about the differences between the meaning and intention of graphic design and contemporary fine art.

Design for the world is an organisation which aim is to help solve issues which include ‘health, education, development and AIDS’ (Schmidt, 2004, p. 18). These topics affect a range of people, and this suggests that designers make a conscious effort to communicate to the world, and produce design for a purpose which can raise awareness of issues and help solve international problems. On the other hand, Damien Hirst says of his work ‘I sometimes feel I have nothing to say, I often want to communicate that’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 27). That statement can be seen as selfish here, as he isn’t using his influence in the art world to contribute to worldly issues or communicate a message, which shows a distinct difference in the recent times of the purpose of art and design.  It strengthens the argument that fine art doesn’t have a meaning or message, which was discussed in the previous paragraph that artists like Hirst create ‘half-hearted crap’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 207). To support the idea that Hirst is selfish, Stallabrass describes the contemporary postmodernist movement as ‘obscene’ and ‘trivial’ (Stallabrass, 2006, p. 21), as though it is pointless. This suggests that fine art shouldn’t have a higher value than graphic design because it serves no function, and from Schmidt and Stallabrass’ opinions, they seem to regard contemporary fine art with contempt and abomination, which moves onto my next section as to why art has a perceived higher value than graphic design.

One of the arguments that suggest fine art deserves to have a higher value than graphic design is ‘the perception that art has more to say about a culture’ (Barnard, 2005, p. 166). This could be because there is a permanency to fine art, as paintings and exhibition pieces sit in a gallery or museum which are preserved and documented. They are essential parts of the past so that people can gain historic knowledge from them and learn about past cultures and eras. Although this essay has discussed fine artists from the 21^st century, there are a lot of well-known artists from a different time and era such as Vincent Van Gogh who is from the Netherlands, Leonardo Da Vinci from Italy and Pablo Picasso from Spain. It could be argued that society sees fine art as a more culturally comprehensive practise because these artists are more acclaimed and celebrated than designers, who aren’t as well known with their work. Although visual communication has always existed, the term graphic design wasn’t used until early in the 20^th century, and could be why it isn’t seen as permanent as fine art, or isn’t thought to say as much about culture. Also, because ‘graphic production is not long-lasting’ (Barnard, 2005, p. 166), this could be why graphic design is valued less when compared to fine art is because it suggests that artefacts such as packaging, magazines, signs, way-finding graphics and advertisements aren’t permanent and therefore don’t say more about culture because design is continuously changing and evolving. Although it is a fast-paced industry, design can say a lot about culture because it has to appeal to a variety of target audiences, there are designers from all over the world and since the 20^th century there have been many movements which have since influenced modern design and other forms of visual communication such as Constructivism, the Bauhaus and the International Typographic Style. These are all contributing factors as to why the perceived idea that fine art says more about culture than graphic design is false, and they are both as significant as each other here. To support the idea that art isn’t as significant culturally when compared to design, Steven Heller says that ‘many objects of graphic design are preserved and studied’ (Heller, 2004, p. 12) suggesting it has just as much to say about a culture as art does, because of the time and consideration that has goes into graphic design, even if the final production isn’t always ‘long-lasting’.

Even for the design which is ephemeral it can be argued that ‘graphic design is there to perform various jobs or functions’ (Barnard, 2005, p. 172) and if that is a transitory job, then it shouldn’t be valued less than art which is permanent if it fulfils its purpose. Many design jobs are temporary such as advertisements and launches of events or films, and if the designs function is to inform, educate and persuade an audience, then it should hold more value to society than fine art, which isn’t seen to serve a purpose. However, Noel Carroll suggests that even art for art’s sake ‘is still functional’ (Barnard, 2005, p. 174) because it hopes to engage and enthral the viewer and this can be considered as a function. It can be supported that art does engage with the viewer, because people buy and collect art, they post blogs on pieces, converse with each other about art, and a career can even be made out of it – being an art critic. This could suggest why ‘art critics never worry about the future of art’ (Siegel, 2004, p. 168), because there is a function to serve, and as long as contemporary artists are producing, or rather getting their assistants to produce their attention-seeking work for them, there will always be something to critique.

In conclusion, there are different arguments on whether art or graphic design should be assigned more value, and the answer depends on how people define the word ‘value’. If value means the commercial value of work, then it is contemporary fine art which ought to be assigned more than graphic design, as the artists discussed in this essay have a very high market price for their work, which only an upper class group of people can afford, such as Tracey Emin’s piece ‘It’s The Way We Think’, which was an appliqué blanket reaching £130,000 at auction. This differs with graphic design which is targeted at everybody, and is mass produced to make communication reachable and affordable to a large range of people. However, if value is based on the social value of how it benefits people, then graphic design should be assigned more value than fine art, as the designers’ priority is to educate, persuade and inform people about everything. Design is a powerful tool in making people aware of global issues, such as the NRDC campaign to make people aware of global warming where the designers created a water dispenser sticker of the world, and the slogan ‘World’s drinkable water supplies are running out. Stop Global Warming’ (Abduzeedo, 2008). This shows the priority of design, whereas the purpose of Hirst’s work is to communicate how he has ‘nothing to say’ (Stallabrass J. , 2006, p. 27), suggesting that his art doesn’t have a high social value. If historic value is the most important factor, then it can be suggested that fine art has the higher value, because artwork is displayed in galleries and exhibitions, and it gives an insight to historical eras. However, since photography was introduced, that started to document the world giving a more accurate insight to history, and what life was like. Graphic design also comments and communicates history, whether it is advertising exhibitions or publishing historical text, therefore it can be argued that these forms of visual communication should also be assigned historical value, even if it is a more recent form. The last point which this essay discussed was about the value of function that fine art and graphic design have, and how even though graphic design is known to serve a function to people to communicate, it can be argued that the function of art is to entertain and intrigue the viewer, meaning they both have a job to perform. This is a contributing factor to the overall decision that art cannot be assigned more value than graphic design because arguably, they both serve function to society, even if they are extremely different.

Bibliography

Abduzeedo. (2008). 35 Creative Advertising Campaigns [online]. Avaiable at: <http://abduzeedo.com/35-creative-advertising-campaigns>: [Accessed 23 January 2013].

Barnard, M. (2005). Graphic Design as Communication. Great Britain: Routledge.

Bilak, P. (2004). Graphic design vs. style, globalism, criticism, science, authenticity and humanism. (R. Vanderlans, Ed.) Canada: Princeton Architectual Press.

Emin in Stallabrass, J. (2006). High Art Lite. China: Verso.

Findlay, M. (2012). The Value of Art: Money, Power, Beauty (1st English Edition ed.). London: Prestel Publishing.

Heller, S. (2004). Understanding Design Literacy (2nd ed. ed.). Canada: Allworth Press.

McCoy, K. (2004). Graphic design vs. stlye, globalism, criticism, science, authenticity and humanism. (R. VanderLans, Ed.) Canada: Princeton Architectual Press.

Nakaruma, R. (2004). Graphic Design vs. style, globalisation, criticism, science, authenticity and humanism (First ed.). (R. VanderLans, Ed.) Canada: Princeton Architectual Press.

Schmidt, M. (2004). Graphic design vs. style, globalism, criticism, science, authenticity and humanism. (R. VanderLans, Ed.) Canada: Princeton Architectual Press.

Siegel, D. (2004). Graphic design vs. style, globalism, criticism, science, authenticity and humanism. (R. VanderLans, Ed.) Canada: Princeton Architectual Press.

Stallabrass, J. (2006). High Art Lite. China: Verso.