Fill/Stroke.com
I’m starting to realize that there is a large population of graphic designers that only design in preparation. They are knowledgeable about emerging trends, know all the new styles, the new techniques, the new visual language of the design world. They read all the trades, they read all the blogs and they soak it all in, and wait. They wait til they can apply it to their own projects, til they can find a way to make it marketable, til they can use the abundance of the “emerging” style as evidence of being “cutting edge” and “ahead of the curve”. They don’t set trends, they don’t take any chances, they wait.
I am going to coin this anticipatory design. Its the idea of people who watch all the great, experimental, risky design and then wait until its been hashed out across the cusp of the design world. Then they adopt the style, hawking it to clients as if they’re being original. Peddling off others ideas, feeling as if they are being creative and risky.
It’s not imitation, its not copying. Its market research done by others. Its the reason flourished decoration, vector circles, and grunge backgrounds are so popular and rampant in designs today.
What I think is most interesting about this though, is my theory of the origins of the designs. Who are being the most experimental, the most willing to take risks, try things and put them out there for the world to see?
Students.
Students set trends, they have no clients and therefore can try, experiment and successfully implement their ideas, successful or failure, without having to answer to anyone besides their professors and their own inner aesthetic.
Now, mind you, I realize its 1 out of 1000 designers that actually comes up with something unique, groundbreaking, mesmerizing. But, none the less, this is 1:1000 ratio compared to the 1:100000 of “real world” design.
So my question then is, why are students so often “risks” for a new hire? Why are students made to “pay their dues.”
I realize the practicality of this, I do. But to me, it seems like being wary of hiring a fresh graduate, or being wary of putting them on big projects has three outcomes:
1. They learn the way your company works (benefit? maybe. learning bad habits.)
2: They are forced to work through tedious projects, becoming part of the team, adapting and relaxing into the tedium.
3. They lose that sense of danger, of experimentation and fall into the pattern of your company, leaving you with another body, not another mind.
I guess what I’m getting at is this:
Don’t watch what others are doing before you try something new, and don’t squash the experimenting, risk taking part of your new hires. Sure, calm them down, hone the skills, but don’t ruin it with mindless work.
Don’t wait for the next big thing. Be the next big thing.
(This will be my first in a series of reactionary design. Next up: Style Chasers)
I think you are a little off by saying that students are “risk takers”. I have taught web design and multimedia classes for several years in an undergraduate program and have found that a majority of students mimicked things they saw on others sites. Mid-term and final projects were often turned in with design elements that were obviously tutorial results or slightly modified in-class labs. Part of this regurgitation may be because of an unfounded fear of a lower grade for experimental design.
1. RAC. 8 October 2008.
Oh, I totally agree. There are a lot a lot a lot of students who just copy everything they see, have no idea what they’re doing. I guess I should’ve made that more clear that I think, while its not ALWAYS the case, that there is a much greater leaning towards experimentation and risk taking while a student. The 1:1000 vs 1:100000 ratios.
Though I’m just guessing on the numbers, I think that a lot of the stuff I run across that’s interesting and unique tends to be student work, or student thesis projects.
But yeah, there are a lot of “trying to pass” students too.
2. md. 8 October 2008.
Completely disagree that students are doing the experimenting. You’ll almost always find that in the earlier years they’re looking to the web for inspiration and often try to create the same styles as their design heroes.
If anything its the design/thought leaders who are doing this.
I also think there’s a fallacy in the arguement that all this anticipatory design is a bad thing. Fact is, when you’re designing something for a client you’re taking their needs/problems into hand and creating a tailored solution for this. You almost never have the complete freedom to implement some avante garde graphic design trend when your dealing with corporates.
3. James. 9 October 2008.
Like I said, you can find any subset of designers who aren’t experimenting. I realize students are not always doing it, but I think the ratio is higher among students than among professionals, at a much higher rate,
I also agree that there is often not a chance to implement completely new ideas into a project. My problem is with those who never try, those who ONLY look at whats emerging, without contributing to it. There is a different between anticipatory designers, and designs who have to pull back their ideas/ambitions so it works for the client.
Subtle things, but I think they are hugely noticeable.
4. md. 11 October 2008.
Leave a comment
Trackback. Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed.