Dont Mistake Legibility for Communication Analysis

Dont Mistake Legibility for Communication AnalysisCRITICAL STUDY IN ART determinationDONT MISTAKE LEGIBILITY FOR COMMUNICATIONDavid Carson DiscussIt is the art director, graphic designer and surfer David Carson (b. 1954) who stated during his 2013 TED Talk, Dont mistake legibility for discourse. Since making this statement, designers carry had to rethink what it kernel to blow over especially when attempting to interact and engage with their target audience. However, is Carsons statement true? As it tooshie be argued that legibility is the basis for something to not only be readable but also understood and therefore communicated. Conversely, if discourse is the inclineency then the aim is more than undecomposed making something legible. Therefore, this discussion will look and present arguments for and against the statement Carson made, define and explain the terms legibility and talk, and to document the social and historical context behind Carsons statement to establ ish whether it was valid or not.To begin, when something is creation communicated it can be received by the audience opticly, verbally, nonverbally or in its written crop. The field of a Graphic imageer is visual communication as they attempt to incorporate, or least infer these elements by their designs. For that reason, visual communication or more specifically, production in print, will be the focus for this discussion as that is what Carsons statement pertains to.In regards to Carsons statement, the word legibility is mentioned. This word can be simply defined as how recognisable individual(a) letterforms are (Tselentis, J et al. 2012 p. 324). In a segment of Carsons 2003 stick out And Discovery TED Talk, he presents the future(a) image with his statementCarson then goes on to say the following about his image ( compute 2) and gives his opinion about the statement in regards to legibility and communication, where he states,I like this image for a couple of reasons. If yo uve had any(prenominal) design courses, they would larn you cant read this. I think you eventually can and, more importantly, I think its true. Dont mistake legibility for communication. Just because somethings legible doesnt mean it communicates. to a greater extent importantly, it doesnt mean it communicates the right thing (Carson 2003).As Carson suggests (2003) the primary goal of the designer is to communicate a heart and soul. However (in his own words) more importantly, it is to communicate the right thing. The capitulum to then be considered is to ask what communication is in the first place? John DiMarco (b. 1963) in his book Digital Design For Print and entanglement (2010) explains that communication is a process, in which, . requires a sender (the designer), a message (information or an effort to persuade), a medium (the delivery platform), and a receiver of that message (the audience). here(predicate), it can be understood that during the communication process it is the designers job to send a message. DiMarco (2010) then states that, the goals of such messages are to inform, to persuade, to educate, or to entertain. The designer having a communication goal in mind then uses the message and medium to r distributively their audience. Bearing this all in mind, we are then left to ask why is communicating the right thing so important to Carson? In the 2007 Helvetica documentary, Carson states,Dont confuse, legibility with communication. And just because somethings legible, doesnt mean it communicates, and more importantly doesnt mean it communicates the right thing. And vice versa. If something is a very important message, and its said in a boring, nondescript focussing, then the message can be lost (Carson 2007).The goal for Carson then seems to be that is essential communicate the right thing otherwise known as efficient communication. The message cannot be lost through with(predicate) the medium. Which would then leads to the message not being received by the anticipated audience. Nevertheless, what is effective communication and how does it differ from regular communication? The difference seems to lie in the way something is communicated. It can be argued, (as Carson seems to) therefore, that this is just as important, if not more important than the kernel of the message itself.This point is noted by Art Director and Graphic Designer Kaitlyn Wells (b. 1988) who suggests (2011) to communicate does not mean the designer has to send a message which is simply legible. As for Wells, legibility in itself does not equate to communicating effectively. In her intercommunicate post Dont Mistake Legibility for Communication Wells writes,Just because you can read it, doesnt mean it is communicating the think message. David Carson is famous for his crazy composition and his business leader to connect emotion, design and key messages in an effective, impactful way. Some of it is legible, some of it is not, but all of it de livers a message (Wells 2011).Here, Wells makes the distinction between legibility and effective communication, noting how important it is to make sure that the audience actually receives the message through the emotion behind it and not just the kernel of the message itself. For Carson, it is not suitable for something to merely be legible, as it is only one of the potential tools that can be used to achieve the end goal of communicating a message.Carson seems to be able to attract his intended audience in such a way that he not only gets his message across but manages to emotionally connect and engage with them as well. In The Emotion Thesaurus (2012)Ackerman and Puglisi state that the sole reason people pick up a printed production is . to have an emotional experience. They read to connectIt can be argued that this is the same communication goal of Carson too.This can be further demonstrated through some examples of Carsons designs in the beam of light Gun publication (1992) w hich Carson was the art director ofAccording to DiMarco (2011), after Carson was appointed Art Director for the putz Gun publication its circulation tripled, emphasising the effectiveness of Carsons designs. DiMarco then states that the clipping was created as an anti-glossy, anti-establishment manifesto that became a synonym of rock roll, rebellion and alternative spirit. This was the audience that Carson was attempting to reach. Therefore, the layout design needed to not only reflect this but to surveil over a way to effectively communicate and connect with his audience as well.In Carsons TED Talk he speaks about the following car stores (see figure 6)Here Carson points out that the two car store doors displayed (see condition 6) are both legible and communicate the same message. However, the way the message is communicated is antithetic. As it can be seen that the garage to the left is legible and the message is clear NO PARKING. Stylistically the way that this message h as been presented would likely be seen as generic, informative and neutral.Conversely, it could be argued that the garage to the right gives the reader a different feel as the message would likely be interpreted in a different manner to the garage on the left. As the garage to rights with its NO PARKING message has a bold and humanistic style which seems to give it a different tone to the intended viewer. Although it could be argued that this is unintentional the feeling seems to persist nevertheless. The underlining of the same NO PARKING message seems to emphasise the gravity of what is being communicated. All of these stylistic elements add to the way the message is intended to be received by transmitting through the text the emotion of the message.Moreover, other examples of text being written in capitals tend to convey the emotion of anger and often transmits the message of somebody shouting which in both cases demands that the message being communicated is to be taken seriousl y as it has been delivered in a direct and effective manner.Carson (2003) himself then goes on to explain about the garage doors in the following way,Im a big believer in the emotion of design, and the message thats sent before somebody begins to read, before they get the rest of the information. That area of design interests me the most. These are a couple of garage doors mixed identical, situated next to each other. So, heres the first door. You know, you get the message. You know, its pretty clear. Take a look at the second door and see if theres any different message. O.K, which one would you park in front of? Same colour, same message, same words. The only thing thats different is the expression that the individual door-owner here put into the composing and, again, which is the psycho-killer here? Yet it doesnt say that it doesnt need to say that. I would probably park in front of the other one (Carson 2003).For Carsons own designs, it seems his focus is on the way he commun icates his message. Carson appears to designs his layouts intuitively to create a visceral reaction and response. His designs must connect with his audience emotionally for them to be effective and even if the content of the message cannot do this alone then the way the message has been designed will help the communication process of achieving Carsons communication goal. This can be seen in his designs for The Book Of Probes by Marshall McLuhan.Whilst it may seem that Carsons statement cannot be refuted there have been those that have done so. One example of someone that has vehemently disapproved Carsons methodology, is design writer Joe Clark. In his article titled Illegible David Carson cannot communicate originally published in the Globe and Mail (1995), Clark writes that,Typography is supposed to be invisible. If the intended reader actually notices the typography and graphic design on a page, then youve crumpleed as a designer. The goal of communication is achieved only when typography does not distract (Clark 1995).This line of thinking was influenced from Beatrice Wardes (b. 1900) lecture titled, The Crystal Goblet, or Why Printing Should Be Invisible (1930). Both Clark and Wardes focus is on the content of the message and that the legibility of the message detracts from what is trying to be communicated. Otherwise, the message can be distorted where the information that is trying to be communicated is not what was originally intended.DiMarco (2011) notes how Carson, stony-broke the rules in every way. including negative leading, overlapping, layering, and creating absurd compositional layouts, such as backwards text settings and columns of texts that bled off the page or aligned or overlapped each other. This can be seen in below (figure 8).In Noah Reads article (2009) in regards to Wardes lecture he notes that,Warde asserts that the designing of written text is thought transference and any type that does anything to distract from that goal is a fa ilure in its purpose. Type is there to illuminate the thoughts and ideas contained in the written word (Read 2009).Here, Read highlights how Warde deems anything that detracts from the content of the message to be a failure in its purpose. In relation to Carson, this would be a failure in his attempt to communicate with his audience. For Warde, the text used in the message should only be implemented to aid the content and the content alone. However, as mentioned earlier, Carson has demonstrated that he arranges the type to effectively communicate rather than to merely share the content alone.For Clark, in his article he rebuked the Ray Gun publication by noting that,Every single typesetting rule of thumb you could possibly keep up up with has been broken in Ray Guns brief history Overlapping blocks of copy light text against dark backgrounds dark text against dark backgrounds racetrack text across pages, including stories that are read horizontally across columns (just hop over th e gutter between them) deliberately running photos upside-down (Clark 1995).For Clark it seems as if he felt Carsons, Dont mistake legibility, for communication statement was taken to the extreme where because both the message was legible and the audience could misinterpret its intended point too through the way it was designed then for Clark surely the communication and intended message failed, as the design was illegible in its content and missed the mark in its execution.However, this assertion of Clarks is subjective at best and judging by the sales of the Ray Gun magazine it is presumptive at worse because as mentioned before the publication sold more copies to those prior to Cason design. Additional to this point, it was the philosopher and Professor Marshall McLuhan (b. 1911) who wrote in his book Understanding Media The Extensions of Man (1964) that, the medium is the message. By this, he meant that it is the form of the medium, not the content of the message or even the me ssage itself that is most important. An example, which could argue how Carson supports this theory is where he employs a similar idea into one of his articles for the Ray Gun magazine publication where he uses the Zapf Dingbat typeface.In regards to Carson using the Zapf Dingbat typeface, he states in an interview with Design Boom (2014) that it was one of his favourite briefs. During the interview he shares,We had a new writer from a much bigger music mag, and I was sincerely excited to read this article when it came in. but I was really disappointed to find it was like sooo many others the writer had been given 10 minutes before the performer went on stage to do his integral interview, and as such he reported the typical stuff like what the singer was wearing, what was in the room etc. boring stuff Id read so many times before. I started going through my fonts, finding nothing that felt right, then came across dingbat. Which would have been the last one on my very immense list, as its known by the designers name zapf dingbats. Im sure I chuckled a bit, then thought, well, why not? It was a really boring article. So the entire article was set in zapf dingbat (Design Boom 2014).This exemplifies that for Carson communicating his work was more than using words alone but even the piece itself could be communicated through the medium rather than with merely the content. Especially if the content served no purpose in taking the reader on an emotional journey It could be inferred that the purpose the Zapf Dingbat that was to do precisely that to bring excitement, joy and humour to what would have been a boring, dull tedious article.David Carsons statement (2003) Dont mistake legibility for communication is both intriguing and thought-provoking. As stated beforehand, not all designers would agree with Carsons evaluation of effective communication. As Carsons statement seems paradoxical at first but when understood in its proper context it appears to be congruent when seen in light of his work. However, when compared with traditional teachings and lectures as to how typography in publications should be treated, it can be argued that the designer could fail in making his or her work both illegible and even worse this may lead to the message of the designer not communicating its desire effect too. Nonetheless, to confine communication to only being something that can be achieved through legibility in content only takes away from what effective communication can be. Taking this into consideration, despite his critics and given his numerous supporters, it is still justifiable to argue that Carson has made a salient point in the Graphic Design world as it is still relevant today as it was when he first stated it. Consequently, it can be strongly argued that it renders Carson statement, Dont mistake legibility for communication as valid.Reference ListBooksTselentis, J., Haley, A., Poulin R., Seddon T., Leonidas G., and Saltz I. (2012) Typography , pen A Comprehensive Visual Guide to the Language, History, and Practice of Typography. Beverly, MA Rockport Publishers.DiMarco, J. (2010) Digital Design for Print and Web An accession to surmise, Principles, and Techniques. Hoboken, New Jersey John Wiley Sons.Ackerman A., and Puglisi B. (2012) The Emotion Thesaurus A Writers Guide To Character Expression. Seattle CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.WebsitesWells, K. (2011) Dont Mistake Legibility For Communication. Available at http//www.stokefire.com/2011/06/dont-mistake-legibility-for-communication/ (Accessed 15 December 2016)Clark, J. (2011) Illegible David Carson cannot not communicate. Available at http//joeclark.org/design/davidcarson.html (Accessed 13 February 2017)DiMarco, D (2011) David Carson. Available at http//www.csun.edu/pjd77408/DrD/Art461/LecturesAll/Lectures/PublicationDesign/DigitalTimes/Davidi-Carson.html (Accessed 12 February 2017)Noah, R (2009) Graphic Design Theory The Crystal Goblet. Available at https//noahread.net/blog/graphic-design-theory-the-crystal-goblet (Accessed 12 February 2017)Design Boom (2014) Interview with Graphic Designer David Carson. Available at http//www.designboom.com/design/interview-with-graphic-designer-david-carson-09-22-2013/ (Accessed 12 February 2017)TED duologueCarson, D. (2003) David Carson Design and discovery. Available at http//www.ted.com/talks/david_carson_on_design (Accessed 21 November 2015)videodiscHelvetica (2007) Directed by Gary Hustwit DVD. London Plexi Film.Image ListFigure 1 David Carson (2004) Design Indaba Speaker Profile Picture. Available from http//www.designindaba.com/profiles/david-carson (Accessed 3 December 2016)Figure 2. Dont mistake legibility for communication Thomas, C. (2013) Legibility Vs Communication in Design David Carsons point of view. Ted Talk. Available from https//postmodernmovieposter.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/legibility-vs-communication-in-design-david-carsons-point-of-view/ (Accessed November 26 2016)Fi gure 3. Communication Process Bowers, J. (2006) A Communication Model. Available from http//www.jerf.org/writings/communicationEthics/node4.html (Accessed February 12 2017)Figure 4. Cold Sweat. Carson, D. (1989) David Carson. Available from http//www.davidcarsondesign.com/ (Accessed February 12 2017)Figure 5. Ray Gun magazine designs. DiMarco, J. (2011) David Carson. Available from http//www.csun.edu/pjd77408/DrD/Art461/LecturesAll/Lectures/PublicationDesign/DigitalTimes/Davidi-Carson.html (Accessed February 12 2017)Figure 6. NO PARKING Thomas, C. (2013) Legibility Vs Communication in Design David Carsons point of view. Ted Talk. Available from https//postmodernmovieposter.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/legibility-vs-communication-in-design-david-carsons-point-of-view/ (Accessed November 26 2016)Figure 7. Book Of Probes. Carson, D. (2002) David Carson. Available from http//www.davidcarsondesign.com/ (Accessed February 12 2017)Figure 8. Breaking The Rules. DiMarco, J. (2011) David Carson. Available from http//www.csun.edu/pjd77408/DrD/Art461/LecturesAll/Lectures/PublicationDesign/DigitalTimes/Davidi-Carson.html (Accessed February 12 2017)Figure 9. Breaking The Rules 2. DiMarco, J. (2011) David Carson. Available from http//www.csun.edu/pjd77408/DrD/Art461/LecturesAll/Lectures/PublicationDesign/DigitalTimes/Davidi-Carson.html (Accessed February 12 2017)Figure 10. Dingbat. DiMarco, J. (2011) David Carson. Available from http//www.csun.edu/pjd77408/DrD/Art461/LecturesAll/Lectures/PublicationDesign/DigitalTimes/Davidi-Carson.html (Accessed February 12 2017)BibliographyBooksMeggs, P (2011) Meggs History of Graphic Design. 5th edn. Hoboken, New Jersey John Wiley Sons, Inc.Kunz, W. (2004) Typography Formation and Transformation Introduction to typographical Process. Salenstein von Braun Publisher.Lupton, E (2010) Thinking With Type A Critical Guide for Designers, Writers, Editors, and Students. 2nd edn. New York Princeton Architectural Press.Craig J., Bevington W., and Ko ral Scala I. (2006) Designing with Type The Essential Guide to Typography. New York Watson-Guptill Publications Inc.Tselentis, J., Haley, A., Poulin R., Seddon T., Leonidas G., and Saltz I. (2012) Typography, Referenced A Comprehensive Visual Guide to the Language, History, and Practice of Typography. Beverly, MA Rockport Publishers.Armstrong, H. (2009) Graphic Design Theory Readings from the Field. New York Princeton Architectural Press.DiMarco, J. (2010) Digital Design for Print and Web An Introduction to Theory, Principles, and Techniques. Hoboken, New Jersey John Wiley Sons.Ackerman A., and Puglisi B. (2012) The Emotion Thesaurus A Writers Guide To Character Expression. Seattle CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.WebsitesBradley, S. (2010) Legibility And Readability In Typographic Design. Available at http//vanseodesign.com/web-design/legible-readable-typography/ (Accessed 30 November 2015)Thomas, C. (2013) Legibility Vs Communication in Design David Carsons point of v iew. Available at https//postmodernmovieposter.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/legibility-vs-communication-in-design-david-carsons-point-of-view/ (Accessed November 26 2016)Clark, J. (2011) Illegible David Carson cannot not communicate. Available at http//joeclark.org/design/davidcarson.html (Accessed 13 February 2017)Wells, K. (2011) Dont Mistake Legibility For Communication. Available at http//www.stokefire.com/2011/06/dont-mistake-legibility-for-communication/ (Accessed 15 December 2016)DiMarco, D (2011) David Carson. Available at http//www.csun.edu/pjd77408/DrD/Art461/LecturesAll/Lectures/PublicationDesign/DigitalTimes/Davidi-Carson.html (Accessed 12 February 2017)Noah, R (2009) Graphic Design Theory The Crystal Goblet. Available at https//noahread.net/blog/graphic-design-theory-the-crystal-goblet (Accessed 12 February 2017)Design Boom (2014) Interview with Graphic Designer David Carson. Available at http//www.designboom.com/design/interview-with-graphic-designer-david-carson-09-22-201 3/ (Accessed 12 February 2017)LyndaAdams, S. (2014) Foundations of Graphic Design History. Available at http//www.lynda.com/Design-Color-tutorials/American-corporate-identity/166781/363080-4.html (Accessed 24 November 2015)Saltz, I. (2013) Foundations of Typography. Available at http//www.lynda.com/Design-Typography-tutorials/Foundations-Typography/106698-2.html (Accessed 29 December 2015)YouTubeCarson, D. (2012) David Carson David Carson Techniques in Design. Available at https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1pQTuJfUi8 (Accessed 21 November 2015)Puschak, E. (2015) Atemporality Our Relationship To History Has Changed. Available at https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAv5EKvRrco (Accessed 02 January 2017)TED TalksCarson, D. (2003) David Carson Design and discovery. Available at http//www.ted.com/talks/david_carson_on_design (Accessed 21 November 2015)DVDHelvetica (2007) Directed by Gary Hustwit DVD. London Plexi Film.