Journal 12 // Hillman Curtis Videos

I really enjoyed Paula Scher's talk and the points she was bringing up, especially that "type is making noise." It really hit home about how type really is "image." Her work with the public theatre is a great example. The way she presented it hit right on with her points of type being extreme, loud, visual, and urban; she made another point that type is really about the words and in relation the message that they send based on the way they are used and represented. This example of work was very urban and fit in well with the NYC culture; which resulted in the city "eating the public theaters identity." It was interesting to hear more about Scher's design process and how she doesn't consider herself a refiner and uses a very intuitive process. It seems that she knows right off the back if she has the ability to come off with a successful solution to the challenge at hand. Her citibank was an example that really demonstrated what she was talking about; she broke down the client's needs and used information from them to come to the "umbrella" being formed with the "t".

David Carson is a designer that I really had not heard much about and I really enjoyed his talk. It is interesting that he attributes some of his success to his lack of formal design training. He just went out and did what he thought was right and used his "self indulgence" to design. Because of this, you could tell her was very serious about his thoughts on how design to him needs to be more personal. He thinks it is important for your personality to show through in your work. If you pull from who you are as a person he thinks you will have more success; this makes sense in that your work should somehow show part of your identity not only as a designer but as the type of person you are as well. His work from the RayGun magazine was very interesting to look at. He talked about how he didn't have to report to anyone before printing so he took full advantage and went out on a limb for many of his designs. Carson's three big keys to this work was read, interpret, and draw attention to. He wanted his readers/viewers to really think about what they just read or listened to.

Milton Glaser is always interesting to listen to. I feel like he always has insight that is relevant and relatable. He seems to have reflected on his career a great deal and can say that designers cant understand their path until its over. This played into the question of where designers are on the spectrum between artists and businessmen/women. I think it is important to find a balance and it would be difficult to be on the end of either extreme. Glaser made a good point about how designers produce social commentary; the way they decide to present work is the way the rest of the world sees it. He made a good point about how they have access to people's minds which contributes to them being a good citizen. They can present ideas both good and bad so it is key to think about what your work would say to others. This is another reason why Glaser wanted to teach. He wants to project into the future to avoid being narcissistic but also to contribute to the way designers are being taught today and make sure that the ideals he has deemed important are still being stressed; his level of success and influence makes the things he say very believable and people respect his views. He really embraces the idea that "the possibility for learning never disappears."