Design and art: comparative analysis

Art

Design or Art

In "Art's Little Brother" author Rick Poyner maintains design is not taken as seriously as art, and wonders at the reasoning behind this phenomenon. He notes that designers often are not taken as seriously as artists are, and are virtually ignored in the art world. He writes, "Designers rarely achieve the level of recognition and financial reward attained by the most successful artists. Media coverage of art and design constantly reinforces art's privileged position" (Poyner 1). He acknowledges there are questions about the relationship between art and design, and that the relationship has become blurred over the years, and will become closer in the future.

He notes that an exhibition, while attempting to answer some of these questions, actually draws a larger line between the two disciplines, and creates more questions than it answers. He writes, "So what was the museum trying to say with the mysterious mathematical symbol in the title, which means 'not equal to, but not greater than and not less than?'" (Poyner 1). He cites other exhibits, books, and ideas that perpetuate this divide between design and art, even though many experts acknowledge art cannot exist without design.

Poyner's key argument in his discussion is the definition of design. He writes, "A designer, unlike an artist, 'works through and for other people, and is concerned primarily with their problems rather than his own'" (Poyner 2). This is the ultimate difference, for many people; at least, between a designer and an artist, they maintain an artist actually thinks about his own vision, rather than worrying about the problems of others.

Poyner is an author and design critic, and his work makes the reader think more about the difference between design and art, and makes the reader wonder, "why can't art and design exist together, and what makes the divide between them so great for some artists?" It seems as if this might have something to do with snob value or art snobs, don't you think?

In "Graphic Design: Fine Art of Social Science," author Jorge Frascara grapples with the same issues, only with the process of graphic design rather than traditional art techniques. He maintains that graphic design discussion is flawed for a number of reasons, and these flaws have led to distortions about graphic design and its principles. He writes, "He and other avant-garde artists made a major impact in the visual development of graphic design, but they also raised the importance of their esthetic approach to a point where they communication link with the common denominator they were addressing broke down" (Frascara 20). He maintains their designs were so "out there" that they lost their meaning and were actually detrimental to graphic design, rather than the positive influence many people thought they were.

He also maintains that graphic design is an art form, but that many designers aren't considering that graphic design is also a medium that communicates and is socially significant. He writes, "Furthermore, as an art form, graphic design is viewed only from an esthetic perspective, without enough consideration of communication and social significance" (Frascara 20). His main point is also a definition, and he writes, "Graphic design is the activity that organizes visual communication in society" (Frascara 20), and that it has to communicate something to someone else. This could be a loose definition of art, too, because most artistic pieces do communicate something to the viewer, as well.