DISSERTATION

In my final year of University, I had to write a 2,000 word essay on a subject related to graphic design. I decided to choose the theme of rules, and whether it is ever okay to follow or break rules and why they are put there in the first place. I researched famous designers who famously followed/broke design rules, and looked into the theory behind it.

This was one of my favourite projects for university, as when it came to publishing the dissertation, I wanted to make it stand out. In the end, I chose a 210mm x 210mm size, and gave it a design where the reader would read through the book normally, and the conclusion would be in the centre of the page. They would then have to turn the book over and upside down, to read the other half of the dissertation named "Who Breaks The Rules?".

Below is my full 2,000 word dissertation on the subject matter.

Again, Rand repeats himself as to support his previous point. He is stating that one needs to fully understand an issue or problem, and only then can they produce an answer worthy of solving the problem. Everyone has ideas, anyone can imagine something which they think is extraordinary, however it is a matter of translating that idea onto paper or screen, and this can be done with a vast breadth of knowledge in to the subject. Therefore, it is not confusing as to understand why Rand has set this as a rule to be followed. It is  not to hinder a designer, rather to encourage them to become much better.

“Unfortunately, in some of our schools little attempt is made to guide the student’s thinking in a logical progression from basic design to applied design” 
(Rand, P. A Designer’s Art, 1968)

Rand is very expressive in his beliefs, and here he states how passionate he is for the youth of design. Understanding that they are the future, he wants to ensure they are being taught the correct methods and are following the correct rules. He still believes heavily that the most important step in a designer’s journey is the initial idea planning. The fact Rand wants the students to follow the rules set by other graphic designers shows how much he appreciates these rules, and believes they should be kept and followed for years to come.
          Paul Rand has written many books in his time, all of which talk about how graphic design is an art and should be treated as such. There is no denying that if one of the greats such as Rand has a firm belief to follow rules, then it should at least be considered by other designers.

“I started to look in to the meaning of such a publication and recognized that it could become a useful instrument for a better understanding of typography in Graphic Design. This little book reveals our guidelines - those set by ourselves for ourselves” 
(Vignelli, M. The Vignelli Canon, 2010) 

This is quite an interesting quote to be at the forefront of the book, in particular, the part which expresses the guidelines being set for ourselves, by ourselves. Here, Vignelli has answers the question of ‘who makes the rules?’. He points out the fact that it is the designers themselves who set the rules, as no one understands the industry more than graphic designers. However, in Vignelli’s case, it seems he is referring to ‘ourselves’ as graphic design as a whole, rather than using ‘ourselves’ as singular designers. Everyone sets their own rules; it’s up to them individually to decide what is right and what is wrong.  So while some may not completely agree with Vignelli’s views on the industry, he does bring up some goods and valid points.

“Having said this, I must add that we like Design to be forceful. We do not like limpy design. We like Design to 
be intellectually elegant - that means elegance of the mind, not one of manners, elegance that is the opposite of vulgarity. We like Design to be beyond fashionable modes and temporary fads. We like Design to be as timeless as possible” 
(Vignelli, M. The Vignelli Canon, 2010)

Vignelli brings up an interesting point here, because even though designs which stand the tests of time are of course most likely to be respected for longer periods of time, design which may just be a fad or relate to current events is surely more likely to be popular within the current world of advertisement. With the people of the world being brainwashed into liking certain things due to the media and the news, taking advantage of what these people find entertaining is sure to make a designers’ work become more popular. While some could agree getting on board with the latest trends and using it in ones design to make it more popular can be seen as ‘tacky’, with so many designers in the world now, people will do anything in order to relate and catch the eye of the general public; and of course the best and most effective way of doing this is relating to the trends.
          Throughout the rest of his book, Vignelli talks about rules concerning text layout and formatting, as well as grid systems and what to do when using type. He does bring up some very interesting points, and elaborating on what he has to say, the rules are there to help us. The industry should treat them as a friend, not an enemy. However there was one quote which he used at the start of the book which summarised the whole issue with rule making.

“It is not the intention of this little book to stifle creativity or to reduce it to a bunch of rules. It is not the formula that prevents good design from happening but lack of knowledge of the complexity of the Design profession. It’s up to the brain to use the proper formula to achieve the desired result.” 
(Vignelli, M. The Vignelli Canon, 2010)

This very quote on its own answers the question stated at the start of this dissertation. Many people in the industry, especially those just starting out, will see rules as their enemy. They may not agree with them or see them as boring and restrictions on what work can be done, however this is most likely due to their lack of knowledge on the subject matter. They don’t dislike the rules; rather they just simply don’t understand them. With everyday in the graphic design industry containing a lesson to be learned, it is understandable that sometimes the work can be overbearing and difficult to work alongside, but if one were to just sit down and fully embrace the lessons and ways of  learning a certain topic, maybe they would be fine with following the rules.

“I think the fun of being a graphic designer is to do something original, to make images that nobody’s ever seen before. And the only way you’re going to do that is to avoid what the culture tells you is good. There is no good. The good comes from what does the job. Once it might be a sunset, which is beautiful, and another might be a dog turd, which is disgusting. But it may be the perfect image for what you’re trying to communicate.” 
Gill, B.

There is always a side for every argument in life, one for and one against the issue, but we never really seem to focus on the ones who fight for both sides, or just take a neutral approach to the dilemma. This is an advantage for both sides, as it brings out the best points for each, but also the worse points for the other.

“The problem is one of content. The misconception is that without deep content, design is reduced to pure style, a bag of dubious tricks.” 
(Rock, M. Fuck Content 2009)

A quote stated by designer Michael Rock. He explains that the misconception within the industry is that content is needed for work to be meaningful, and without it, design is merely an entity serving no purpose. Context does indeed help to explain what the artist was talking about when analysing the work, however why not create an art piece with no context, and let the recipient decide the meaning of the design. One could argue that truly, the context of art is subject to the mind of the audience, rather than the intention of the designer. This of course is a basic overlook of the matter at hand, and would need to be looked into in more detail for any exceptional answers.
          With the argument of right or wrong in mind, many people debate on whether or not the artist is in the right. This also brings to mind the question of should the audience be able to have their own views and opinion on the work, or should the views of the artist speak the truth? As Michael Rock once put it,
 
“The problem with the authorship paradigm alone is that it encourages both a historical and acultural readings of design. It grants too much agency, too much control to the lone artist/genius, and discourages interpretation by validating a “right” reading     of a work.”
(Rock, M. Designer As Author, 1996)

As Rock is trying to put it, with the work already having a ‘right’ way to be read and interpreted, it simply does not allow others to have their own opinion of the artwork. In favour of the artist, giving the work meaning already does offer them an explanation for the work itself, and explains to the audience what it means. In contrast, many people view artwork as a form of escapism, allowing them to feel something or relate to the piece of work. With this in mind, does the fact that the artwork already has a meaning suggest the audience is wrong? One could view it as graphic designers create work that already has meaning, whereas when the work is left to be interpreted by the audience, it is simply art.

It is evident that there are good and bad outcomes for both following and breaking the rules, and in the end it seems to be reliant on how the designer handles these approaches. Contrary to their definition, breaking the rules can often lead to magnificent work, whereas sometimes following the rules may be too safe, and restrict a designer from their true potential. This issue has been argued for and against within the design industry by many designers, with many bringing up fair points for their side; now what do those who are for following the     rules have to say?

“I think the fun of being a graphic designer is to do something original, to make images that nobody’s ever seen before. And the only way you’re going to do that is to avoid what the culture tells you is good. There is no good. The good comes from what does the job. Once it might be a sunset, which is beautiful, and another might be a dog turd, which is disgusting. But it may be the perfect image for what you’re trying to communicate.” 
Gill, B.

There is always a side for every argument in life, one for and one against the issue, but we never really seem to focus on the ones who fight for both sides, or just take a neutral approach to the dilemma. This is an advantage for both sides, as it brings out the best points for each, but also the worse points for the other.

The information contained within this document is astounding, presenting the reader with vast amounts of information regarding the rules that a graphic designer sets for themselves and for others to follow within the industry. The document starts with a foreword, and the author (Tony Seddon) talks about how they went back to university, only to drop out four weeks later as they were not happy. Many people might label this as a failure, or a lack of commitment to the subject before them. However, Seddon actually quits for the opposite reasons. He is in love with graphic design, and seeing the students be ridiculed or corrected for the ideas they put forward made Seddon not want to go on with the course. While Seddon listened to the teacher point out what was wrong with the other students work, he agreed with the points being made, but not how it was being handled.

“Yes, I agree that this isn’t the proper way of doing it. But maybe they’re on to something! Something new! And fantastic! What would happen if we just let them run with it?” 
(Seddon, T. Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012)

Typically from a professional graphic designer you will see them agreeing with official points being made; and even though Seddon mentions that he does agree with the teacher, he also agrees with the students. Allowing them to create their own work or just  experiment with something can lead to endless possibilities. It doesn’t have to end up being “good”, it even might end up being something completely useless, but there is a chance that creating bad work can lead to some amazing outcomes. Many people in the industry may agree with him, as most of the graphic designers, especially those starting out, will be led into a different direction they may not want to go in, which results in them feeling lost; but being lost in a maze of unfinished work leads to a road of endless possibilities, a chance for something new to shine through. There’s nothing wrong with giving these ideas that may seem bad at first a chance.

There are many other lessons Seddon teaches in his book as well. One point he mentions in particular is the issues with stock photos. With applications such as Adobe Stock existing, as well as websites like Unsplash, it’s not difficult for people to find free images to use for their work. They exist for people to download and use for free, which at first may seem like a good concept, however when you think about it more clearly, the fact that everyone uses them may not be so good after all

“Remember that other designers can download the same photos or illustrations you’ve selected for their own clients, and the better (and therefore more popular) images get pushed to the top of the list when you search by subject” 
(Seddon, T. Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012)

Here, Seddon brings up an excellent point. While a number of designers may be guilty of using stock photos from time to time, it should be said that photographs taken by the designer themselves are much more impactful. For a start, no one else in the industry will be using the same images, allowing the designer to become more independent and stand out more amongst the crowds. Another great point is the fact that while there are countless stock photos for every subject imaginable, they may not be the exact image you want. Maybe one might want a photo of a certain building, but there are no stock images of it from the angle they want, or how about an icon spray painted on a wall, only this one is in blue and you wanted it in yellow. Designers taking their own photos will help them out so much. They can get the perfect photo, and choose from the multiple that have been taken. The great thing about the graphic design industry is that it’s full of people with different talents, so even if the designer can’t take an amazing photo, they can always hire a professional photographer. Related to the topic of photography, Seddon brings up another great rule about photography.

“Thou shall not use your cell phone to shoot images for a project” 
(Seddon, T. Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012)

This is the title of one of the sections of his book. It talks about quite an obvious rule in design and photography, where he goes on to say the following.

“A common misconception is that pictures taken on low-grade cell phones will be of a good enough quality for high-end print purposes” (Seddon, T. Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012) It is vital for a designer to be working with an image of high 

quality, and while cameras can achieve this, photographs taken on a smart phone usually cannot. That being said though, some camera phones now can take exceedingly good photographs in good quality, which Seddon actually states and argues against his original point.

“However, as with all things digital, technology moves on and many of the newer smart phones now available are capable of producing good-quality, high-resolution images which, up to a point, will be good enough to use” 
(Seddon, T. Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012)

A fair point, and he does do well to argue for both sides, seeing as some people do not possess a state of the art camera, or simply do not have the funds to hire a photographer. This being said, nothing looks worse than analysing a piece of work that is clearly low resolution, and instead of admiring the design or advertisement, you can’t help but notice how ugly and pixelated it is. Using low quality images therefore not only makes it difficult for the designer to work on the image because of the resolution, but it will also be noticed by the client and furthermore the customer. Many clients will not want to work with a graphic designer who uses blurry images in their work; it is seen as unprofessional and lazy. It’s quite a simple rule which everyone can follow easily, however the amount of people that still choose to download images instead of taking their own could be considered upsetting to the industry. As previously mentioned, editing images can be a daunting task, but with the right rules to follow, it can make a designers life so much easier. Again, Seddon covers this subject in vast detail, starting with capturing the original photo and what to do and what not to do when it comes time to editing the image.

“By taking their picture and recropping to a different format, more often than not you are degrading the overall quality of the image and negatively affecting its composition, as well as being disrespectful of their ability” 
(Seddon, T. Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012)

Though a graphic designer and not a photographer, Seddon understands an impactful photograph when he sees one, and so should all other designers. If an image has been taken with a landscape view, this means it should remain this way. It should not be edited into portrait, instead, the photograph should have been taken in portrait mode if this was the original intent. The same rule applies for turning portraits into landscape. Cropping parts or the majority of an image can often result in it losing its’ appeal or overall level of satisfaction. Seddon puts it best when he later goes on to state:

“Most photographers I know often take a landscape and a portrait of the same subject matter, with the orientation dictating their choice of composition” 
(Seddon,T. Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012)

One must be respectful toward a photographer and their eye for beauty. If a photograph is given to someone with the orientation already decided, it has been decided for a reason. Like everyone else in the design industry, photographers have their own set of rules to follow too.
          Logo design and rebranding companies is a huge part of a graphic designer’s job, and like all other aspects of the industry, should be followed with a set of rules in mind. This is an important ask for a graphic designer, as not only have they got to please the client, but also the customers of the client.

When it comes to rule making and rule breaking, the area of designing something for a client should have the designer following the rules. This isn’t a personal piece or work they are doing for themselves; it is work that somebody else will use to represent them. A logo will have to match the company, and make them look professional. Again, Tony Seddon goes in to great detail of designing logos, each with their own set of rules.

“Good logos identify an organization. They do not tell the 
viewer everything there is to know about the organization. 
The logo is the foundation of the visual system. It must exist in a variety of contexts” 
(Seddon, T. Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012)

With more and more companies being founded and shops being opened, logos are more popular and widely used than ever before. And while there are breathtaking logos, there are also those that can be ‘too much’ and explain more than the customer needs to know. When looking at two yellow arches, people immediately associate it with McDonald’s, that’s all it takes. However if more colours were added, more wording and shapes that matched all of the food they serve, it would immediately lose its identity. A logo should be something that can be placed somewhere and anywhere, and will be recognised by most. Seddon makes a great point about how logos should be displayed.

“The good news is that designers are now able to animate a logo, use a broader colour palette, and think three dimensionally. The bad news is that every logo needs to be legible on a printed piece and reduced to a small number of pixels online” 
(Seddon, T. Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012)

With the ever changing world we live in, the design industry must keep up with the times as to allow our work to constantly be relevant. In the past, logos were simply kept as print. Just a plain and simple 2D image was all someone needed to brand their organisation. Now, with the likes of computers and other technology being around, logos not only need to be printed, but also appear online, flash up on billboards, and also be rendered into 3D graphics where they can spin around and show all sides and angles. It is important for a designer to keep in mind that when creating a logo, they must think ahead to whether or not this image can work in not only other forms of media, but also other dimensions. It makes the job harder, but if done right and all the rules are followed, can create masterpieces of work.

‘Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans’ is indeed a very interesting read, and many would agree with everything Tony Seddon had to say. While he pointed out many of the rules that should be followed, he also talked about how it is often okay to break a couple of rules from time to time, allowing the designer to be freer with their work. There are no wrong paths within the world of graphic design; there is no way to get lost, only roads that will eventually lead you to the work the designer wants to produce.

“By all means break the rules, and break them beautifully, deliberately and well” 
(Bringhurst, R. The Elements of Typographic 
Style, 2005)

With rule breaking often seen as an act of rebellion, it is more often than not given a bad reputation among the subject. In graphic design, many designers see rule breakers as those who simply don’t understand the subject matter, or those who disrespect the art as a whole. However, the rule breakers would argue that they break rules for a reason, that there is a need to do so as so many people are afraid to do it themselves. This being said, rule breaking is an art, and should be treated as such.

Forms of rebellion also act as ways of breaking the rules. Cliff Sloan is a marketing guru in the design industry, and has been for many years. Therefore, he knows what works and what doesn’t, and what can be effective in attempts to get people’s attention. In an interview on ‘Design Matters’ between Debbie Millman and Cliff Sloan, Sloan mentions how when he started getting in to design, he would make work that doesn’t technically follow the rules, as to speak out and raise more attention towards his work. During the interview, he states that:

“I never really came to the world or viewed the world as, you know, I never wanted to just come quietly go about my business. I always thought it was better, for better or worse to put yourself out there and get noticed... I’d rather go down swinging than just go quietly.” 
(Design Matters with Debbie Millman: Cliff Sloan, 6:40)

An interesting quote indeed, and further proves that many designers do take the route of going against the grain; for some it works, for others it doesn’t, but it’s an interesting concept to talk about none-the-less. As there exist many designers within the industry now more than ever, it is a struggle for someone with such an occupation to get their work noticed in an ocean of others. It is therefore not uncommon for someone to take unorthodox measures in an attempt to separate themselves from the crowd and get noticed. Sloan states how designers should put themselves out there, taking any action necessary in order to get noticed within the             ever-growing industry.
          Sloan’s approach to design is quite intriguing, as it is indeed always interesting to see a designer’s work that shows they took a leap of faith; and more often than not it pays off. There should not be anything wrong with trying new things or breaking a couple of rules, so long as it pays off in the long run and the final outcome is a piece of work that both designer and consumer are happy with.

Breaking rules can be a good way of creating new design, and give birth to a newer form of art and design. Art itself is a way of expression, and perhaps what some designers feel the best way of communication is to break these rules set before them. Pablo Picasso himself puts it best:

“Learn the rules like a pro so you can break them like an artist.” 
Picasso, P.

When one is to look at the work by Pablo Picasso, you can definitely see how he was a rule breaker in his own right. During the 1900s, many art pieces would be realistic paintings of lanmarks, places or people, with the designers often taking pride in their work in terms of how realistic they would look; which is most likely why Picasso was often frowned upon with his work. He invented styles of paintings such as Cubism and Surrealism, which visually morphed the way in which paintings were usually produced by using vibrant colours and a variety of shapes to construct objects.

When Picasso first started this movement, many designers thought it to be a way of disrespect against how art is usually produced, however over time his paintings became more and more popular, being accepted and praised as some of the best work in design history. This proves the point that breaking the rules isn’t always a bad idea, as evident with Picasso it can lead to new styles of art and inspire many other designers to take steps in their workthey may not have done before.

Many famous and well respected designers have an urge to break the rules, and many use breaking rules as a way to create their work. It is evident that breaking rules can lead to many good designs and artwork, and a lot of the time can even inspire a new genre and era of art. Therefore, rule breaking may not be as bad as many designers say it is. Of course, as there is with every statement, there is an argument against it, or sometimes an explanation for both sides.

From looking at different points of views from different designers, as well as exploring them from my own point of view, my final standpoint on the whole topic has become clear to me. In the beginning, I started off disagreeing with the inclusion of rules within a designers work; I was fully against the idea. In a way I agreed strongly with the points made by designers like Sloan and Picasso; however now I could argue against their views and raise concern about their practices. Though I do still agree with them to an extent, I do not side with them on the argument on rules. Sloan’s view of “going down swinging rather than quietly” could come across as quite ignorant towards the rules set by many graphic designers before them, however his comment does make an impact on myself, as I can see why he makes that point. Furthermore, in the previously I would have agreed fully with Picasso’s comment “Learn the rules as a pro so you can break them as an artist”, as when first read it seems he is encouraging designers to break the rules set before them. However, after looking into it deeper, I can make more sense of what he is trying to say. His comment actually insists that in order for one to break the rules, they must first be at a professional standard so that they actually understand what it is that they are breaking. This comment summarises my final views on the subject; the fact that when one is comfortable with the practice of design, then they can break as many rules as they like. Rules breaking can lead to a number of beautiful designs, it can encourage a designer to become more comfortable and confident in the work they produce, breaking the rules should be considered a rule itself.

Information Bibliography

Bringhurst, Robert: The Elements of Typographic Design, 2005 Book Eames, Ray: (Quoted)

Gill, Bob: (Quoted)

Picasso, Pablo: (Quoted)

Rand, Paul: Thoughts on Design, 1947 Book

Rock, Michael: Designer As Author, 1996 https://2x4.org/ideas/22/designer-as-author/ Online Essay

Rock, Michael: Designer As Author, 1996 https://2x4.org/ideas/2/fuck-content/ Online Essay

Rudel, Emil: Typographie, 1967 Book
http://www.famousgraphicdesigners.org/emil-ruder

Seddon, Tony: Thou Shall Not Use Comic Sans, 2012 Book

Sloan, Cliff: Design Matters with Debbie Millman Cliff Sloan, Podcast

Vignelli, Massimo: The Vignelli Canon, 2010 Book

Zeldman, Jeffrey: (Quoted)