Jet (ooh ooh ooh ooh woo-woo woo woo)

I had the pleasure of experiencing London's Gatwick airport today/yesterday/whatever.
I was meeting a friend whose plane was due in just after midnight, so I got the 22.34 train to the airport to be sure I arrived nice and early. Before I left I used Dashboard's flight tracker widget to see how her flight was doing - 1 minute late it said, so I guessed all would be well and we'd make the 01.45 train back home.

I'm not particularly au fait with airports, having only folown once (or twice if you count the return trip) and I always expected them to be extremely ordered affairs with lots of instructions everywhere. Instead they seem to be big cavernous spaces with lots of people milling around. When I went to Heathrow for a flight to Ireland a while back I bumped into David Trimble, First Minister of the Northern Ireland Assembly, looking distinctly harrassed. I remember thinking at the time how odd it can be to bump into 'famous' or 'important' people. (Actually I remember thinking 'who's he? It's on the tip of my toungue...'

So anyway there I was at Gatwick wandering through the entrance and looking around for a little bit of a hint about where I should be going. Nothing. It is an appalingly designed place (as is Heathrow's terminal 1) and I can't imagine what effect it has on visitors to the country. But at 23.13 it was a soul-less place.
Eventually I found a sign that said 'Arrivals' so I thought I'd best follow it. After passing by empty and depressing check-in desks I found the 'UK arrivals' lounge. I say 'lounge' - it was a door with a broken hinge and some green chairs that looked far too uncomfortable to sit on, never mind sleep as many people appeared to be doing.
This didn't exactly strike me as particularly international so it came as no surprise when I realised that 'UK arrivals' didn't refer to people arriving in the UK but people arriving on internal flights - when I thought about it the logic was obvious: everyone is arriving in the UK.

I couldn't believe how stupid I was, and I was grateful I arrived early as if I'd spent all my time in the wrong lounge with my friend stranded where I was supposed to be, I'd have felt a right proper charley.
So I carried on walking until I came to 'International Arrivals' only to find that the plane I was waiting for was delayed by over an hour.
So I went up to the bookshop and bought a copy of Graham Greene's 'Brighton Rock', a book I've been meaning to read for ages. Then I went to get a coffee but was stuck next to a group of people whose entire vocabulary consisted of the f- and c-words on one side, and three rather attractive young women with equally attractive Irish accents on the other.

It was, to cut a long story short, one hell of an evening. The plane eventually arrived at 01.15, exactly half an hour before the last train home and, coincidentally, exactly half an hour before the passengers actually made it to the lounge. Hence after the required (and heartfelt) emotional greeting my friend and I spent several hours drinking coffee and catching up before catching the 04.44 train home.
We eventually arrived back here at half five in the morning. She's gone to bed despite having gone through 'tired' and I can hear her deep breathing as I type in the next room (oh - now it's snoring). I, on the other hand, reasoned that if I went to bed I'd get at most two hours sleep before having to get up - so decided to stay up and go to work early, hopefully coming home early before my all-nighter catches up with me. Funny, all I did was go to the airport but I'm going to be the one that ends up with jet-lag!
This may be a mistake - it's now twenty past six in the morning and I can feel the side effects already. Maybe if I close my eyes for just a minute...

What do you mean, you've never heard the Eroica symphony?

The BBC begins its marathon Beethoven broadcast tomorrow - every note he ever wrote played over a whole week.
I'm going to dip in every now and then; I got into classical music through Beethoven and while I sometimes grow tired of his style I quite enjoy having a long break and then 'rediscovering' him.

If you've never heard the nine symphonies then the BBC is going to be making the broadcasts available for download over the next few days, so here's you chance. (Of course you can hear the whole week on the internet via the Beeb's great 'listen again' service).

If you're new to this stuff and fancy giving it a go, I recommend the 3rd ('Eroica'), 5th, 7th and 9th symphonies in particular (the 6th is always popular too - lots of familiar tunes you can hum along to)

The third symphony's first two movements are powerful; the second is a long slow funeral march with a magnificent double fugue in the middle that I used to bore my neighbours by playing over and over again.

The fifth is of course the 'de de de DUM' symphony - well worth listening to the whole thing because it repays close attention and ends in a glorious blaze of colour.
The dot-dot-dot-dash pattern of the symphony's motif (which recurs throughout) is Morse Code for 'V' (although Beethoven didn't know that, of course!) As a result, the symphony became popular during the second world war (V for Victory, you see) and the motif was used to open BBC broadcasts to Europe, in particular those that contained codes for resistance fighters.

The seventh symphony was the one that 'got' me, in particular the second movement which, on the recording I first heard, was played extremely slowly. Very, very sexy music. Nowadays it's more common that it's played quickly and it can often lose its punch. (Again, a lot like sex...)

The ninth symphony needs no introduction... but what the hell. The first movement is some of the most dramatic music you will ever hear - until the final movement which includes a full choir singing Schiller's 'Ode To Joy' to one of the most famous tunes ever written, so simple but so stirring. It's a great symphony to hear live if you ever get the chance.
Beethoven was stone deaf by the time he wrote this piece, not long before he died, and at the first performance he had to be physically turned around to see the ecstatic reception it received. The moment's captured quite well in the film 'Immortal Beloved' (although the film itself is sometimes a little self-indulgent).

Compared with Mozart's 40-odd symphonies and Haydn's 100+, Beethoven's nine symphonies are few in number but enormous in impact. He took the symphony and transformed it from something of a bagatelle showcase into a powerful expression of emotion and musical form. It had a huge impact on music - and not always a good one. Brahms famously put off writing a symphony because he didn't feel able to meet the challenge (in the end he wrote four, and his first symphony was labelled 'Beethoven's tenth' by many critics). The other oddity of the nine symphonies is that the number became a bit of a curse. Schubert only wrote nine before he died (in his 30s) and so did Bruckner. So convinced was he that he would die after writing his ninth symphony that Mahler put off producing one, calling what is in effect his ninth symphony an orchestral song-cycle ('Das Lied Von Der Erde' or 'Song of the Earth'). Thinking he'd beaten the curse he wrote what became his 'ninth' symphony - and promptly died...

Incidentally, the Eroica symphony is famous for quite often being misprinted in newspapers as 'Erotica'. I suspect either an over-zealous spell-checker or, more likely, a proofreader's industry in-joke.

Experimental Travel

From Michael Quinion's ever-fascinating World Wide Words newsletter:

Experimental Travel
The phrase is in the news because Lonely Planet yesterday published
its Guide to Experimental Travel. One author is Joel Henry, a 48-
year-old television scriptwriter from Strasbourg who is said to
have created the idea in 1990 (though the term is more recent).
It's also called "experimental tourism". As a surreal alternative
to the standard trudge round tourist venues, he suggests that you
should "challenge your perceptions of a city and increase your
receptiveness as a tourist" by trying alternative ways of seeing.
Alphatourism, for example: identify the first and last streets in
the A-Z, draw a line between the two and follow the route on foot
(a variation might be to draw a random shape, superimpose it on a
street plan and follow the route it marks out). Or aerotourism:
spend a day in an airport enjoying its facilities without going
anywhere. Or nyctalotourism: go to a foreign city at twilight, look
around all night and leave just before dawn. Or cecitourism: let a
trusted friend or partner walk you blindfolded round a place,
describing the sights. If all these are too mundane, you might try
"horse's head tourism": don a horse's head costume and walk around
to experience the way that people react to you.

* From the Independent, 9 Feb. 2005: About 20 miles further on, I
drive past Bodiam Castle, a 14th-century fortification. This, of
course, is a conventional tourist attraction, but experimental
tourists are permitted to visit such places, as long as they
indulge in contretourism. This involves turning your back on the
monument in question and taking a photograph of the view in the
opposite direction.

* From the Observer, 22 May 2005: "You see," he says. "That is the
thing about doing experimental tourism, it gives you a special
feeling. It makes you into a person you are not." I think about
this but I don't think I'm sure enough of the person I am to know
that I'm not the person I'm not. But then, this is precisely the
kind of topsy-turvy conundrum that experimental tourism throws up
the whole time.

Skype

I just had a 20 minute telephone conversation with a friend in Spain via Skype on my Powerbook using a headset with microphone.
Excellent quality sound - apparently I sounded a bit odd on the other end but more than acceptable.
Total cost for the call... only 20p (36 US cents/ 0.30 Euros)

Not bad - higly recommended if you've never tried it.

Design Your Own Games!

Back in the 1980s a friend with a Sinclair ZX Spectrum got hold of a program called HURG (can't remember what it stood for) which essentially allowed you to create your own platform games.
A few of us had great plans for transforming the games industry and tried to come up with the next big thing.

Obviously it didn't work... (well, we were only 13 - I mean, as if someone so young could ever make it big in the tech industry...)

But I've just bought a copy of Power game Factory which is a cool-looking (and cheap!) program for the Mac that lets you produce side-scrolling games. I'm certainly not imagining that I'm going to produce anything that anyone else will want to play, let alone buy, but I'm looking forwards to producing something. Maybe a game in which designers shoot clients, (or ordinary people shoot demon designers!)

Anyway, looks cool - check it out.

Bad Project Warning Signs

Andy Budd (fellow Brightonian) has just posted a list of warning signs for bad projects when it comes to web design. I'd say they also apply to print design as well and have encountered most of them in the past.
I run workshops teaching Dreamweaver etc to private clients - big companies as well as hobbyists. One of the common problems is that big companies are sending people to learn 'how to do web design' so they can take on their site - as well as carry on doing their 'real' job. I advise them at the very least to set aside a day that will be their 'web day' and make it clear that if anyone wants stuff putting on the site it has to be with them by midday at least two working days before - get people seeing the site as a publication with a schedule rather than an ad hoc thing that can be updated at the drop of a hat. Otherwise they'll extract the micturition.
That's if, of course, the company can't be persuaded that a web site is a full-time commitment, not something that can be slotted in whenever. They wouldn't do the accounts that way, or hold board meetings in that manner, would they?

I've shamelessly nicked the list but I recommend you visit the original post to read the comments that people leave - and indeed make Andy's blog one of your regular ports of call.

Individually none of these signs should be deal breakers. However put a few of them together and it may be worth thinking twice about taking on that project.

• The project needs to be done in an incredibly short space of time, due to a fixed deadline. In these situations the potential client has often known about the deadline for a while. However it’s taken them longer to plan the project than initially anticipated so they expect the developer to make up the time.


• The potential client says that have no idea about budget. This could indicate they haven’t done their home work and aren’t very serious about the project.


• The potential client says they have a budget but won’t tell you what it is. This is often an indication that the client doesn’t trust you and feels that if they let you know their budget, you’ll simply charge them more for the same solution.


• The client says they want the site to be as cheap as possible, or they have an extremely low budget. This usually means the client doesn’t value their web presence much, preferring cheaper over better. In this situation potential clients are often spending their own money, can be extremely demanding and expect more for less.


• The client expects much more from the project than their budget will allow. In these situations it can be difficult to manage the clients expectations.


• You are expected come up with design ideas for the pitch. This is often problematic as you won’t know enough about the project at such an early stage. These type of pitches can turn into a beauty contest where participants are solely judged on the visuals they create rather than their ability and track record. There is a strong risk that elements of your design will be used even if you don’t win the pitch.


• The potential client won’t tell you how many agencies they have contacted about this project. This could indicate that they have emailed a large number of agencies and are shopping for the lowest quote.


• You will be pitching against a large number of other agencies. This often means the client hasn’t done their homework researching potential suppliers. If the pitch involves lots of preparation this puts a financial burden on the agency, while limiting the chance of success.


• There is no central point of contact. Projects for large companies often involve many stakeholders. If there is nobody managing the project at the clients end you’ll having to do it for them. This vastly complicates the project and increases your overheads. Being a supplier you’ll have no power in the organisation, making your task extremely difficult. You also run the risk of getting sucked into company politics.


• The potential client hasn’t provided you with a request for proposal and doesn’t have the time to fill in your design questionnaire fully. If the client isn’t willing to put the required time into the project it could indicate aren’t going to take the project seriously. It could also indicate that they have contacted lost of agencies and just don’t have the time or are simply window shopping.

Valuable lesson no. 1: the client who knows it all

It's my day off today but I had to go in to work to pick up tickets for the private view this week.
While I was there I got talking to second years about their research project proposals for next year - they're worth 15% of their final mark (or 30% if they so choose, which a lot of them want to). One student is choosing to investigate whether graphic design is 'worth it' - I think she's becoming a bit disillusioned with it all. In particular she wants to look at the 'we're all designers' mentality that is so common these days and seems to devalue the status of the designer. (I think we as designers, and design education, have a lot to do with that as we attempt to depict ourselves as magicians and prostitute ourselves in art galleries rather than the real world - it's no wonder ordinary people (if you excuse the term) would prefer not to do business with us).

This is, as any regular reader of this blog will know, a cause dear to my heart and so we chatted for a bit. Turned out she was having problems with the editors of a magazine she works on who want to be 'hands on' when it comes to the design. Not even graduated and she's getting the best lesson you could have: dealing with clients who think they know better than you! (I should be careful here - I'm not suggesting that clients shouldn't be respected; of course they should. But I think you know the sort of situation I mean.)
I got back home to find that Joel Wheat, a student at Portfolio Centre has written a great piece on precisely this issue. (I'd put a link to PC's web site here but as they've chosen not to let it work in Safari I won't bother - I hate it when people do that - bad, bad design choice).
I think it's an area that deserves to be looked at more - indeed I submitted a paper to an AIGA conference on it but it never got chosen :-(
Anyway, read Joel's article. I'd be mightily surprised if it didn't strike a chord with any designer who sees it.

Met a lady the other day that told me that her grandson was also a designer. “He can draw really well and is good at the computer too”. Turns out the kid is 17 and, from her description a veritable virtuoso in the realm of Microsoft Word. I have run into to this time and again. Read the full article

Tight Briefs

I have, on several occasions, encountered graphic design courses where tutors will walk into a studio full of waiting students and deliver a verbal brief similar to this: "I want you to explore the idea of isolation" or "illustrate the concept of repetition".
You know the sort of thing - they're called 'conceptual' briefs, and they're usually the result of an extremely poor imagination on the part of the staff, or just stupid attitudes to planning.
There's no indication of what students are supposed to learn on these projects, or how they will be assessed. For the students, it's nothing more than a guessing game, wondering what it is that the tutors are after, and hoping that they get it right.

Briefs like this (unclear, ill-considered) have no place in graphic design education. They're not the equivalent of creative callisthenics, the sort that might be used in writing classes because they aren't presented as such. All they do is confuse people - even tutors can't agree on how to assess the results, and the people who set them are notoriously contradictory in the advice they give and the way they assess.

A student approached me shortly after I started teaching back in 2000, having difficulty with a brief to design a poster illustrating key graphic design concepts. In actual fact, this was the fifth or sixth student who had mentioned this to me, and I knew there were many more.
'What is being tested here?' I asked, 'Your design skills, your layout skills, or maybe you knowledge of key design concepts?'
'I don't know', she said.

There's the first problem. What are the objective criteria for evaluating the results? All graphic design briefs in industry have (or should have) this simple list. It might be 'increase awareness of our new product among users of competitor X', or 'increase understanding of our core message among currently under-represented markets such as young women'. It's those clear objectives that allow someone to judge firstly what is wanted, and secondly whether what is produced will work.

The same is necessary in education: we call them 'learning outcomes' in our jargon and they're usually worded something like 'by the end of this module/unit/project students should be able to demonstrate their ability to communicate key concepts of graphic design to...' or 'show their ability to experiment with different layouts and reach a rational conclusion about the best choice for clear communication'.
It's actually really difficult to write good learning outcomes and those are very poor examples - but even these would be far better than the wooly, even non-existant intended outcomes that accompany most project briefs. The truth is, most projects have the same invisible learning outcomes: 'students will be kept busy for several weeks while we wander round acting like gods and giving out contradictory advice, then disappear to the staff room and complain about how stressed we are'.

So this student had no objectives and, therefore, no idea about how to proceed. 'I can't get creative about this' she said. Okay, well two mistakes there. Firstly this belief that you have to be 'creative' in graphic design. 99% of design isn't 'creative' in the sense that it's usually used in 'our world'. To be creative means to create, it doesn't mean to be different or special or unique or 'knock your socks off'.
Armed with this mythical view of creativity as being different, students dismiss potentially good ideas - something they learn from their tutors - because they've 'been done before' or 'it's old hat' or 'it's too clichéd'. Well here's a newsflash: communication relies on clichés. If we didn't use phrases and words and gestures that were understood through familiarity we would always be finding ourselves misunderstood. That's if we could actually come up with something to say. And that's the problem with our definition of 'creativity' - we tell our students that it means being different and so they stare into space fearful to the point of nervous collapse of coming up with anything that might be familiar, if not to them then to their tutor who has the knowledge of accumulated years of fantasising over back issues of Creative Review, the designer's Playboy.

The second mistake revealed in the student's comment was that it relied on the idea that creativity is something that you pray for, and wait for, like the second coming. It's depicted as a religious experience that some people are gifted with and others seek in vain. Creativity as religious experience is bull. We create whenever we make a cup of tea or a sandwich, whenever we make conversation or whenever we shake hands. It happens all the time and we are all of us equally creative. Creativity is a response to a situation, an action that causes things to happen. It isn't a miracle. It's like breathing: we all do it. The secret to breathing better, to improving the flow of oxygen to our muscles and organs, is to understand how breathing works and how it can be utilised. The same with creativity - and yet we do not teach creativity, we just expect it to happen and condemn those that appear to lack the gift. Many people insist creativity can't be taught. The thing about fallacies like that is you only need one example of someone being taught to be more creative to disprove them - and there are many, many examples to hand.

So there was my student, confused and lacking ideas (she actually had lots of ideas but as I said they were all rejected out of hand not because they wouldn't work, but because they weren't 'creative' enough).
I told her she had to set herself some objectives, to tighten the brief. And the first thing I said she could do to help would be to define her audience. Forget the client for now, I said - you can please the client all you want in graphic design but producing a design that the client likes is just massaging their ego. And designing to please yourself, the designer, or worse - to please other designers - is nothing more than what I call 'designerwank', okay when done in private but somewhat disturbing when done in groups or in public.
'Who do you want to teach these key concepts to?' I asked. 'Because if you decide you want to teach them to 13 year olds thinking of studying design at school, it will be a different poster than one aimed at first year design students. And if you decide your audience is expert designers then it'll be completely different again. So choose an audience and then you can go back to your ideas and see if they work.'
Immediately the ideas started flowing and I left her with at least half a dozen completely workable, creative, ideas. She only had a few hours left but none of them would take long to produce, at least to a rough presentable state (something else we get wrong in design education is that we expect students to finish everything to a 'professional' standard, yet in reality no idea tends to progress beyond the black marker sketch before it's taken off to the artworkers - and the majority of our students want to be the ideas people, not the Mac Monkeys; yet our focus diverts them down precisely this path).

I bumped into the student a few days later and asked her how the project was going. She'd thrown away all the ideas she'd come up with and gone for something 'conceptual' - she admitted it made no sense to look at, but it 'looked creative' - lots of letterpress and faded letterforms. She'd taken the view that the real intended outcome of the brief was not to answer it with something that worked, but something that you could frame and stick on your wall. That is, in many cases, what attracts the good marks in design education - not design, but 'art'. In the design world the word 'concept' means something concrete, justifiable, objective; in the art world it means the exact opposite. And that's what this student had decided was required.
It had taken her weeks to do something that a more intelligently constructed brief would have taken a few hours. There'd been no teaching as such, only 'critiques' that left her more confused. And there'd been no rational criteria for any of the judgements made.

She had learnt absolutely nothing, produced a piece of work she hated, and come out of it thoroughly depressed. All for the sake of a misunderstanding of what 'being creative' means and a lazy approach to teaching.