Essay: Graphic design, society and culture

Most designers would agree that there is a relation between graphic design, society and culture. Unlike the position that obtains in art; ‘art for art’s sake’; there is undoubtedly no question implying that graphic design is independent of society and/or culture, because were it not for the different classes and culture groups (also referred to as ‘audiences’ or ‘markets’ in the design world) there would be little need and use for advertising graphics. The idea of ‘graphics for graphics sake’ as a movement has no sensibility to it. And, further pushing on the subject of the nature of the relationship between graphic design, society and culture and thus two possible explanations arise. The first being that society and culture pose as the framework from which graphic design derives its context. The second is that graphic design reflects and points at the society’s values and cultural attitudes that it is found in. This social and cultural values and attitudes can be identified in graphic design products like advertisements from early 1900s America, which contained blatant racism against the black population, or 1970s British ads, which contained a stereotypical portrayal of women. While the contents of these ads are appalling, unfortunately this was the norm at these periods of time. Both these descriptions imply that graphic design, society and culture are profoundly influenced by one another impacting it each other’s meaning and effects. Design should generally operate with in the context of society and culture similar to how a backdrop is used in the theatre, as society and culture being conceived as the scenery and stage from which the main performance of expression can be displayed. Another sense of graphic designs relationship with society and culture working in context is simply as a reflection of the social and cultural beliefs and attitudes mirrored in the design, which is used to point and identify those beliefs and attitudes. This suggests graphic design is more complimentary than necessary, that graphic design could exist and function perfectly well without society or culture. I disagree with such a depiction of graphic design and will argue that design holds more weight in the society and culture than merely complimenting and reflecting its beliefs and attitudes, and I will shine light on its influential aspects that deserve duly notice. The misconception of graphic design lies in conceiving society and culture as the context, in preference to being the backdrops for design or as being mirrored in design. As is comparable to the theatre, in saying that the actors and their actions surely have no effect upon the background and that vice versa the background has no clear influence on the actors. It is offensive to depict graphic design and its relation with society and culture as being parallel lines that never meet, and that all graphic designers do is imitate and reference something going on elsewhere. I am arguing that, far-off from being the backgrounds to design or that without which design is incomplete, graphic design indeed produces and reproduces society and culture. And I will bid to show that graphic design, society and culture have mutual effects, as each is one of the ways in which the others are made. For as graphic design makes society and culture possible, so does society and culture make graphic design possible.