The US flag with Twitter replacing stars is accurate; the erasure of Canada (in “2025” no less!) by the US is not. The subject of the former puts the blame on the US, while the latter implies a fait accompli, especially given the title, Canada 2025. Sagmeister had a responsibility to be more thoughtful in this post (that could indeed be utilized for harm by the MAGA crowd) by giving more context from the designer and himself… it was sure to backfire. He couldn’t even be bothered to post the full title from the designer’s IG account. It was in poor taste all around.
Thanks for a demonstration of how graphic design needs a critical literature—but can’t bothered to support it. Sorry, Marian, but you’ve misdiagnosed the problem. Stefan brought this upon himself by offering these “mini-crits.” They aren’t crits. At best, they’re notions. Everything you wrote is spot on and shows the necessity of having a nuanced, expansive take on a design topic—as opposed to a few terse sentences. Then you can pop off in response. But as the political maxim goes, if you’re explaining, you’re losing. In this case, it’s you reinforcing the idea that a few choice words from a design hero is a sufficient mode of evaluation. It’s not the reader’s fault that they couldn’t intuit all the issues you bring out from Stefan’s three sentences. The problem isn’t designers being “crazy” it’s being lazy—in how they examine design work and eschewing taking in a lengthier study. Maybe if a true design criticism was prevalent and respected, we wouldn’t have these flash mobs of fury. (That “maybe” is admittedly doing a lot of work.) Full disclosure: I actually encourage my students to submit work to Stefan. It’s a challenge for them to think outside the classroom and be part of the wider world of design. And what’s to lose? I suppose I’m undermining my own assertions here. And here, where I write about Stefan’s Instagram: https://scratchingthesurface.fm/stories/safe-words. I’m at peace with the knowledge thousands more designers will read short Sagmeisters than that article I just linked to. But if you come at me for it, you’ll have earned it.
While I’ve never asked Stefan why he does this, I’ve always assumed it came from being overwhelmed with requests to view portfolios and give a little feedback. Designers in his position get many requests each day and they can’t possibly attend to all of them, or even go through them to choose one worth responding to. I imagined Stefan thought it would be nice to give a quick public response and let his followers provide additional opinions. But it isn’t design critique, nor did he say it was. It’s just a little feedback to someone who wants his opinion.
I agree with you that design is missing critique. A lot of things are missing nuanced, rational critique. We’ve entered the age of thumbs up vs. thumbs down. Too often peoples ideas are given a choice between “you may live,” and “you must die,” with the hysterical rabble deciding the verdict and, too often, the execution.
But I don’t think Stefan’s posts are a part of this. I genuinely think he’s just trying to be nice by giving a little attention to people who have none, within the constraints of time. I don’t think it belongs anywhere near the category of design critique—it’s just a little feedback.
The responses to Sagmeister’s display of the flag mash-up remind me why I don’t bother with graphic designers’ discussions. It’s hard to comment on the reactions to the image without sounding like I’m screaming, “You kids get off my lawn!” I am impressed, though, that it was possible for something to lower my opinion of the RGD.
In 1970, I was hitchhiking across the US and Canada. A bunch of Canadians asked me whether the rumors were true that Canada was about to legalize marijuana and that Richard Nixon had given orders to send tanks across the border in response.
Your formal comments were the start of a possible interesting discussion: Could you do something worthwhile with the nipples? How about the top of the leaf turning into a crown? Is the whole thing wanting to become the Starbucks mark? (Does the stem really want to be an anemic exclamation point?) . . .
. . . Am I the only one weirded out by having fifteen stripes? What does **that* mean?
I love the idea of discussing nipple/crown possibilities. I also counted the stripes but couldn’t think of anything funny to say about them. Those kids who get off your lawn better not get onto *my* lawn!!
Thank you for your hot take on this little online fiasco. I respect both of your work tremendously so it was to my surprise that it was pickup at all from you. After my initial outrage it made for a great debate between me and my partner honestly. He pointed out that I should be focused on the poor design first and my outrage second which I think many of us have fallen pray to here. I think as a country we have our backs up and ready for a fight so this was just an opportunity to vent out our frustration on topics we feel all too passionate about, design, and our patriotism!
I'm honestly surprised to see the GDC chiming in on this one. That being said, respectfully I still don't think critiquing this design at this point and time was tasteful. It should not be about kids getting off lawns but rather the landscape at large and since design has a place in history let's not let it give way to negative ideology.
Darn, I missed this and now feel like a fool! lol Thanks for sharing :) Designers are also a weird bunch.
The US flag with Twitter replacing stars is accurate; the erasure of Canada (in “2025” no less!) by the US is not. The subject of the former puts the blame on the US, while the latter implies a fait accompli, especially given the title, Canada 2025. Sagmeister had a responsibility to be more thoughtful in this post (that could indeed be utilized for harm by the MAGA crowd) by giving more context from the designer and himself… it was sure to backfire. He couldn’t even be bothered to post the full title from the designer’s IG account. It was in poor taste all around.
Thanks for a demonstration of how graphic design needs a critical literature—but can’t bothered to support it. Sorry, Marian, but you’ve misdiagnosed the problem. Stefan brought this upon himself by offering these “mini-crits.” They aren’t crits. At best, they’re notions. Everything you wrote is spot on and shows the necessity of having a nuanced, expansive take on a design topic—as opposed to a few terse sentences. Then you can pop off in response. But as the political maxim goes, if you’re explaining, you’re losing. In this case, it’s you reinforcing the idea that a few choice words from a design hero is a sufficient mode of evaluation. It’s not the reader’s fault that they couldn’t intuit all the issues you bring out from Stefan’s three sentences. The problem isn’t designers being “crazy” it’s being lazy—in how they examine design work and eschewing taking in a lengthier study. Maybe if a true design criticism was prevalent and respected, we wouldn’t have these flash mobs of fury. (That “maybe” is admittedly doing a lot of work.) Full disclosure: I actually encourage my students to submit work to Stefan. It’s a challenge for them to think outside the classroom and be part of the wider world of design. And what’s to lose? I suppose I’m undermining my own assertions here. And here, where I write about Stefan’s Instagram: https://scratchingthesurface.fm/stories/safe-words. I’m at peace with the knowledge thousands more designers will read short Sagmeisters than that article I just linked to. But if you come at me for it, you’ll have earned it.
Thanks Kenneth,
While I’ve never asked Stefan why he does this, I’ve always assumed it came from being overwhelmed with requests to view portfolios and give a little feedback. Designers in his position get many requests each day and they can’t possibly attend to all of them, or even go through them to choose one worth responding to. I imagined Stefan thought it would be nice to give a quick public response and let his followers provide additional opinions. But it isn’t design critique, nor did he say it was. It’s just a little feedback to someone who wants his opinion.
I agree with you that design is missing critique. A lot of things are missing nuanced, rational critique. We’ve entered the age of thumbs up vs. thumbs down. Too often peoples ideas are given a choice between “you may live,” and “you must die,” with the hysterical rabble deciding the verdict and, too often, the execution.
But I don’t think Stefan’s posts are a part of this. I genuinely think he’s just trying to be nice by giving a little attention to people who have none, within the constraints of time. I don’t think it belongs anywhere near the category of design critique—it’s just a little feedback.
Btw, nice use of “under consideration” ;)
Marian,
The responses to Sagmeister’s display of the flag mash-up remind me why I don’t bother with graphic designers’ discussions. It’s hard to comment on the reactions to the image without sounding like I’m screaming, “You kids get off my lawn!” I am impressed, though, that it was possible for something to lower my opinion of the RGD.
In 1970, I was hitchhiking across the US and Canada. A bunch of Canadians asked me whether the rumors were true that Canada was about to legalize marijuana and that Richard Nixon had given orders to send tanks across the border in response.
Your formal comments were the start of a possible interesting discussion: Could you do something worthwhile with the nipples? How about the top of the leaf turning into a crown? Is the whole thing wanting to become the Starbucks mark? (Does the stem really want to be an anemic exclamation point?) . . .
. . . Am I the only one weirded out by having fifteen stripes? What does **that* mean?
I love the idea of discussing nipple/crown possibilities. I also counted the stripes but couldn’t think of anything funny to say about them. Those kids who get off your lawn better not get onto *my* lawn!!
Thank you for your hot take on this little online fiasco. I respect both of your work tremendously so it was to my surprise that it was pickup at all from you. After my initial outrage it made for a great debate between me and my partner honestly. He pointed out that I should be focused on the poor design first and my outrage second which I think many of us have fallen pray to here. I think as a country we have our backs up and ready for a fight so this was just an opportunity to vent out our frustration on topics we feel all too passionate about, design, and our patriotism!
I'm honestly surprised to see the GDC chiming in on this one. That being said, respectfully I still don't think critiquing this design at this point and time was tasteful. It should not be about kids getting off lawns but rather the landscape at large and since design has a place in history let's not let it give way to negative ideology.
Sincerely,
Still a big fan, from Canada.