Parody & Pastiche - Study Task 02 - OUGD501

By looking at two differing texts, one by Fredric Jameson and the other by Linda Hutcheon we were able to differentiate the two authors and their views on post-modernism and its relation to parody and pastiche.

Discussion:

What is parody/pastiche?
Parody mock's and makes fun of.
Pastiche celebrates what it mimics.

How does parody/pastiche relate to post-modernism?
It is the scrutiny of modernism, taking something from the past and recreating in a way that mock's it would be classed as parody. On the contrary, pastiche would mean you are celebrating the past and the movements that come before post-modernism, taking a painting for instance, and recreating it in your own style (post-modern).

How does Jameson's tone of voice differ from those of Hutcheon's in regards to post-modernism?
Jameson's increasingly harsh when speaking about past movement and what they stood (stand) for. He has little respect for the imitation in the form of nostalgia, however Hutcheon realises more that if it weren't for the past work that they are 'celebrating' post-modernism would have little to no meaning. Hutcheon completely disagrees with Jameson's idea that you can produce purely original work and call it post-modern, she says it's political whereas Jameson thinks it is all relatable to ego.

How do the idea's relate to Graphic Design/Visual Communication?
Parody and pastiche is intentional. To communicate a message effectively, you need to be able to create something that can't be distinguished as something else. To illustrate this, a corporate identity can't be the same as another from the past otherwise it will cloud its message and carry over reputations from the identity that already existed before it.


Task:

The definition of parody/pastiche differs between Jameson and Hutcheon. This clash of opinions is based on the sense that in Jameson's eyes, 'Pastiche is, like parody, the imitation of a peculiar or unique, idiosyncratic style, the wearing of a linguistic mask, speech in a dead language.' [Jameson, F. 'Parody', p16]. So in turn, his outlook on post-modernsm, particularly in relation to architecture is subjective and not political. Hutchinson contradicts this outlook, 'parody is doubly coded in political terms: it both legitimizes and subverts that which it parodies' [Hutcheon, L. 'Politics', p101]. So Hutcheon's view differs greatly from Jameson's in the sense that she thinks of post-modernism from a purely political point of view. This being that post-modernism is celebrating the past by using parody to legitimise and subvert the material it is mimicking, rather than to 'make fun of'.

The Death of the Author - Study Task 01 - OUGD501

With the uprising of post-modernism in the late 20th century, people began to question the originality of all material, whether this be writing, art, music or even photography. The idea that everything we produce as designers is entirely our own work is to say that we are not influenced by every aspect of modern life, this would be false, and Barthes opens the door to questioning authenticity of everything we see, read and feel.

Designers form a basis on how to execute a certain piece of work with great influence on the idea that integration within a certain society would be acceptable, and thus the communicated message would be received well, in order for it to be rendered as a successful piece of design. To say that the world we see around us is completely original would be absurd, to illustrate this point, to look at the work of Missimo Vignelli would give Barthes theory validity, and provide an undeniable truth that the originality of all design is somewhat questionable.

The philosophical meaning of the modernist movement was thought of as the ‘renewed’ world that followed the world wars. In addition to this, modernists rejected everything that had come before it, enabling them to create a more appropriate environment that re-invented the values of an increasingly industrialised world to provide a lease of new life for the people that lived in it, in other words, a utopian word that harboured no imperfection. But with this ideology that was inspired by its recent past, was this world without imperfection unachievable? It questions how Vignelli worked and although he is seen as one of the best modernists that has ever lived, just how original was his way of working? “The image of literature to be found in ordinary culture is tyrannically centered on the author, his person, his life, his tastes, his passions, while criticism still consists for the most part” [Barthes, R (1977) ‘The Death of the Author’ p143].

By analysing the American Airlines Corporate Identity by Vignelli, M. (1967) it is easy to see that there has been logic, thought and common sense that has been put into the design process. However, Barthes states that everything is created to not have fixed meaning as there is always the idea of it being interpreted in many different ways by many different cultures, but this means to refuse god and his hypostases, reason, science and law [Barthes, R (1977) ‘The Death of the Author’ p147]. Something of which when it is considered, contradicts Vignelli and his ideologies. The identity of American Airlines was set to represent patriotism by using the colours of the US flag, thereby this only applies to those who see those colours in such a way. A person from the other side of the world might see these colours, shapes or letters as representing something different. One very telling example of this is the Swastika, a symbol of which was a sign of peace and tranquillity, used primarily within Buddhism. This was completely flipped on its head during the rise of Nazism during the 1930’s, representing something of pure evil and oppression.

Expanding on this, to understand the work, you must understand its author. As Barthes puts it “when the Author has been found, the text is 'explained' - victory to the critic.” [Barthes, R (1977) ‘The Death of the Author’ p147]. A person could look at the American Airline’s logo and not understand the full representation of its form. This being the average person with little understanding of design, the very person it is reaching out to, the consumer. This also leads into the fact that “we have come to live in a post-materialist age where the superficiality of design for design’s sake and, indeed, consumption for consumption’s sake has been exposed as the contour productive social trend it always was.” [Miles, S. (1998) 'Consumerism as a Way of Life' p37]. Thus meaning all design is designed purely for the sake of the consumer, to ‘sell’ rather than to communicate a message that can be universally understood.

The Death of The Author - OUGD501

Today's session started off in the deep end, by analysing a linguistic theory by Roland Barthes to uncover the true meaning of who is the real author of a piece of text. This being any medium that can be read by another person.

Barthes thought that the whole notion of the 'author' needs to be rethought. That the simple explanation of owning a certain material means you were the one who wrote it, the one who designed it, took the picture or painted the painting has been clouded by the manifestation of cultural influences, therefore, the owner is not the person that put pen to paper, rendering the 'author' as irrelevant.

I suggested that the text can be highly interpreted as ironic, as the idea's of one man (Barthes) can be interpreted in many different ways, although, this again solidifies his theory, suggesting a never ending loop of different interpretations which is dependant on culture/social/political/etc influences.

In my case, to make sense of his theory and understand it better, I found looking at cultural influences that only mean something if you have something to compare it to, like the stereotypical hipster for example, we all as a culture label 'hipster' to people with huge beards and tattoo's. But what our (In some cases 'my') interpretation of a hipster may be completely different to those in another culture. 

Post-structuralism explains it all much better than I can, but this is purely to help me fully understand the philosophies of Barthes and his ideologies.


Task
Decipher the given words in a way that relates to Barthes theory:
Culture, Society, Technology, History, Politics.

We were split up into five different groups and we were all appointed the task of using an example of the text that relates to the given word, then use this information to relate this to a piece of design.

Culture:
Can dictate a movement.
Social and cultural hierarchy.
A never ending loop of Culture vs. Popular Culture.
No example, similar to Society.

Society:
P142. Society determines who is successful.
Capitalist ideology.
Promotes evil.
Vignelli dictates that his canon is the right way to do design and that every other way is wrong.

Technology:
Apple is the identity of the designer. If you use anything else you are considered to not be at your full potential. < (I somewhat disagree with this statement, as I was not influenced by others around me to chose a computer based on popularity, my decision was based on logic and reason. However, there are others without the latter opinion.)

History:
Author's are 'modernist'.
Retrieving history as inspiration.
Dictionary of quotations.
Again relate to modernist graphics and its 'rules'.

Politics:
Purely hierarchical.
Authority over the author.
Prejudicial against certain classes.


Study Task

Explain: Use the idea's of Death of the Author, using quotes to relate to design.