Triangulation

Comparing three texts on Ken Garland's First Things First manifesto

Ken Garland, a British graphic designer of the 1960's, wrote and published the manifesto First Things First as a plea to raise support and move designers away from advertising jobs to focus in their skills on worthier activities. Garland believed their skills were going to waste and that they were becoming an industry of plastic consumer designers when there were 'signs for streets and buildings, books and periodicals...industrial photography, educational aids' (Garland 1964) that needed their attention. He then went on to say; 'We hope that our society will tire of gimmick merchants, status salesmen and hidden persuaders' and at the time he got 21 designers, photographers and students on boards, but as we know from living in today's society we haven't yet tired of the commercial world of advertising, we have in fact gone in the opposite direction and jumped on the band wagon even more.

Rick Poyner, writer of First Things First, A Brief History, agrees with Ken Garland’s words saying himself that ‘it is no exaggeration to say that designers are engaged in nothing less than the manufacture of contemporary reality. Today we live and breathe design.’ (Poyner, 1999) When Garland wrote the manifesto it was at a time when the ‘rapid growth of the affluent consumer society meant there were many opportunities for talented visual communicators in advertising, promotion and packaging.’ (Poyner, 1999) He believed that Garland’s words caused a stir in the industry and as Poyner’s name is on the list of signatures on the original manifesto, it is obvious that he is bias towards it, but he admits it might have been popular, just not as affective as they had hoped, otherwise a second version of the manifesto would not have been necessary.

Poyner goes on in his text to agree further that designer’s talents are going to waste on trivial advertising and that if only a few more designers in the 1960’s had spoken out and accepted the work of more useful and educational tasks ‘balance would be restored’, but instead ‘advertising and design are closer today than at any point in the 1960’s’ (Poyner 1999)

The manifesto was re-written, First Things First Manifesto 2000, in Adbusters with the help of Poyner, and became a much more political and confrontational text suggesting that by going along with and advertising such products, as a designer, you support the exploitation of the third world. It is very forceful, saying that designers must stop doing what they do, whereas Garland’s original piece just pointed out that designer’s talents are wasted. Poyner, who’s name is on both versions of the manifesto, also agrees with this Adbuster’s version posing the questions; ‘In whose interest and to what ends? Who gains by this construction of reality?’ (Poyner, 1999)

However, Michael Bierut in his text The Footnotes argues that working for the advertising, consumer market has its advantages and that in today’s society it does not waste the talents of the designer. It shows good design and spreads that good design across the globe Just because you are advertising, doesn’t mean as a designer you have to lie to your audience to better the brand. Bierut analyses the First Things First Manifesto 2000 picking out the phrase ‘a new kind of meaning’. Tibor Kalman orders; “Designers: stay away from corporations that want you to lie for them,” but Bierut makes a good point that ‘the greatest designers have always found ways to align the aims of their corporate clients with their personal interests and, ultimately, with the public good.’ (Bierut, The Footnotes, n.d) The creators of Adbusters and the likes of Rick Poyner renewed the manifesto because they believe it will then be heard and acted upon, but Bierut stands firmly by the words of designer Bill Golden who wrote “I happen to believe that the visual environment...improves each time a designer produces a good design - and in no other way.”

He is obviously slightly sour towards the manifesto, as he openly comments in this text; ‘Good question. As for me, I wasn’t asked to sign it’ (Bierut, The Footnotes, n.d) but I do agree with a lot that he has to say. If designers turned their back on advertising, it wouldn’t make it any less of a global takeover, it would just mean that you would be faced to look at bad design attempts everywhere, and who wants that?