'There Are No Longer Any Political Ideologies, There Are Only Corporate Strategies,' Digital Print, 2003. This work raises the issue of multinational corporations and the power they have. Here directly compared to and tied up with military power.
When we discussed inviting Jonathan Barnbrook for an interview, it was clear to everyone how much we appreciate the clarity and expression in his work as a designer, especially its political content. Our interview was also a quest to connect with someone who is genuinely critically engaged, and who contributes and provokes thought. “A designer’s basic task is to improve society,” he remarks during our meeting while discussing his ethos. “Anything else is a distraction.” It’s a principle that should be true for every one of us.
SLEEK: Are we really so primitive as to be unable to see with our own eyes the loss of democracy that is clearly going on?
JONATHAN BARNBROOK: Tom Burgis makes a crucial point in his interview about democracy being gradually eroded, and that is exactly what we are seeing in America – and to a lesser extent in my own UK – and it is absolutely a lesson from history for all of us. Often, when we look at history from the perspective of our own time, it’s difficult to understand how it is to be in a society that is ‘stolen’ by fascism – we feel it is a takeover, that it crushes everything with a jackboot. The good people can see what’s going on and if they have the courage, leave; the bad people join up with the fascists. Of course, there is the ultimate threat of violence, to reinforce the takeover, but that takeover is subtle not sudden. Everything is undermined until the extreme becomes normal. Those who consider themselves ‘good’ can be in such a skewed everyday situation that they can no longer tell what democracy is any more. That doesn’t absolve them of blame, but it does show how relative our everyday existence is.
It’s very interesting to see when design is explicitly blamed for misleading people. The best example of ‘bad design’, i.e. design that unintentionally creates the wrong outcome, were the ballot papers which were blamed for the loss of Al Gore in the [2000] election where he faced George W Bush. A clearer design could have changed the outcome and actually, we probably wouldn’t be where we are today with the rise of the extreme right in America. Then there is the ‘intentional bad design’, which is calculated to create a preferred outcome. The most notorious example of this is the voting form from 1938, where voting for Hitler was emphasised.
These are political examples, but graphic design is responsible in everyday situations for reinforcing images or outcomes which either make people feel inadequate, push forward consumerism or reinforce the authority of government. The very act of designing something featuring a message that has been spoken or written, converting it to printed typefaces and images, immediately makes it have authority.
'Brand Mandalas,' Digital Prints, 2003. Based on Tibetan mandalas – religious documents created for contemplation that show the hierarchy of heaven; look closer and you will see that heaven is now constructed entirely of American corporate logos. A reflective comment on the role brands have in our lives.
S: Why do older people ignore the protests of younger people? Is it because of generational differences?
JB: It is the natural span of human life. I think when you are young, you really want to change the world, make it a fairer place – everything can be thrown away and we can start again. When you are older, your priorities change, you may have children, you may be just disillusioned and want to protect yourself. You are also less prepared to suffer any kind of discomfort, maybe because life has already exhausted you. Also, your time is limited, so you feel a disconnect from the future – why worry about it if you are not around? Not everybody is like this, but generally it is the way it seems to go. It is very hard to fight that because the older generation are generally in power, controlling the finances, and it is something that has been with us since the start of civilisation. However, it is how societies evolve.
S: But shouldn’t we be building bridges with young people? They are the future, after all.
JB: Of course and most principles of living are simple, it’s just there are a lot of people who have a lot to lose by society changing. There are a lot of people in particular who, if they acknowledge the environmental crisis and the unfairness of the world, will have their way of living threatened. Therefore, they will lie, cover up and not give anything away until they are absolutely forced to. I do want to say something about idealising youth – that it’s important not to be sentimental about it. The only reason they are important is because they have to deal with the consequences of what we are doing now. There are lots of young people who do not care about politics and there are many older people who have lived a life full of experience and, as a result, realise how precious the world is.
S: How do these questions and ideas affect your work?
JB: A designer’s basic task is to improve society. Anything else is a distraction. And these questions are part of that improvement. There are many who would argue about what an ‘improved’ society is. Some would say that it’s about people making more money and, in doing so, creating jobs and growing the economy – but this is such an ‘anti-nature’ point of view, you can’t endlessly produce and consume. You have to look further than that and think of basic universal principles of inclusion – living in harmony with nature, providing a decent life for all. These are timeless and remain universal but always need adjustment. It is important not to patronise, and it is also important to show the way, but these things should all be done with consideration.
Why use bombs, when you can destroy them with your brands instead?, Digital Print, 2003. This artwork os based on a half-remembered comment from a politician who stated that America would never need to bomb a country that had a McDonalds in it, thus revealing the importance of multinationals in the furthering American influence on other countries.
S: Your politics and your sense of human dignity are clearly discernible in your work. Often they appear as one. Why don’t you separate them?
JB: Most people separate their job from politics, but every job is political, not just design. As soon as you consent to being part of the market economy, that is a political decision. The difference in accountability is that graphic design really does enable capitalism – it has huge power to manipulate information and change opinion. However, graphic designers don’t want to discuss the possible negative effects of this power. That’s because it is bad for the company owners, it’s bad for the people selling advertising. So this is why you will see all the major blogs on design talking about technique and aesthetics and not about what these things are doing to society. Equally, most designers will talk about how they do something, not why. One of the answers I have heard the most from other designers is when someone asks you why you work for a certain morally dubious company, and they reply, “I don’t do politics” – that is actually the most political answer of all. They seek to limit the discussion which is a form of repression.
For me, the most important question before you start any design work is why, and that ‘why’ isn’t a question about ‘how can the client can sell more stuff?’, it is about the designer as a human being, and how to contribute to society or evolve as a human being. ‘Why are you designing at all?’ ‘Why are you doing this project, is it making the world a better place?’ These questions can be summed up very simply by saying: ‘The designer should always be a good citizen and that that should be the guiding principle of their design.’
S: You also seem to convey these ideas through your work with artists as well. Do you agree?
JB: Pass! This one is a bit too difficult to articulate. I think there is enough in the other answers!
S: When you engage with what Tom Burgis is saying and what his writing reveals about the world, what goes through your mind?
JB: What goes through my mind is quite negative, many people do not realise how much has been stolen from them and how violence backs up the system. But many people do realise this yet feel powerless. There are so many obstacles in place to stop people fighting to overcome the system. Governments shame any kind of public protest to undermine the power it has. We have the media, which largely supports their governments in their war-making or preservation of the status quo. It takes supreme effort and time to move against this. The situation is becoming more difficult, so honestly, I fear that it may end in conflict with those in power, who continue to be deaf to change and events becoming more extreme. Then there’s [the possibility of people] turning to violence [towards] companies or politicians or individuals who act only in their own interests. The last resort is fighting violence and oppression with violence – but it may come to that.
S: Does hope remain?
JB: Yes, it does. Humanity is never still, society evolves for good or bad, and that means there is a possibility for adjustment in an unjust world. So although I fear violence, I can also see there is a possibility to get somewhere without it. It’s the possibility that the relentless pressure from the young – and the world they will inherit – as well as the [effect of] people who care about [things] will make a difference.
Interview from SLEEK 71 – Power
Available in Print or Digital