Is it possible to describe any aspect of Visual Communication as Post Modern (ist?)?
In order to address this question in an affective manor it is important to really have an understanding of the terms Visual Communication and postmodern, in turn this also calls for knowledge of the term modernism. Visual communication is notoriously awkward to explain without using either the words ‘visual’ or ‘communication’, but as the name suggests is the presentation or portrayal of a message via ocular transmission. Essentially you can see something and take away information from it. Visual communication can take many forms, most notably in graphic design, typography, printmaking, illustration, photography, product design etc.
You can not understand postmodernism without modernism coming first, Modernism became a movement of questioning and experimentation often resulting in the production of abstract thought and imagery; it also focused on the new cutting edge materials and processes available to the world, choosing a ‘form over function’ attitude. The distinction between modernism and post modernism is both obvious and blurred as technically ‘modern is always post-something’ (Appignanesi, Garrat (1995) Page 19). Postmodernism for Beginners states that ‘The modern ends up being at war with itself and must inevitably become post-modern.’ (Appignanesi, Garrat (1995) Page 19) Admittedly this makes sense technically but also seems somewhat paradoxical at the same time. A simpler way of looking at this is that postmodernism is ‘in fact merely a continuity of modernism’ (Appignanesi, Garrat (1995) Page 164) and that modernism, by definition, must always come first.
In contrast with this postmodernism is a conscious step away from the ideals and viewpoints of modernism; Glenn Ward describes the term postmodernist in ‘Postmodernism’ as ‘an apt description of our new period of disillusionment.’ (Ward (2003) Page 4) Unlike other things ‘Postmodernism is not, strictly speaking, a school of thought” (Ward (2003) Page 4) it is more a direct reaction to the whole ethos of modernism; it is a rebuttal to all things modernist. Ward also argues that postmodernism is so hard to attribute that if something is seen as postmodern ‘You are bringing an idea to it, rather than discovering a quality in it.’ (Ward (2003) Page 15) this sits well with the idea that aspects of things can be perceived as being postmodern as opposed to a product itself being postmodern.
When thinking about postmodernism most people thing of architecture as having taken the most notable change, previously in terms of modernism architecture there had been an excess of the ‘form follows function’ attitude that was put forward by Louis Sullivan, essentially a truth to materials and an absence of ornamentation. In direct contrast with this postmodernist architecture is characterized by its return to ornamentation and an unapologetic mix of styles and designs spanning all eras. Postmodern architecture often involved the ‘juxtaposition of something old and new, or the witty inversion of the old’ (Poynor (2003) Page 19) into a completely new building in an unapologetically ironic way. A prime example of M architecture can be seen in the Seagram Building (constructed in 1957) in New York with its large glass panels, rigid structure and overall utilitarian appearance as a building. Again a direct comparison can be made when this is compared to the Sony Building (formerly the AT&T building, constructed in 1984) that strangely enough is also located within New York. Instead of large glass panels as stated previously it boasts large columns on the buildings faces from top to bottom, furthermore its arched entranceway that spans seven stories in height with an almost cathedral-like design. However its most notable attribute is its ornamental top, directly identifiable in the skyline. These are obvious examples but stand as proof that postmodern affect on architecture is undeniable, however it is important to acknowledge that the design of a building is a form of visual communication in itself. Though architecture received the most notable and recognized change it still essentially boils down to visual communication and the impression the building gives off from the outside, be this a professional working environment or a consumer store.
However my main point is that visual communication changed in itself, graphic design took on various changes in terms of the modern and postmodern eras. First embracing the new processes and dramatic changes in technology in terms of modern design, this can be seen in the London Tube Map - a collection of geometric lines, pantone colours and sans serif text. Rick Poynor states, as the pivotal focus of his book ‘No More Rules’, that ‘one of the most significant developments in graphic design, during the last two decades, has been designer’s’ overt challenges to the conventions or rules that were once widely regarded as constituting good practice.’ (Poynor (2003) Page 19) this is essentially the epitome of postmodernist theory applied directly towards graphic design. Essentially it marked an ignorance to the rigidity of modern Graphic Design and a complete disregard for the rules that had become a paradigm for graphic design as a practice. As present in architecture it lead to a mix of styles and somewhat an abolition of the ‘form follows function’ ethos to design. Rick Poyner also describes graphic design as ‘a prime example of a popular, accessible medium exhibiting symptoms of postmodernism.’ (Poynor (2003) Page 10) This strengthens my point that graphic design, as a form of visual communication, can be seen as postmodern as it shows these symptoms, however it also implies that it is not postmodern in itself.
Postmodern Art is another example of the affect of the postmodern era on visual communication, as ever it is characterized by the rejection of modern tendencies. In terms of popular culture this is most recognized in the form of Pop art most notably associated with, but not restricted to, David Hockney, Roy Lichenstein and Andy Warhol etc. Pop Art is known for taking the imagery and processes affiliated with consumerism and displaying it either in a different way or in a different context, this fits with postmodern ideals as it rejects the paradigms of modern art and design. An example of this is Andy Warhol’s’ Campbell’s Tomato Juice Box. In reality it is a representation of what is normally a stock case of a consumer product, as it would be delivered to a supermarket, however as soon as you reproduce this and put it in a gallery it becomes art. This is exactly what Warhol did, he ‘turned mechanical reproduction into art’ (Appignanesi, Garrat (1995) Page 39) This not only mocks the practices involved in modern theory and art and design but also the social value attached to art as it is seen in a gallery. It has been said that ‘Warhol’s look perfectly sums up the cliché slogan of postmodern wisdom. “What you see is what you get”’ (Appignanesi, Garrat (1995) Page 40) this fits perfectly with the tongue in cheek demeanor of the postmodern attitude. Typically art, as seen in a gallery, is thought of as being of a higher social standard in comparison to the underrated design you may see on packaging, in this case tomato juice. Whereas in this situation Warhol is making a direct rebuttal to this by attaching a much higher value to the packaging by presenting it as artwork and not design. This shows that the idea of postmodern theory has definitely affected what people perceive as art or arguably what people can get away with calling art.
All in all I think that it is fair to say that visual communication as a practice has taken many influences from the postmodern era and that due to this it can easily be described as postmodern itself, but in reality it is not solely post modern. This boils down to not only the final product of various excursions of visual communication but also in the theory behind it. Postmodernism’s most notable success is its undeniable affect on architecture which as stated previously still lends itself to theories of visual communication and the impression that a building portrays purely by its shape and design regardless of its interior or having stepped foot inside. Secondly Graphic Design has quite clearly taken pointers from the postmodern era and benefitted from it, although this change is not ever present it is definitely relevant. The same applies to art in the sense that it is not purely postmodern but that it can have postmodern aspects. This brings me to my final concluding point and that is that aspects of visual communication can be referred to as post modern but that visual communication itself is not postmodern.
References
Appignanesi, R. and Garrat, C. (1995) ‘Postmodernism for Beginners’. Cambridge. Icon
Appignanesi, R. and Garrat, C. (2003) ‘Introducing Postmodernism’. Cambridge. Icon
Ward, G. (2003) ‘Postmodernism’ London, Hodder Headline
Poynor, R. (2003) ‘No More Rules, Graphic Design and Postmodernism’. London, Laurence King Publishing.
Background Reading
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_communication
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_architecture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_architecture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodern_art
