Position through iterating.

week 01 – 100 iterations

For this project I decided to focus on different aspects of my practice that emerged through the previous briefs: systems/accidental/print/typography/layout

The snippet used as the starting point of the iteration is this one (from the iteration brief):

I decided to base my 100 iteration using a system based on the one used for the methods of iteration brief which is to play with the layout grid and place tape on the page, to have the headline printed on top of it and then, reassemble those fragments of tape together in order to create a new typographic visual.

Here are some notes and research/thoughts about the system:

I’ve also decided for some iteration to follow more the notion of ‘accidental’ and random and here are some planning/thoughts about it:

The iterations:

Feedback:

week 02: 50 iterations

For the second week, I started by the written response, looking for references to help me move my practice/project further. The references that I decided to choose are: Fuck Content, 2009 and Designer as author, 1996 by Michael Rock + Typography as Discourse, 1998 by Katherine McCoy and David Frej + Deconstruction and Graphic design, 1994 by Ellen Lupton and Abbot Mile. Here are my notes and first draft of the written component.

I feel that the writing and reading these different references helped my see my work in a more critical and in depth way, helping me to put words on what I was trying to do and achieve, as well as where/how to position my work and the experimental aspect of it.

The 50 iterations:

With the help of my reference I feel that with the work produced I aim trying to position myself as a translator of an existing content, re-shaping, manipulating it in order to give it a new dimension. The idea is to change the relationship that reader has with the content. Here, by using newspaper headings, I reshape the view and the veracity of the newspaper titles and articles putting forward their non-sens and bias view on a subject. This allows to have a new critical view on it and also opens it to interpretation by an existing and new audience. An important part of the work is also related to typography and the idea of expression over style, where the form is treated as a visual language to be read as well as to be seen, where both text and image are to be read in detail. here, by playing with the plasticity, and the visibility of the letter, using deconstruction and reconstruction it also emphasizes and questions the relationship that one has with the written word, the written format, and what is the meaning of a letter? can it convey sense and expression without making a word in itself? Therefore another manipulation appears the one of the typographic character in itself.

Feedback notes

what’s working

• Really like the idea of showing an overview of a day of a newspaper 
• The loss of objectivity of the newspapers can be seen in the iterations
• The last week the construction was more concerned with creating a separate headline, this week’s construction replicates the visual aspect and the activity that a reader goes through reading through these newspapers
• There is social commentary going on about the nonsensical news that shows up on the newspapers today
• It acts as a satire 
• Like the usage of a system and how it presents certain limitation 

what’s not

• There are a few iterations where there’s just a texture and nothing legible, and somewhere you can still read a few words.

what’s next

• you can create these iterations in the newspapers format, can act as a translation of a day’s newspaper
• Try to bring some legible sentences into the textures, to give glimpses of the messy surface of a newspaper 
• What are the uses of language that you want to grab the attention towards?
• You can provide insight to the usage of language and the kind of content that is promoted through these newspapers
• A comparison of translation between the left wing and the right-wing newspaper
• Can bring the compositions to a more grid like layout 
• Leverage the commentary on the view of authorship of a newspaper 

Written response: