Context of Practice: First things First

Instead of using the talent to promote more useful and worthwhile causes we use it for everyday essentials that perhaps don't need the design. It is set out to not destroy advertisement but its a reversal of priorities. There are too many advertisements these days they are just noise.

2000 is a broader reflection of the creative industries it is not just graphic designers like in 1964. They are trying to introduce it into schools so that when designers enter the real world they wouldn't fall into the trap. The first one was only published in the Guardian where as the 2000 was published in a lot broader range of magazines to get the attention of students and the people reading.

The 1964 is written as a dialogue to spark a debate and interest. Compared to the 2000 one which is more of an emergency to create a change. "Consumerism is running uncontested; it must be challenged by others perspectives expressed, in part, through the visual languages and resources of design." in the 2000 manifesto compared to the previous "We do not advocate the abolition of high pressure consumer advertising: this is not feasible. Nor do we want to take any of the fun out of life."

A much more ethical charge to the second manifesto .... coffee, cigarettes etc..

Ken Garland saw that America was abusing the right of advertising and were a head of us. He could see Britain going the same way. Britain had a lot of prosperity after the war, there was a sudden rise of consumerism as people began to have disposable income. It was never intended as a manifesto, which is what it has become seen as. He had it as a discussion to get people talking and thinking.

How deep rooted the problem is. We only learn about the commercial function of design.

A necessary part of the economy.

Underlying political system not in question.

The design decisions

Footnote 1 summary: The design should have a 'spirit' and should have a reason to be there other than selling. Released by Designers who were already campaigning for this cause. This just reiterated their own belief.

Footnote 2 summary: They weren't commercial designers so weren't making a stand but continuing their design style. Preaching to the crowd. Presenting a school of thought which previously existed as an innovative and new way of thinking. They as designers are in a situation where they can do what they want and not worry about the next pay check.

Footnote 3 summary: Look at the tools of Advertising as evil when actually they are the same tools that Graphic Design uses.

Footnote 4 summary: Who is to say what graphic design is!? why is the museum booklet graphic design and the dog food packaging not?

Footnote 5 summary: Hyperthermic needle theory - suggestion that they are a passive audience. They should be seen as people not a passive audience.

Footnote 6 summary: What if we withdrew from this space? If Designers decided not to design then it would be unpleasant. What is wrong with good design? surely we are better in a world where everything is designed nicely.