Bauhaus was an art school founded by Walter Gropius in 1919, a German architect. His intent was to create a school that morphed diverse forms of art, creating an interaction between these different branches. This was an extremely innovative idea, especially for that time period. Gropius’ manifesto argued that artists should “return to the factories”, meaning that, with the industrial revolution, everything was being made in factories and he believed that artists should take a step back and make sure that actual skills were being applied to their work and it was not just being made by a machine.

The school united many masters such as Wassily Kandinsky, Paul Klee, Josef Albers, Laszlo Moholy, amongst others. There were three sites; one in Weimar, then one in Dessau and, finally, one in Berlin. With these important names in art history working together, Bauhaus was a turning point for art, design and architecture, so much so that there is a ‘Bauhaus style’ that inspired people in the creative industry even now a days.

The Bauhaus aesthetic is commonly known for its appreciation of arts and crafts along with focus on the form. There was a lot of geometrical work, abstract work and studies of shapes and lines in this sense. Not much ornamentation was present since they had a modernist way of thinking which praised the function of the piece. The paintings that follow the bauhaus style are usually flat with overlapping shapes that indicate three dimensionality. When it came to other areas, like prints and posters, Bauhaus aesthetic took bold typefaces and flat geometric shapes with strong colours. Usually not a wide colour palette, the posters made at that time had bold colours but not many colours at once.

Architecture also portrayed the Bauhaus style with balanced and harmonious shapes. The constructions are very geometric and, just as mentioned in relation to art, they valued the functionality of what was being made. So even though it does have a balance and a specific design, they did not praise the aesthetic as much as the functionality. Now a days, many modern homes follow the Bauhaus style with clean lines and a simple polished look.

Due to the nazi invasion, the school shut down and most of the masters ended up fleeing the country. Unfortunately, the school had a really short life- only 14 years. Nevertheless, these fourteen years were enough to shape a period and create a style that has perpetuated throughout the entire world and, today, we can say it has been perpetuated through an entire century. Bauhaus will always have an influence in those who work with design, art and architecture, the masters who shared their knowledge at that time will be an eternal inspiration along with the aesthetic generated at the time.

Yesterday in class I was asked the following question: “What is hair?” My first thought was, what a curious question to ask since as far as I am concerned, hair is something that grows out of our skin. It is something with which we deal with everyday as we comb, shave, tie it, and so on. It can be said to be quite unexceptional, so, why was my teacher asking me that?

After this lesson, I will never think about hair the same way, and after what I will explain in this post, I am pretty sure you will have a different perspective upon it as well. Hair can be used to study semiotics, since out body is a semiotic field; it is language. Hair is part of the social body and it includes a vast range of connotations and contexts. Hair can be linked to a person’s state of mind, to hygiene, virility, class, status and many others. Looking at David Bowie, someone who had a constant change in hairstyles and we can think about characteristics thaat relate to each style. Here are some pictures as examples:

• 

• 

We look at them and words such as “eccentric”, “creative”, artistic and so on. However, Bowie stood for something much greater than this connotations which was transforming beyond the idea of who we are and who we think we are.

Hair can also be explored in the world of consumer culture, specially when taking the example of shaving. Exploring the semiotics of shaving, razors to have at home were sold related to speed, technology, sociability, comfort, style and, overall, masculinity. This advert by Gillette turns the barber into a demoniac form, as if it was something bad not to shave at home.

• 

Having analyzed these aspects, which were the ones which called out my attention the most, I cna see how hair can be used to study semiotics in an incredible manner. And, afterall, it does go far from just something that comes out of our skin, as I thought days ago!

The First Things First manifesto, published din 1964, argues that designers should contribute to bettering society instead of just wanting to sell things. It suggests that advertisements could be used as an instrument to transmit bigger ideals. It relates to the concept of mass production, in which the main focus is money and selling things, however, this manifesto makes us think: could there be more in advertising than just profit? The answer to this question is yes, designers who work in advertising can exceed boundaries of creating something simply for it’s aesthetic and actually propagate ideas and innovations. 

The manifesto in still very relevant now a days, which is quite interesting since it was written in 1964 and media manipulation is still really present in our daily lives. Criticizing this practice is a good way to raise attention to the cause, just like Charles Chaplin did in his movie ‘Modern Times’. This movie is located in factory and it portrays the workers in an ironic way; as if they were machines. 

The arts and crafts movement was a reaction to mass production, which is quite interesting to compare and contrast since it praises quality over quantity while mass production will do the exact opposite. It raises attention to purchasing something that you truly find to be useful and pleasing to look at. On the other hand, many propagandas will try to sell a lifestyle, you don’t necessarily need the item you are buying, but maybe you saw a beautiful person selling it and you want to feel closer to her. This is a form of manipulation, you think you need that too become someone famous, for example, in this way, there is a huge desire being induced. 

A good solution is using the skills of a designer for movements and campaigns. This was done by activists in the 1980’s and 90’s, who invited designers to help out with posters and other forms of communication. This way, something beautiful could be created while still having a greater cause involved. The artist Barbara Kruger is another fantastic example of using art to propagate opinions, in her case, many times the role of the woman is criticised as well as consumerism. In conclusion, when a designer used his talent not only aesthetically but also with attention to the message being propagated, he is paying attention to his responsibility while carrying out his job. 

Dear Andrew and Dene,

On the last Seminar we explored the theme of automation in design and one of the examples shown when talking about this was Steve Reich’s ‘Pendulum Music’. It really made me think and reflect after the session on some aspects of this piece and I would love to further discuss this with you. If you have the opportunity to check it out, it is available on YouTube.

The questions raised on this were about it being impersonal and also about the removal of subjectivity from what was being produced. I believe that the discussion on whether it is impersonal is quite rich since I do believe it is impersonal, but only to a certain extent. I would say it is since the sound being produced can be made by any group of people who follow the instructions determined by Reich. However, it is quite personal since I think that having this idea shows the personality of the artist- Steve Reich- since it is quite an unique idea and it is unlike the usual type of music we listen to. He wanted to create something that would never be the same, unlike playing a piano, for example, Pendulum Music can be altered depending on the room it is done in, the timing for letting go of the microfones, if there is more wind, there are lot’s of factors that could change it so each time it is carried out it will be different even though the same instructions are being followed.

In terms of the removal of subjectivity, I believe that, by doing this, the artists allows his work to be interpreted in many other ways and we can observe it without having a previous meaning attached to it. It exists purely to explore how the same instructions, the same input, can generate a vast quantity of outcomes. It is not emotional, it is algorithmic and algorithms allow you to produce lots of different versions of something but with the same initial command. Do you agree? I found this whole discussion to be really interesting and I am still reflecting upon my own thoughts on automation. Do you believe that it can end up compromising the creativity of the artist? I would love to know your opinions on the matter, do check out ‘Pendulum Music’ so we can further discuss this topic.

I look forward to hearing from you!

Best wishes,

Maria Carolina Torres

There were several aspects about semiotics that appealed to me. Firstly, I find it very interesting to see that what we know as a language is a convention. What we call a chair is simply an object which was agreed to receive this name. So maybe if I see a chair with a different design and don’t recognise it as first I would not sit on it. However, if someone told me it is a chair, I will sit on it since I already understand it’s function.

• 

Also, language can have the power to resignify many things. There was an image of a Van Gogh painting which I saw and I liked it, it was a beautiful painting. After that, I saw the exact same image with a caption saying that that was the last painting he made before passing away. That made me look at the painting with different eyes and unconsciously, I tried to attribute a new meaning to it. How words associated to an image will always affect our understanding is quite an amazing phenomenon.

In addition to this, the study from the thinker Roland Barthes about how we interpret an image really called my attention. He explores two sides of the image, it’s denotation, which is the physical reality of the image, and it’s connotation, which is the arbitrary meaning. The first one is rational and objective, you see an image and can identify what is in it, it’s colours and elements. On the other hand, the connotation will be affected by the reader’s rules and conventions. The way in which I read an image and how it appeals to me will be different from anyone else due to my life experience, my point of view and, also, my emotional baggage that could be possibly linked to elements I see.

In conclusion, when studying graphic design, semiotics is really important since it links what we see, how we comprehend the world around us and language. Using it to our advantage as graphic designers we can appeal to the connotation of the elements creating an emotional link between the reader and the visuals.