CAPS LOCK

https://valiz.nl/en/publications/caps-lock

in the olden days they called it commercial art which was purposeful and based on craft. then we got into calling it design and it became fancy and a bit conceited (thanks a lot apple). 

did you know michelangelo was paid 2m euros (roughly) to paint the ceiling?

Maybe some of these are very obvious questions with obvious answers and I’m just spamming folks with my thoughts 😂🙈

yes design should have utility. otherwise it is art. 

somewhat related: this is a question we asked (me, i did!) in the very early days of the app store. someone submitted an "art" app (it did nothing but exist) and had no utility. we classified it as art, and acceptable. 🎉🥳

Hot take: art *is* commercial (unfortunately) 🫠

Yeah I mean I grew up literally a stone’s throw from the Sistine Chapel 😝 but also I have a background in applied arts and worked in the art “industry” and it’s the worstttttt. So like you say it’s like “ugh no but totally yes” 🙈

i would say the style of design you choose was most likely pioneered in the name of capitalism.

1000% agree with you that the personal is political ✊🏽✊🏽✊🏽

There is this one from Ruben Pater; https://valiz.nl/en/publications/caps-lock

Ideally when we think of art we (want to) imagine it to spread the message of the artist as opposed to the message of the person paying for the art. Does that make sense? Like, were art patrons just.. VCs? 🫠

humans make art, it's a byproduct of our ability to think in abstractions. we are biologically wired to perceive and think about what we are perceiving (art!).

(But I totally understand the sentiment, I do, because I would love to see art completely “removed” from capitalism and I think in some cases it is or can be)

What do we say to designing a piece of communication that has no commercial purpose besides sharing a message? 

I think graphic design, in the context of pure communication design (even without a business purpose) is still design.

these are fun questions. agitprop is utilitarian art. 

everything is political, the personal is political. the form a poor person fills was designed to make sure they fail so don't get government money. design is political. dark patterns are political (& financially rewarding!)

Also if we want to nitpick… art patrons of the renaissance were like the ultimate capitalists 😝

Hahaha yeah I absolutely agree with you here! I think I’m more talking about the fact that the patronage (at least centuries ago) came with strings attached — including supporting religious and political powers.

Yes! Absolutely agree with everything you’re writing here. I think it’s a conversation too complex for this format but I’d love to know if you think that design and art can evolve and allow for multitudes. Should design always be purposeful?

Maybe... but I was more hinting at the fact that the differentiation between Art and Design is often not so clear. Maybe an art piece can also be designed. Maybe if it is researched, planed, and executed to deliver some value, art could also be considered design.

all labor should be recognized as such and paid accordingly. we could collectively pay each other to live but in lieu of that...being paid for our labor works too. 😃

Wow! 🥳

Sooo… can we ask the same question in the other direction? Should art have no purpose in order to be defined as such? And where does political propaganda, for example, land on that spectrum? And is political propaganda different from the work of Banksy?

Posts