Reform & Revolution / R² » Jonathan Krohn

7 Comments

Oh I don’t like such kind of work. It’s like mix of art and design but in fact it’s neither of them. For art it’s too shallow for design it’s not functional and easily understandable. Not everything there is trash, but surely is layout of the site(too small letters) and at least 50% of works

M72 added these pithy words on Apr 08 08 at 11:50 am

M72, just out of curiousity, what would you hail as good design? I, personally, do not find all his pieces to be amazing pieces of design, though his work is much stronger than most of the people I see across the design portals. So just wondering which people you think are good at either design, art, or both.

Fairwhether added these pithy words on Apr 08 08 at 2:10 pm

Fairwhether, hey thanks for the question:) Who is good in design? Surely Philip Starck ;) But seriously… At the begining I have to say that design doesn’t have to be aestheticly pleasant. But it always must serves it’s function. It must be understandable on the very first sight. Of course not to everyone but to the group it’s ment for. Let’s say that you are making poster for Metallica could you do it the same way with same features from poster for Milka?
Graphic design on university - Works of Jonathan Krohn reminds me of works on university (www.vsup.cz) of atelier Graphic design. What they do is that they try to develop visual language of graphic design - It’s good and understandable that they don’t make classical commercial work that is in fact with minimum progress. It’s ok, Graphic design as other forms of design must grow and we need unconvetional works. But here we go again function must never be overlooked. I also have to mention that work of such designers have often some common features (eg. black text with yellow highlight color) so where the hell is that progress?
Designer is supposed to make works easy to understand. It doesn’t mean that if you’r making logo for a company that build houses you’ll make a sign containing a house and a crane. There is human consciousness and subconsciousness and also collective subconsciousness you can alway experiment with these things and maybe you’ll find out that somehow that logo you were making would be easiest to understand with sign of eg. some bush(or brush?). But the thing is that the function is not crossed.
As you probably know question “what is art?” is the wrong question the right question is “when is art?” because understanding of art always depends on era it appears in. So are works of Jonathan Krohn art? I thought they are supposed to be graphic design?
There are fusions of art and design I think that one good example could be “lounge/ottoman (UP5 & UP6)” from designer Gaetano Pesce. It serves it’s function and it has deeper social idea.
But is design art?
Question who do I think is good in design or art is irrevelant - It’s not about what I like or dislike but more about the general idea art/design I tried to explain above.

M72 added these pithy words on Apr 09 08 at 6:45 am

M72, thanks for the lengthy reply. While I disagree with you on the work of Jonathan Krohn, the question of what you think is good is relevant because it gives me the context of what you consider good vs bad. I appreciate you going into details about other items such as conscious, subconscious and collective subconscious, but that strays from the main point here. Such subjective questions such as is graphic design art? And what is design vs. what is art may not be up to you, or me, to answer. How you feel the function is served and if that designates the role of design is not important to me since that definition is in fact flexible. I do however agree that Graphic Design has a primary function of communication, which is what I believe you are referring to as function, but how that function is derived can vary dramatically and still fulfill its role as the ‘function’. Just what stance you take on how it is fulfilled matters, and I am not trying to open up a discussion that will go back and forth and over multiple schools of thought. That would be pointless, especially in the comments of Reform&Revolution. So my main point is, from looking at Jonathan Krohn’s work (which I like and think is much better than most of the work I see daily) and your work, is what else do you consider good design? Since whether you think design is art, or art is art, or design is design, is subjective discourse that I am not trying start with you, nor here.

Fairwhether added these pithy words on Apr 09 08 at 8:06 am

You are not trying to open up disussion, yet your reply is long enough :). Nevertheless I did’t say I like for example graphic design of Olympic games in 1972 by Otl Aicher, insted I tried to set some (subjective) rules with which I consider quality of works.
citation:”from looking at Jonathan Krohn’s work (which I like and think is much better than most of the work I see daily)” - well I must admit that many of his works really are much much better than works I see daily. But some of them just don’t work for me as design works. That’s my main objection.
I was probably to hasty with saying that more than 50% percent of his works are trash. It’s much less.
…so partly I take some things I wrote back but the rest I just cannot .

M72 added these pithy words on Apr 11 08 at 11:41 am

Just wasn’t wanting to start on a tangent. I am mainly curious since you listed reasons, who may (in the subjective eye) you do like. Discussion is great, though at times difficult online. I don’t mind your opinion on the work, just wanted to try and see it from your eyes.

Fairwhether added these pithy words on Apr 11 08 at 1:43 pm

I like his work, I just think more attention could be spent on typographical layouts, as a lot of the typesetting feels off. Good stuff though

Thinkdust added these pithy words on Apr 14 08 at 12:53 am