• Pn_2
Graphic Design

I, Me, Mine: do we specialise too soon?

Guest posted by Peter Nencini,

Many creatives in this day and age see themselves as ‘multi-disciplinary’ – whether that’s a designer who can illustrate, an illustrator who makes films, or a photographer looking at themselves as more of an artist. This double-barrel is usually seen as an admirable asset, but is this always the case? For this week’s debate Pete Nencini asks; “Do we specialise too soon?”. Go on, stick your oar in.

We specialise too soon. Post-school, Art School. Foundation Course, a compact descendant of the Bauhaus’ Preliminary Course. Ignited by two months of polymorphic play. Then we stop and sign up for life, aged 18, to an homogenized pursuit of one from Archi/Graph/Illus/Anim/Fash/Text/Photo/Paint/Sculpt/Prod/Craft/ography.

For example, you specialise in Illustration. How to be an illustrator? What’s on the booklist? Some revelatory reads: David Mamet’s ‘On Directing Film’; Umberto Eco’s ‘Six Walks in the Fictional Woods’; George Perec’s ‘Species of Spaces and Other Pieces’; Paul Thek’s ‘Four Dimensional Design’. You probably won’t find them in Magma bookshop, or on the ‘Visual Communication’ library shelf. But each (in talking about writing, filmmaking, looking, thinking making) offers much, from a refreshing distance. A set of ‘manuals’ for a parallel process in your specialism. Without telling you how it should look. Because they talk about process rather than fashion. Much more useful than a subject-swatchbook of styles with a one-year lifespan.

This is not an argument for dilletantism, nor multidisciplinarianism (even the word is too much!). Specialist expertise is slow-grown, rooted in natural ability and will-to-learn. But our specialisms are conjoined. The conjunction. The in-between. The bit where we talk to each other. And where we make things together.

Technology is giving us the space to talk and to make fluently. Is our shared vocabulary up to it? In truly innovative, more-than-the-sum-of-its-parts collaboration, it’s not just about how well you understand your own process; it’s about how well your process is understood.

Look at the Bauhaus’ concentric-circular-curriculum. Compare with Design Academy Eindhoven’s Kompas subjects (colour, music, form, technology, culture, craft, economy, social science). Consider IDEO’s T-shaped designer (vertical stem equals deep specialist knowledge, horizontal bar equals understanding, empathy, passion for other subjects). Assess Martí Guixé’s self-defined status as an Ex-Designer. Toy with the craft-rooted notion of Vrije Vormgeving (‘free design’).

This is about your education in, experience of, passion for conjoined specialisms. As an Illustrator that could readily mean, for example, Typography. To support, some Linguistics? A dose of Sound Art? And so on. Hands on and time spent. Too much? Three years’ degree is a long time specialised. Especially when you’ve got the rest of your life. So, do we specialise too soon?

Peter Nencini is a freelance illustrator and designer; his recent work has been applied to sets for BBC’s Glastonbury Festival, ITV’s ’Hell’s Kitchen’ and Channel 4’s ‘T4’. After graduating from the Royal College of Art he worked as a graphic designer in Brussels before returning to London. He now teaches illustration at Camberwell College of Arts. www.peternencini.co.uk

Comments

12942303959839966 ObjectThinking on Mon Oct 19th 2009

Agree. Even multi-disciplinary degrees tend to assume students should define and demonstrate a specialism. Generalists are often considered indecisive. We need both. Pigeon-holing ourselves by discipline courts conservative business based upon its typical output. The brave practitioner either charts a distincive specialism and/or is unconcerned with boundaries, acknowledging that it is the project that need to work within a defined context, not the practitioner.

12942303966386073 Quinnuit on Mon Oct 19th 2009

Everyone's practice and ability is so diverse that no one umbrella shaped course title will keep a class within it's definition. Terms like Visual Communication help to add a subtitle to the story and can give it's applicants freedom to experiment within it's 'Visual' boundaries. (But is it too vague?) It's hard sometimes to focus on graduating not really knowing what you're graduating in and Art School can begin to feel like a lesson in semantics.

12942303975083208 rachillustrates on Mon Oct 19th 2009

This is really interesting, and I agree too. Especially the part about foundation degrees. I chose to do illustration and then 2 months later we had to apply to unis... I didn't even know what illustration was during a-level, foundation was literally a crash course, but because I loved it so much in that short space of time I wanted to do it at uni. However when it came to applying to unis, I feel that I didn't get in to my first choice because I was expected to be a professional illustrator at the intervew! And not a learning art student. Very strange atmosphere. But I got into my second choice and off I went, and three years later, I've graduated. Still don't know if I want to just do illustration... there's so many things out there I want to try.

1294230398335004 thomascoombes on Mon Oct 19th 2009

Jack of all trades, master of none. Although i think its important to have an understanding of many disciplines its also nice to have one you are really an expert in. If there was enough time in the world to be an expert at everything then great. But that would be a long degree.

12942303989948096 shornBatchelor on Tue Oct 20th 2009

I agree, I think that the more knowledge of other disciplines you have the more you can be aware of pushing a different discipline forward. For example a knowledge of film techniques may open a door in a printed application. It often requires a lot of self learning though. You can expect everybody in a course to want to do everything. I did a 3 year course and that simply would not be enough time to have professional skills in a single discipline if i was doing film, photography, illustration, cake decoration etc with any seriousness though they were touched on. (minus the cake decoration, literary flair)

1294230399626611 miiikerobinson on Tue Oct 20th 2009

I think the most interesting things happen when you have a broad range of executional knowledge (including some specialisms) and a good general creative approach. Surely you'll make better creative connections if you have broader knowledge?

1294230400914623 KathrynJaneHall on Wed Oct 21st 2009

'Multi-disciplinary' is another term to place before designer, why can't we be designers with no pre text required? I come from a degree that only could be said to specialize in encouraging an intelligent questioning approach to design where ideas are expected to stand up to critique. When you graduate you are a designer, how you describe yourself is up to you. I have a strong sense of what my principals and beliefs about what I desire design to be and mean. I am not too concerned with what I am beyond a designer, skills can always be learnt but ideas are harder to come across. Does having a discipline limit the potential of our creativity and ideas? Not knowing how to do something or not being sure of where it’s going can bring around the most interesting ideas and doesn’t have to be scary.

12942304017311618 PeterNencini on Wed Oct 21st 2009

Not interested in labels either. Also, the jack-of-all-trades comment above misses the point. I'm talking about the substance and detailing of our practical and conceptual approach. To make for better, more innovative work. I think it's fruitless to make a distinction between ideas and making skill. Who decided that one holds the other back? Making is thinking. Intimacy with process fosters invention. A Cuneiform alphabet's beauty is in the creative permutations coming out of a articulate understanding of a limited tool and writing surface. I'm really not proposing that we try to make everything or become polymath-super-designers. Just that, given the incredible access we now have to information and each other, is our empathy with each others' (thinking or making) process developed enough? Regarding hours in the day and sufficient time to learn... I learnt more through one month in a graphic design studio than a year in college. Don't get me wrong. My course was great; it was my capacity to learn under real pressure that HAD to develop. We can learn quickly and learn more. I'm convinced that knowledge beds in rhythmically and feeds our creativity.

12942304023532305 waywaiwaywai on Thu Oct 22nd 2009

I think it's true that we specialise too quick. Life is fast moving now and too often mapped out. We do this and then this and then this; we're making decisions and before you know it you're deep into it, not realising whether you yourself chose this outcome, or if you're just the unlucky bugger who ended up following some shoddy life advice...from the careers councillor.

It is sometimes if not always reaaally good to stray totally from what we think we should be doing. We should go learn about geology, learn to cook, learn about how we learn, learn crazy unnecessary theories, learn binary, learn off QI, learn absolutely anything at all, even something you hate.
And even if all we learn after that is that we'd just quite like to sit: pen in hand, paper at the ready, crouched over a table, drawing, painting, making for the long forseeable future... At least we know theres nothing out thre that we'd rather be doing.

12942304029664829 sebeys on Sat Oct 24th 2009

Look back to the renaissance period and that was a time of huge... change(as best I can describe it)many of the players at the time where multi-disciplinary or did not ties themselves with what they came up to be thought with, they kept changing,of which the pieces of work,created in that period are still relevant to this day

1294230403747679 darrylclifton on Sun Oct 25th 2009

I may be approaching this at a tangent but I had a similar experience to Peter, the 'road to Damascus' moment of clarity when first working in a fast paced and commercial environment. This kind of experience has become a determining factor in the curricular world of Higher education. There is major/confused emphasis on the need to meet the requirement of industry and it is predominant in the Creative Arts [possibly because of inherent course and resource costs/four year as opposed to three year programmes]. Referring to Industry [and its 'needs'] in a bid to better understand the requisite 'skills' in our graduating student body has benefits and disadvantages. It is the driver for a number of initiatives/individual student projects and a new fervour for educational programmes in well established companies [including the new Wieden and Kennedy 'school' for a new breed of advertisers], it is also the reason that so many bespoke courses have emerged in our Universtites over recent years AND more importantly it is having a net effect on the priorities set on the student experience overall. greater emphasis on the acquisition of skill sets [transferable and otherwise] have required greater specificity, greater accountability, more 'box ticking' exercises, an audit culture that is both ambiguous and unneccessarily specific.
Tail wags dog.

I am offering up this mono-context/soft rant about Education in order to give an opinion about our approach to specialism. My view is that students will be required to specialise earlier and earlier [it is happening this year with the abolition of route B, the old ADAR route tailored specifically for Art and Design students] because of the overall pattern of 'third way' Education. Specialism or naming of a discipline is often done for the sake of convenience/marketing/recruitment and the nuts and bolts of delivery and curriculum content are driven and defined by those people responsible for writing the projects. An holistic approach to Education is not particularly fashionable, because it is ambiguous, underpinned by beliefs and principles, difficult to describe and difficult to explain and deliver. However education is what we should all aim for, in its truest form, the cultivation of experiences/situations/spaces that enable individuals to develop within and without of a particular context, that process of 'drawing out' [ I reluctantly use the epithet; education is 'lighting a fire' not 'filling a bucket']. The radical in me says that we should be driving this in conjunction with Industry not passively asking them what they want, the latter may be the most practical, short term solution to whatever those uninterested Whitehall statistic mongers want but it will not serve either individuals or Industry well, it is a reductio ad absurdum, a hiding to nothing but mediocrity, bland and formulaic passive non creativity.
In short we need names, its a question of semantics but we need our education to be broad - wide and deep [yes T shaped], we need it to be at times complicated and problematic, at times simple and skills orientated but at all times part of an education not simply a 'training'. We have big brains and opposable thumbs, lets use them wisely!

12942304049221745 ratherlemony on Sun Oct 25th 2009

Late to the party as ever ... my short answer is yes; specialism comes all-too-swiftly for art students, or indeed prospective students from all disciplines. What eighteen-year-old knows exactly what they want to do, anyway? Personally, I vaguely wanted to be a lawyer at eighteen ... five years later I am finishing an illustration degree where my main focus is moving image. Go figure.

Back to the topic at hand. Feeling your way through to a correct working practice. I think it's very individual and for some perhaps it would come easier if on a generalised art/design course for three years, rather than a niche area. No labels. Just finding out what clicks and who you click with and deriving something that comes from this very organic process and hey, eventually you'll come out on the right track. For others, you need the security of a specific skill-set - something tangible that you feel can directly transfer into a career path. On the flip side, this niche can actually give you something to kick and rebel against, where in the nebulous breadth of a generalised course there would be nothing.

Ultimately I subscribe to this notion of deep understanding of a specialism combined with communication and cross-over between other disciplines that you mention. One area often feeds another, promoting creativity and intuitive leaps in our prospective practices that otherwise might not have occurred. This is important, not least because it ultimately means you have a personal practice which is both communicative with other areas AND more uniquely your own, as you have sought out the connecting threads that ultimately make what you do more substantial.

So what to make of all of this at the start of your degree? Well. I tend to think a lot of people are all-too-ready to nail their colours to the proverbial mast and label themselves (for better or for worse) because it's more comfortable than the alternative. There is such a need to define yourself at a young age, there is a security in tunnelling your vision like this. In wider society, your BA is often viewed as a means to an end rather than an opportunity to expand your ideas.

Maybe it's worth pointing out that although you specialise, that's not the final word. Things can change, your ideas can jump. Just because you ticked the photographer box when you were eighteen doesn't mean you can't change your mind, find the deep specialism at a later date (maybe not for a few years), etc. Your education does not stop when you graduate. You educate yourself if you are engaged and enthusiastic about the world around you. If nothing else, a good degree - regardless of specialism - teaches you to get interested in stuff - even if that stuff is the exact opposite of what you are meant to be learning at the time. You've still got the time and the space to get passionate about something and chase it. That's the key. Your time isn't wasted if you get the label wrong.

So I think what I am trying to say is that specialising in art/design at such a young age is tough. It works for some, not for others ... there probably should be more allotted time for play before you subscribe to something more rigid. But with things as they are, keeping your eyes and ears open about what is going on in other disciplines (and not just artistic, but scientific, mathematical, whatever) not only feeds your own practice but also may set you off on another path altogether and that is fine. It's up to the individual to keep looking and learning, though. College can provide a structure where this is possible, but it's really up to you to keep things interesting and keep questioning what you do and why.

12942304056008034 RobertSollis on Mon Oct 26th 2009

It's not so much about working in the gaps in between disciplines, which I don't think exist anymore, but working in the areas of overlap. It's important to have a broad knowledge that allows us to either make work that stands up to criticism from both disciplines or that lets us realise the limitations of our expertise and choose the right person to collaborate with. Choosing a good collaboration comes from an understanding and ability to identify ways that each of us approach making work, because the fundamentals of our approach are interdisciplinary even when the outcomes are not.

12942304063158715 Snicholson2 on Tue Oct 27th 2009

I too think branching out is very important, however, I do agree with “ Object Thinkings” point. If we are seen to venture too far from our discipline we are, the post-graduate, seen as being indecisive and unsuitable for the job. With all that said I do believe there are universities out there that offer courses that offer a focus, but provide the insight and flexibility to redefine how we solve problems. And even if your BA/MA/HND was particularly restrictive there is still hope!

Work placements! They are a great way, if you can afford to work for free, to have an insight into disciplines outside your training. I spent the best part of a year working under Architects, Branding specialists, Packaging designers, Interactive media specialist and others while I was in limbo between Uni and work. So if you can, I believe it is an invaluable experience.

Now with the financial upturn employers are looking for ‘multi-disciplinary’ students to employ to service their clients. The specialist are dieing breed, they are being replaced with polymaths and cross-disciplinarians to solve problems in a different. After all the problems are all the same–how can we make our product/service more visible to increate sales/shares/brand equity–It’s up to the creative to produce new solutions.

Posted by Peter Nencini

Most Recent: Graphic Design View Archive

  1. Foreign_policy_brandguidesingapore_itsnicethat_list

    Foreign Policy Design Group, who we featured on the site last year, has nailed the art of collating diverse and sometimes complex ideas into a beautiful, cohesive publication. The first book in its new series, Brand Guide: Singapore Edition is like a beautifully arranged scrapbook of your dreams, rounding up “iconic homegrown brands that attest to the current golden age of design in Singapore,” the studio explains on their Behance page.

  2. Leslie-david-itsnicethat-list

    Leslie David might be one of the busiest women working in her industry. We last checked in with her six months ago, to swoon over the identity and packaging her studio had created for Glossier, and a typeface which looked to be blowing in the breeze, among other things, but this week she’s back with no fewer than three new projects. Three! She never stops.

  3. List-ashley-stephenson-new-york-times-its-nice-tha

    Designer Ashley Stephenson seems to be a shy chap, perhaps explaining why he prefers to go by his creative pseudonym G/tr, and why it took a friend of his to get in touch singing his praises. We’re not sure why, as Ashley’s certainly talented: this project was created while interning at the New York Times, and looks to show the publication’s prestigious heritage while also celebrating its move into the digital era. For each of the images, Ashley has imagined what the stars of yesteryear might get up to if they were as preoccupied as we are today with the likes of Snapchat, Vine, Instagram, Periscope, Twitter, Facebook, What’s App, Club Penguin, Habbo Hotel…you get the picture.

  4. Studio_storz_itsnicethat_list

    Berlin-based Studio Storz has a portfolio chock-full of visual identities, editorial design and book design that’s varied in style. What differentiates Studio Storz from other design practices is its collaborative approach to design. As part of Spector Bureau, a collection of designers, artists and publishers, it actively works with other professionals in the field. It sees the role of designers as ever expanding and one that can manifest itself as researcher, engineer, craftsman and communicator; and the studio’s relationship with the Heidelberger Kunstverein has been ongoing since 2012.

  5. Alexandre-pietra-for-noise-festival-its-nice-that-list

    A good identity isn’t necessarily one with a mega logo – though it doesn’t hurt – but one that looks great and is instantly recognisable across any touchpoint, be it a coffee cup or huge stretch of hoardings. When we saw this festival identity looking bloody brilliant on a balloon, we knew it passed the test. This simple blue and white look for French festival For Noise was created by Swiss designer Alexandre Pietra, and aims to convey the festival’s new, less rock-orientated approach. “The concept of this 2015 edition is to let the music speak for itself,” says Alexandre.

  6. Byop_int_list

    Earlier this month, the Serpentine Pavilion opened to the public. The beguiling, multicoloured woven structure designed by Spanish architects SegnasCalgo sits in Hyde Park like a more grown-up version of a fort you might have built when you were a child. Over the last decade and a half the annual architecture commission has become a much-anticipated beacon of design, and to celebrate 15 years of the Summer Pavilion, the Serpentine Galleries have teamed up with Kidesign, Marina Willer and the team at Pentagram to launch a digital platform and national campaign to foster the aspiring young architects of tomorrow.

  7. Lust_typedynamic_itsnicethat_list

    LUST not only has a great name, but is a studio covering a huge range of disciplines in an extraordinary way. Based in The Hague, Netherlands, it’s this project the studio did last year at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam that demonstrates the studio’s unique and varied approach. An interactive installation for the exhibition Type/Dynamics, the show aimed to comment on the work of experimental graphic designer Jurriaan Schrofer.

  8. Song-haein-itsnicethat-list

    I’m just going to come right out and admit that there’s an inherent injustice in trying to explain how beautiful a printed book is through digital images. This is especially true in the case of Haein Song, whose painstakingly bound publications go one step beyond plain old riso-printing and saddle-stitching.

  9. List-its-nice-that-mtv_premium_collage_300dpi_iam

    MTV is launching a new “louder, shorter and hyper-visal” look and feel, incorporating user-generated content for the first time. The positioning has been reworded to “I am my MTV” from its former slogan “I want my MTV,” aiming to celebrate its audience and “bring new video art to audiences worldwide,” according to the brand. MTV says that the new design work was created in house, and it seems very much in the vein of the bright, brash and rather brilliant work of its senior vice president of visual storytelling and deputy editorial director (snappy!) Richard Turley.

  10. Penguin_design_awards_2015_list

    Today Penguin has announced the winning covers for its 2015 Penguin Random House Design Awards. The awards are an opportunity for art and design students to get involved with design for publishing. Entrants are given a detailed brief from the publishing house and are invited to submit designs in one of three categories. This year Scott Kooken’s Freakonomics takes the Adult Non-Fiction category, Kate Gamet wins Adult Fiction with Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit, and Lucie Williams’ Carrie’s War wins the Children’s category.

  11. List-eric-hu-talk-magazine-its-nice-that-

    We’re longtime, long-distance admirers of the work of Eric Hu, so the news that he’s recently launched a new magazine, Talk, is pretty damn exciting. And from what we’ve seen of the spreads, young Eric’s not disappointed us. The mag is the product of a collaboration with art director and writer Harry Gassel, former art director at The Fader, and is described as “a style-driven magazine on design focused on emerging culture.” And style-driven it damn well is: we’re digging the cover typeface, which seems to be formed of gloomy balloons, while the spreads show some innovative approaches to layout and image size. The first issue features the likes of David Brandon Geeting, Maxime Harvey, Simon Whybray and Raf Rennie, and we’re keen to see how Talk’s dialogue continues in future issues.

  12. Bond_web_moominfont_a_small_optimized-1

    Tove Jansson was a one-woman phenomenon. Last year Finland celebrated the centenary of the much-loved Moomin creator and children’s uberauthor and illustrator, and you might remember we spoke to C-G Hagström for the Autumn issue of Printed Pages about photographing her throughout her life.

  13. Zoo_festival_de_l%e2%80%99histoire_de_l%e2%80%99art_itsnicethat_list

    Paris-based studio Zoo has been featured on the site before for their zesty posters for a music event, and this time they’re back with a beautiful identity for the Festival de l’Histoire de l’Art 2015. Created as part of a proposal for a competition held by the Ministry of Culture and Communication, the theme was “Matière de l’œuvre (the matter of the work of art).”