This paper further expands on the concern about how we depict
graphic design to explain its relationships (both “internal” and
“external”) for the purposes of education, research, and practice.
The initial development of this concern led to the identification of
what has been described as the critical dimensions of graphic design,
and this inquiry has required the analysis and proposed redefinition
of the subject’s plural domains. The attempt to depict these critical
dimensions, or domains, benefitted from a diagrammatic modeling
exercise, discussed formally in 20071 after having first been outlined
a year earlier.2 This exercise demonstrated how the traditional
definitions, from which the subject emerged and with which it
became identified in the first half of the twentieth century, could
be represented in diagrammatic form, creating a contemporary
interpretation of the subject. The present author has used the visual
method of diagrams as a form of rational inquiry to illustrate the shift
from traditional to contemporary ways of thinking about the graphic
design (Figure 1). The traditional interpretation of graphic design in
diagrammatic form by this author, seen on the left, owes much to the
way urban design is shown, by Jon Lang in 2005, to have emerged
from the overlap between architecture, landscape architecture, city
planning and civil engineering.3 Whereas the contemporary model
seen on the right evolved from numerous attempts by this present
author since 2001 to use diagrams as an effective tool for teaching
graphic design to students within and without the subject.
History
School
The Arts, English and Drama
Department
Arts
Citation
HARLAND, R.G., 2011. The dimensions of graphic design and its spheres of influence. Design Issues, 27 (1), pp. 21 - 34.