“The usual difficulty is that of losing control of the design situation once one is committed to a systematic procedure which seems to fit the problem less and less as designing proceeds” John Christopher Jones, Design Methods, 1970
One of the charges often levelled at ‘offbrand’ is that it somehow advocates an ‘anything goes’ approach, (not that I have a particular problem with this). But off-brand is far from anti-design. It emphasises and advocates thoughful and sensitive design decisions made at the point of impact, in the ‘now’. In fact it could to be said to be more pro-design than most identity schemas (however comprehensive or ‘good’ they might be considered to be when launched) in that it devolves responsibility and puts trust in individual designers being able to handle the specific context of a piece of design alongside a developing visual identity. It prefers design responsibility to be distributed and does not try to make a quick buck with an all-seeing schema today, at the expense of the ability to actually ‘design’ things tomorrow.
The recent preferences for ‘flexible identities‘ go some way towards more responsive design decision making, but many fail to deliver many real freedoms. All identities are flexible but some are more flexible than others. The practise of identity design, in the main, seems to be willfully myopic when it comes to entertaining any thoughts of multiplicity, or the possibility of parallel situations and circumstances, instead seeking comfort in a cosy and simple idea of a linear and undisrupted narrative, controlled from the centre and consistently broadcast without any interference from external factors.
Think of the alternative as a fantastic publisher creating great books, each simultaneously standing alone and as part of a set, or a collection of art, each piece its own self-contained thing, but contextualised in a shared ‘gallery’ space, or an independent record store containing an evolving archive of audio and visual design, the quality, display and format of the pieces (120mm x 120mm, 12″ x 12″) bringing together a diverse body of works. What the above have in common, particularly when operating at the highest level, is either a) individual authors afforded the autonomy, (or able to operate autonomously as a direct result of what they’re doing), by an individual who can keep a gentle but steady hand on proceedings (a benevolent editor or commissioner if you like), and no desire to limit or control from the top down, (recognising that to be counter-productive), or b) distributed networks where individual participants strive to do their ‘best‘ without that being centrally organised or arbitrated.
3 thoughts on “On OffBrand”