Vodafone ’s advertisement campaign was launched a few weeks ago and depicts a rather beautified dublin, isolating their key audiences in a number of fast shots and catching glimpses of various occupations going about their all too happy lives, all the while the doors of Ireland are changing red and we are to be branded a big fat Vodafone customer. Quite a harmless ad, sort of eye catching but trailing into the midsts of being vaguely interesting while hitting the realms of a pride evoking Ballygowan spot or something. Untimely cheesy, probably the result of a lunch meeting where the only issue is a visual metaphor thats easy to mock up with minimal costs. It definitely shows, the only reason it’s memorable for me is due to a lazy glitch at the start where the invading red paint fails to render completely around the number twenty (0.12). At the end, the punch line hits with ‘…and show Eircom the door’.

The shaking hands of Eircom can be felt clutching at its national wallet under the unforgiving threat of a recessionary apocalypse. It seems that desperate times cause for desperate measures as Eircom rips off and completely slanders their ad campaign with unforgiving brutality. The ‘citizents of Ireland’ can been seen peeling off the red paint to reveal their orange Eircom georgian door, almost as if the uninvited biblical plague that terrorised our lands had left and we now have to remove the blood from our doors. Even the same streets and locations are shown in order strengthen the message. The caption reading, “Over 55,000 people have already switched back”.

Irish enterprises are finally starting to get their hands dirty over UK companies invading their markets. A similar tone to the McVities vrs Jacobs copycat malice that resulted in legal proceedings.

No more Mr nice guy.

On the 22nd of June my very welcoming internship in why not associates began. So far I’ve been here about 2 months and its always difficult to properly assess just how much I’ve learnt. When you think about how fast you assimilate into a working environment, the underlying learning amounts to infinity. Even while working on something and passively listening to a phone call or aware of a meeting your forming a collective of just how a company organises itself, the manners in which people communicate ideas and the freedom that each designer has to question a project decision or make a quick phone call to clients. Tea is offered intravenously and a game of fouzball never goes a miss. A particularly colourful yet nostalgic collection of soap boxes exists in one corner of the room, a reminder of just how far back this company goes.

From my experiences and conversations here I soon came to the realisation that the studio dynamic in why not is a huge rarity. Due to their reputation and long standing success the designers have quite a lot of freedom. Surprisingly enough, the freedom to be able to deal first hand with the client at all times, something that I assumed was always a given. Amongst other things, they’ve never had to promote themselves for work. So how did this come to be?

“David Ellis along with Andy Altmann and Howard Greenhalgh formed Why Not Associates on leaving the Royal College or Art in July 1987. The intention was to produce new and innovative work that would not have been possible working through established design companies.”

In a 1992 edition of eye magazine, five years after their initial formation, Andy remarks, “one of the few graphic design companies that professes an attitude.”

Although such a company statement made today may sound redundant, that attitude at the time really must have hit the right note in what must have been a very dull shade of grey. We have to remember that 1987 was a different reality at the time, there was no such things as eye magazine or internet blogs bursting the seams with design students. Admittedly, I was barely starting to exist so im not going to pretend I knew what was going on, I can only speculate on information at hand. The profession of a graphic designer in the 80’s was something that was slightly undefined at the time and I’ve definitely learned that it didn’t have the same prestige it holds today.

“We wanted to produce work that would solve the clients problem while being self expressive.”

Why not really seems like a company dedicated to great image making, with the intention to be innovative and original. Their strengths seem to lie in their ability not to take things seriously and not to be too analytical. This aspect is definitely seen in the lower case alphabets that comes attached to their company image, almost retaining a sense of youth.“I think our work is funny”, says Andy. An attitude that seems to draw a lot of comparisons to the intuitive design process that they helped to define during the early 90’s, - “you shouldn’t have to account for every little mark you make”. I wondered weather that intuitive attitude counts for the success they hold today.

Working in why not has offered me an alternative points of view, an alternative but invaluable approach to the way a designer can work, the ability able to loosen up and think radically rather then conventionally. It almost seems like years of college and explaining ideas is actually more overstated then the reality of designing for clients. Its quite a rejuvenating reminder to the days before logic and relevance wins over. Obviously the difference here, this company is working for real clients and projects hold context. Things have to be constantly screened by the client and direction has to be approved.

It seems here that trying something unpredictable is adding more that rationalisation ever can. Ultimately a problem must be solved but when you thing about it logically, trying to constantly visually relate the material to a design concept won’t produce anything new and won’t offer much in the way of evolution. If you look at why not’s early work of the 90’s we can definitely see design elements that were abundant. Early software traits defining trends and so on, but when you realise the majority of their work was pushing new boundaries you see that it wasn’t their work fitting the mould, it was their work adding to the decade and others following suit. Obviously its impossible to be completely immune to the trends but by trying to innovate and take risks you are helping to move things forwards.

The unfortunate conundrum with being a design student is that you have to input concept to a project that can never be truly functional yet present it as though it is. The Dutch seem to place a lot of emphasis on rationality and concept trough a lot of their projects, the design school at Willem de Kooning had us form a lot of completely self generated projects so ultimately a very strong concept base is needed for the start of a completely invented project, every page is the structure of an overall message and grids and typography must further embellish your message. While this was largely frustrating and I had several rants about the ‘chicken vrs the egg’ design-content issue, but my time there was invaluable. Now its quite refreshing to hear a professional say, “try a full page bleed just for the sake, something just feels right about it”.

Today why not run a fairly tight ship with all aspects of their company, they employ regular freelancers and have a handful of full time staff and ‘motion guys’ all bringing in various styes and talents. Outsourced photographers and illustrators are more then just that, but lifelong friends that are reputable network’ees. Advertising work today for why not may not allow much differentiation but at the end of the day, these guys are running a business. Ultimately their attitudes have evolved much with the changing times but their view on what a design company can be and what jobs they can take is certainly helping to move the industry forward. Much in the tone of ‘why not?’.

“We certainly didnt want to work for anybody else”.

In 1987 Mark Greenhalgh (who went on to work in film) was approached out of his MA by an American company named Sebastian. Noticing his abilities they were looking for an editorial magazine. This laid way to the foundation of why not associates and how they set up. Something that I definitely admired, the ability to set up straight out of college (and successfully at that) is always impressive. Something that almost every design student has thought about but may have been daunted by the the task at hand or subdued into a more lucrative salary position.

Nowadays I wonder weather it feasible for students to get that lucky break. Today HudsonBec exists as a design duo starting straight from college but it seems the digital world of today has created an entirely different priority, the ability to network and promote online, an almost faceless entity that has designers existing virtually. Ultimately its something that needs attention in order to gain successful recognition. Not coincidentally, they are both the founders of the successful it’s that nice blog, proving that the internet is a must for promotion. The internet aside, does the raw naivety that exists with new graduates force the industry into newer and more creative directions? I wanted to get to grip with the realities of setting up straight after education, something that was becoming ever more tangible the more I looked at other companies. I was keen to ask David Ellis a few questions of my own.

So do you think the reality of setting up is less attainable for students nowadays?
“Well, I think anytime or decade is always really a good time, when we set up the design scene was still quite established but we wanted to try our hands at more contemporary design and push the limits on design with more conservative clients. Once you have a client then you really have a starting point to base everything off.”

Do you think the attitude of a company like why not is a model that is more copied nowadays?
“The were a few companies that were still very similar in their name and things like that but I don’t think its important to try and be overly original. You just have to do good work.”

How did you deal with the initial financial issues?
“I think its actually the best time to start on your own when your out of college, mainly because your used to not having any money. I knew a few people who had plans to start up after working for a few years but the problem with that, you became too attached to your salary. Our first clients that commissioned us to start a magazine offered us 2,000 each for each issue. For someone starting straight out of college, its was quite a lot of money.”

I also got a quick chance to speak to Andy,

Was the business side of things something that came natural or did it have to be learned?
“David and I both failed at business school! We just asked other designers. Moved around studios a lot and kept money tight for emergencies and things”

This was quite a refreshing take from the over indulgent synopsis’s of most articles covering their success, a very down to earth approach with a lot of realistic insights. Modest and unassuming. The most assuring and concluding piece of advice that I drew out of the conversations was just doing good work, not labouring over the work and certainly not trying to innovate with every detail.

From the success of why not we can really see how the initial clientele could affect the direction of a companies work. When starting out, it is possibly important to prioritize with the kind of work you want to end of doing. Doing a web design for a few companies is great work but it could not be the direction you want to advertise for other clients. Admittedly, they tell me they were very lucky when starting out; “the right place at the right time”. Perhaps nowadays we live in a different time and a different place with the all too familiar ‘r’ word lurking under every excuse. Competition is fierce and originality is almost unoriginal. I wasnt expecting what they told me next.

“The best things can happen out of a recession and we were certainly in a recession at the time.”

There is hope for us all yet.

I’m currently living in Rotterdam in The Netherlands and as you’d expect the majority of everything is in dutch. As I don’t speak any dutch I depend heavily on visual rhetoric and visual associations to understand the message. For example, I was looking for some biscuits I came across a shelf full of different varieties, I found what I wanted purely based on the colours. For some reason dark chocolate is nearly always associated with the colour red and milk chocolate with blue. I’m not sure exactly why but perhaps it’s because red is usually associated with being a rich colour, a regal colour, which links back to the rich dark chocolate.

There are a lot more examples; dark blue and light blue milk cartons, full-fat milk and semi-skimmed milk respectively. Red/White combination is closely connected with ‘Sale’ or ‘Value’. These colour associations are basic, perhaps somewhat obvious but are an intrinsic part of visual rhetoric. Aside from colours, images too are reliant on their rhetorical value. This is a tricky area as different cultures and environments will have vastly different reactions to the same image. A solid understanding of the audience you are trying to communicate to is imperative to appropriate rhetoric.

Having said that I am not suggesting that you should settle with whatever image is most obvious, and ‘does the job’. In the case of chocolate cookies maybe it is more valid to do just that; I don’t believe that a package design for cookies should be challenging cultural issues or perceptions. On the other hand when presented with the challenge of designing something that needs to engage with the end viewer then I feel it’s important to augment the meaning and touch the heart of the viewer.

Objectivity

Quite often, particularly in advertising I feel there’s a lack of personality and heart in the work we see. This links back to the cookies example earlier, the packaging is a form of advertising, but what about other pursuits. So often design becomes too objective, lacking in any personality of the designer. Frequently I see a very mechanistic approach to graphic design; I sometimes think you could interchange many of the graphic elements of two polar opposite designs and it wouldn’t make a difference to the message because they are purely empty ornament. Perhaps I’m being purist but there’s sincerity and reason behind what I’m saying. Since living in The Netherlands it has opened my eyes to a wealth of solid, considered design, it’s part of this countries culture. Coming from Ireland, which doesn’t have such a rich design history like most of Europe, however it is progressing internationally, I don’t see as much of an understanding for design in Ireland as I do here in The Netherlands. Dare I say it, but making this comparison is much similar to comparing the master and his apprentice.

Quick thought on Irish Graphic Design

In Ireland when mentioning graphic design, it’s quickly followed by confusion about what it is, usually with a blank opinion. This is possibly because graphic design was never a huge part of Irish culture and life, it’s their but it’s for the most part frivolous. I find there’s a massive ignorance of what we do and what it means to be a designer. Only a select few, generally those involved in the industry know what ‘graphic design’ implies. In recent years many Irish companies have sprung up, producing some great work that is pushing forward and experimenting. Ireland has a very closely knit design community which allows for collaboration and awareness of whats going on. I think it’s growing and will continue to do so, but slowly.