« It's Real!... no...wait,.. It's a Fake..... Ops.....hold on.... It's Real! | Main | Getting Off To A Slow Start »

Art vs Advertising

I got into a heated debate the other day with a friend who is a graphic designer over whether or not advertising was art.  I guess you can figure out who picked which side.  I’m firmly on the no side of this argument.  

It started when I mention my cash flow problems from the last couple of months and he suggested that I should change careers’ and become a graphic designer, “So your artistic skills aren’t going  to waste” he says.  That statement really pissed me off and I made some reply to the effect that graphic design wasn’t really art.  I obliviously  hit a nerve with him and the argument was on.

I know this debate has been around for a very long time and I doubt I can add much to it that hasn’t already been said a million times.  I just get very tired living in a world where the only “artistic “ outlet is graphic design, especially when I don’t really believe graphic design is truly art.  I get tired of well-meaning friends trying to “help”  with well-intentioned  suggestions.   Don’t get me wrong I have a lot of friends who really like my work and want to see me continue with what I’m doing, it’s just that there always seems to be somebody around ready to seed doubts and I’m always ready to fall for it.

The old argument that Pop Art levelled the playing field between art and advertising never really held any water for me.  Pop Art showed that advertising can be raised to the level of art but failed to prove in my eyes that it should apply to all advertising.
                                   
Advertising is subversive and manipulative.  Its sole purpose to exist  is to sell some product, if it can sell you something without you being aware, even better.  To me it’s visual noise, something to try to mentally avoid even though  it may be working on me even though I’m not aware of it.

The fact that so much of our society  is willing to accept advertising as art says a lot about our consumer culture.  To confuse the two shows how visually illiterate or world has become or maybe our everyday lives are so devoid of art that we are willing to grab hold of any image we can to fill the gap.

Contemporary Art requires the viewer to be visually engaged in a way that  a lot of modern viewers simply don’t want to be.  There are so many easier forms of entertainment available today.   Why go through the mental aerobics of trying to understand art when TV is so much easier to grasp? For the most part people are visually lazy and advertising feeds off that laziness.

Art and  advertising share a lot of similar traits.  Advertising borrows extensively from art, and since the era of Pop Art, art has borrowed from Advertising.  Art requires a level of visual engagement that advertising could never stand up too.  Advertising doesn’t want you to think beyond your immediate wants.  To really see advertising is to look beyond its cheap façade, to see its inner workings, to understand how it manipulates and not be fooled by its cheap glamour.

Posted on Tuesday, January 17, 2006 at 10:09AM by Registered CommenterHoward | Comments16 Comments

Reader Comments (16)

Good argument,Howard, and I totally agree. It really is depressing how many people are visually lazy, but I blame it also on the lack of art education in our system.
January 17, 2006 | Unregistered Commentermarja-leena
I agree. I'm not even sure if any form of art history is taught in public schools. It's not just that they don't teach art though. I really think kids should be taught how to view all forms of media critically. People spend so much time passively watching TV without even understanding how what they are watching has been constructed. I find it odd that in a culture so visually oreinted we are also so visually naive.
January 17, 2006 | Registered CommenterHoward
I agree too.I've started an art course 2 weeks ago with a very well known american master in oil (technique mixte), after a look around the atelier at the different works and especially his,I decided to quit.It was a kind of easy Onirism style with a lot of symbolic messages, technically perfect, but totally empty, they were using newspaper's photos,advertisings, as model, doing some "decoupage",trying to do "intellectual art" and it was so pompous(?)and serious (and expensive!)...So I quit! I like your blog Howard,like your work, I like your honesty look on your art and understand your difficulties.I'm a french painter (hope you can read my funny english!) and figurative...and big size portrait paintings. People do like my exhibitions but that's all! I'm starting to paint "normal size" coz I really wanted to sell a bit more. (I'm cleaning houses to by my painting stuff)and work (a bit) with my daughter Marnie which is a graphic designer!Hopefully my english husband earn money (in England!)
Would you Please accept my best wishes of success for this new year. I visit your site often, I'm deeply touched by yourself and your world.There are a lot of good painters around the world but not many artist ,I believe you're one.
Elaine from France.
January 17, 2006 | Unregistered Commenterelaine
Thank you Elaine for your kind compliments. I hope you sell some work soon! Getting people to buy artwork can be difficult.
January 17, 2006 | Registered CommenterHoward
Hey i just stumbled onto your stuff and thought id leave a comment to tell you i thought it was cool.
January 17, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterRob
Hey Howard, did you see that US Public TV show called "The Persuaders" all about advertising. Yuck. Yet, I find that some graphic design is really beautiful and not necessarily related to selling anything. My friend Rick used to do page layout and graphic design for a news letter on doing crab counts for scientific purposes and he used his skills to create some really amazing stuff. Plus he did programs for plays and stuff like that.

Some people think it’s a good idea to use our art to make money in other careers, but if you aren’t passionate about graphic design than better to wash dishes and create what you really want to; same with teaching art. So many artists get MFAs so they can teach art at Universities and then stop making their own work because teaching it takes all of their energy.
January 17, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterElise
Yeah I've got that teaching argument as well. I just can't imagine teaching though. Sometimes at school it almost seemed as that was the only purpose to an arts education.
January 18, 2006 | Registered CommenterHoward
Howard,

Agreed! And well-said.

Good blog--I will come back and view your work when time permits.

Warm Regards,

Jude C. in GA (USA, that is)
January 28, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterJude Cowell
Thanks for stopping by Jude.
January 28, 2006 | Registered CommenterHoward
Came to your site via Square Space in a moment of impromptu surfing. I like your work a lot and (having read some of your blog in a random fashion,) I think the effort you make to keep yourself confined to one theme at a time rather than jumping to another one when inspiration hits, is definitely paying off. The progression of the work in your gallery is very consistent. (Something I'm having real trouble with right now as mine is all over the place!)
I can see why people might suggest illustration, more than graphic design, to you as your work has a very strong story telling quality to it and three dimensional work often adds an interesting twist when featured in print or web media.
I agree that design is not art - having worked as graphic designer and now struggling to make my own art - because the job of a designer is fundamentally to bring to life someone else's ideas and not their own. However, that's not to say that graphic design is never 'artistic' nor is it always used for unethical purposes as many a charity has had its donations increased because of a well thought out advertising campaign. Might you consider submitting work you have already completed for use in an campaign by an ethical/educational organisation? I could see your pieces working very well in that context - it might help you with your cash flow but at the same time you would still be free to exhibit and sell the original piece. Just a thought!
February 5, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterCherry
Thanks for the thoughts Cherry. I think what I was trying to get at was that for a lot of people artist = graphic designers, as if they are interchangable. That's understandable, they use the same skills. The purpose of the two couldn't be farer apart in my mind. Sometimes it disturbs me that a lot of people can't tell the difference.
Your other question is interesting and probalby deserves an entry all of it's own. It's rather a slippery slope I think.
February 5, 2006 | Registered CommenterHoward
"it’s just that there always seems to be somebody around ready to seed doubts and I’m always ready to fall for it" - I know the feeling!
February 5, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterDaniel
Yeah, no kidding!
February 6, 2006 | Registered CommenterHoward
I am a painter who got my degree in Graphic Design to appease my parents. Well after five years of doing graphic design my inspiration was out the window and so were my paintings. I can remember sitting at my computer doing a graphic design job knowing that the hours I'd spent on it would be wasted by someone who didn't want to read another peice of junk mail. This was very depressing.
Well, since then I've quit the graphic design biz and have been painting as much as possible for the past two years. Like many artists, I can't live on painting alone and have had to fall back on a mindless part time telemarketing job which sucks more than doing graphic design. I don't know what the answer is.
I was heartened to learn of Joan Miro's plight as a bookeeper who was fired for drawing pictures on the books. Ha. This is an age old artist's dilemma. At least now I know I'm being true to my calling and getting my hands dirty with paint as often as I can.
February 27, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterMelody
Hi! Just to clarify for which don't know too much about art theory (like me), What is the main difference between Art and Advertising (graphic design)? Both imply creativity or not necessarily? I'm sorry if this are silly questions.

Thanks
March 6, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterJuan Guillermo
Yes they are both creative acts, but there goals are opposite. An artist tries to build their own unquie visual language. Graphic design co-opts visual language to get the viewer to buy something beyond the message. An artist is trying to sell their own personal message.

March 7, 2006 | Registered CommenterHoward

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.