Order Subscription, 31st to 38th issue
Issues 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 & 38
8 × 20 pages and sometimes more
21 × 29,7 cm, CMYK
Design: Syndicat
2021-2022
Order Subscription, 31st to 38th issue
Issues 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 & 38
8 × 20 pages and sometimes more
21 × 29,7 cm, CMYK
Design: Syndicat
2021-2022
n°27 — Rhizomes of London. Archigram and mental images of the city. Author: Sonia de Puineuf
Author: Sonia de Puineuf
12 pages, 21 × 29,7 cm, black and white
+ 1 A1 poster, CMYK
2nd February 2021
ISBN: 979-10-95991-18-2
ISSN: 2558-2062
Author: Sonia de Puineuf
12 pages, 21 × 29,7 cm, black and white
+ 1 A1 poster, CMYK
2nd February 2021
ISBN: 979-10-95991-18-2
ISSN: 2558-2062
A mine of images and ideas for architectural and urban-planning practices, the journal Archigram (1961–70) has already been the subject of close reading and analysis by architects, historians, theoreticians, and architecture critics. This study approaches Archigram from a different angle, attempting to interpret it as a successful artifact of graphic design by confronting it with the achievements of its time and other inspirational eras of editorial and environmental graphic design. It aims to explain the graphical evolution of the journal through the graphical stimuli of London—the city where the Archigram architects worked on a daily basis. It is an attempt to demonstrate that the publication, at first glance confusingly heterogeneous, is akin to a comprehensive mapping of the secret whirrs and the more obvious trends of the English metropolis, where the futuristic utopia of the dynamic city took shape in such a particular way. By identifying London’s potential during the mythical Sixties, the Archigram journal stands out as a rhizomatic image, a living mirror of the urban organism.
n°23 — Jan Tschichold: The Master approving of his own work. Author: Žiga Testen
Author: Žiga Testen
24 pages, 21 × 29,7 cm, CMYK
9 September 2020
ISBN: 979-10-95991-17-5
ISSN: 2558-2062
Author: Žiga Testen
24 pages, 21 × 29,7 cm, CMYK
9 September 2020
ISBN: 979-10-95991-17-5
ISSN: 2558-2062
Design history as an independent discipline and field of study appears to be in trouble. Design historians complain about its diminishing influence within universities due to the ongoing instrumentalisation of higher education. The Eurocentric canon built upon values and methods adopted from art and architecture history has been contested by decolonial theories. And finally, it appears that the trust in the institution of ‘history’ itself and its meta-narratives has eroded.
A discipline that was once considered to provide reflection on what came before and guidance on what could come to be—under the auspice of a grand narrative of continuous progress—has been replaced by modest narratives, social anthropologies, and claims of the ‘end of history’.
In this article, I rummage through the ruins of design history and try to unpack what it was that we once considered design history and our design history canon, how we wrote about it and to what end. In particular, I focus on this one image: a portrait photograph of a well-known historical figure, the designer and typographer Jan Tschichold. How is it used? And what stories do we tell about it?
n°26 — Production process: Print on Demand. Author: Manon Bruet
Author: Manon Bruet
20 pages, 21 × 29,7 cm, CMYK
4th November 2020
ISBN: 979-10-95991-17-5
ISSN: 2558-2062
Author: Manon Bruet
20 pages, 21 × 29,7 cm, CMYK
4th November 2020
ISBN: 979-10-95991-17-5
ISSN: 2558-2062
In 2008, English Graphic Designer James Goggin ran a two-day workshop with design students at the Hochschule Darmstadt in Germany. The object which resulted gradually took on the appearance of a photo album, a typeface specimen, and a color chart. On the cover, the phrase “Dear Lulu, Please try and print these line, color, pattern, format, texture and typography tests for us” is clearly addressed to the online print platform for which this book was proposed as a test.
Ten years later, the offer has become more diverse and the success of such online platforms is undeniable—indeed the phenomenon has spread well beyond the field of publishing. While some bemoan unfair competition for printers, others, professionals and amateurs, see in it a freedom to print and distribute relatively well finished objects at low cost.
The possibilities of these systems of production, are multiple but nonetheless limited, and this obviously raises the question of a possible standardization of forms and formats. However, when it comes to Print On Demand, it seems that the issue is not so much the materiality of an object (the choice of format, paper or a particular manufacture) but rather the actual existence of this object itself, outside of usual channels of production and distribution.