Cultivating a More Human Practice through Self-Examination and Self-Connection
The thesis process, as we were duly warned by our professors, is not linear or straightforward. Though this shouldn’t feel like a surprise given that our topics are meant to contribute new information to the field, it’s still jarring for so much of the process to be unknown. As our research revealed new information, our topics shifted and changed, focused and refocused to give us the work we’re viewing today at this thesis exhibition.
But this is the beauty of the design process - we set out to explore a topic, uncovered new information and formed new insights, and adjusted the work to accommodate our new perspective. And while it was uncomfortable to experience this process so intensely over such a prolonged period of time, the experience of getting comfortable with being uncomfortable has built an entirely new skillset and outlook.
As eLearning (and now SCADNow) students, we have an incredibly unique experience. Many of us began our asynchronous online program before the pandemic and global shutdown, so we’d already had to develop the skills and methods to bridge not only the cultural and language gaps between a diverse student population, but also the temporal and spatial gaps presented by a digital-only environment. So when disaster struck, we went from being the fringe cases of the program, to suddenly becoming leaders and emotional / mental supports for students who were thrust into our environment and had a steep learning curve ahead of them.
I believe our collective work here is evidence that this incredibly specific experience had a profound impact on the way our cohort thinks about design, human connection, and the way we hope to build into this discipline for the future. All of our topics related back to deeply human ways of working in the discipline, and I’m personally very excited to see how our work changes the field.
But this is the beauty of the design process - we set out to explore a topic, uncovered new information and formed new insights, and adjusted the work to accommodate our new perspective. And while it was uncomfortable to experience this process so intensely over such a prolonged period of time, the experience of getting comfortable with being uncomfortable has built an entirely new skillset and outlook.
As eLearning (and now SCADNow) students, we have an incredibly unique experience. Many of us began our asynchronous online program before the pandemic and global shutdown, so we’d already had to develop the skills and methods to bridge not only the cultural and language gaps between a diverse student population, but also the temporal and spatial gaps presented by a digital-only environment. So when disaster struck, we went from being the fringe cases of the program, to suddenly becoming leaders and emotional / mental supports for students who were thrust into our environment and had a steep learning curve ahead of them.
I believe our collective work here is evidence that this incredibly specific experience had a profound impact on the way our cohort thinks about design, human connection, and the way we hope to build into this discipline for the future. All of our topics related back to deeply human ways of working in the discipline, and I’m personally very excited to see how our work changes the field.
Thesis I: Research and Discovery
Throughout Thesis I, students undertake a process of exploring values, crafting manifestos , journaling, free-writing, rewriting, and design as research to identify and confirm the feasibility of a thesis topic. What follows in this section is my work towards my initial thesis topic. I’ll explore in subsequent sections how this work evolved and became my final thesis topic.
Working Thesis Statement:
Graphic design yields the power and responsibility to shape public consciousness and culture itself. Post-Industrial Revolution, this power has steadily shifted away from service to society towards service to consumerism, where manipulation, misinformation, and misrepresentation have created a sea change of public distrust.
The consequences of this shift have only become more severe in the current technological age, as evidenced by widespread disbelief in science and “facts,” impotence of public institutions, inequalities across all social categories, and large-scale social unrest. Reversing these trends and rebuilding public trust requires graphic designers to reclaim power, shift the discipline’s focus towards service to society, and commit to visual communication that increases transparency, authenticity, and agency.
Exploring Values
Thesis II: Synthesis and Insights
In Thesis II, students continue to expand their research and begin to construct their outlines, build an annotated bibliography, and start the writing process. The majority of the quarter is spent in the writing phase, with the latter part of the quarter dedicated to design experimentation and exploration process. In between Thesis I and this course, I’d spent a lot of time thinking about this work and continuing to journal, research, whiteboard, map, and otherwise explore the concept.
I found through this process that my focus was shifting in pretty substantial ways to examine the actual relationship between graphic design as a discipline and the society in which we operate. I started to formulate an idea around changing the way the discipline structures itself: the operating hypothesis being that, if we want our work to be perceived or understood differently in society, we would need to operate in fundamentally different ways that are foreign to society. This iteration of my thesis work focused on an inside-out approach for the discipline - allowing ideological communities to naturally form and self govern, rather than the current and traditional top-down, hierarchical approach to organization.
I found through this process that my focus was shifting in pretty substantial ways to examine the actual relationship between graphic design as a discipline and the society in which we operate. I started to formulate an idea around changing the way the discipline structures itself: the operating hypothesis being that, if we want our work to be perceived or understood differently in society, we would need to operate in fundamentally different ways that are foreign to society. This iteration of my thesis work focused on an inside-out approach for the discipline - allowing ideological communities to naturally form and self govern, rather than the current and traditional top-down, hierarchical approach to organization.
New Problem Statement:
As a discipline, we’ve struggled to shift the power dynamic in our relationship with society because our top-down solutions can’t be internalized or actioned by every graphic designer in every context.
WHY: because a few individuals in specific contexts are proposing solutions
WHY: because the discipline has a hierarchical structure AND those hierarchies are disconnected
WHY: because efforts to build community across the discipline have not been successful at including everyone
WHY: because those efforts fail to account for every graphic designer in every context
WHY: because that is impossible - no single strategy will work for everyone everywhere.
Revised Hypothesis:
IF: we adopt a grassroots, inside-out approach to changing graphic design’s relationship with society,
THEN: we allow for ideological communities to bubble up naturally, self-organize and self-govern, alleviating many of the challenges of top-down approaches.
Revised Title and Thesis Statement:
Graphic Designers Do this “One Simple Thing” for Great Results:
A Counterintuitive Approach to Discipline-Wide Change
Adopting an inside-out approach to institutional change will create a ripple effect of human connection that ensures meaningful, enduring change in graphic design’s relationship with society.
RANSOM
As a result of these questions and continued interrogation, I ended up with two distinct but related avenues of exploration: the messages that communicated I wasn’t “enough” and their origins, and the gap between my idealized self and my true self. As I dug into the messages I’d received that formed my mindset and belief of not being “enough,” the most common origin point was my upbringing in a religious environment - specifically, evangelicalism, and more specifically, the Southern Baptist Church. I wasn’t terribly surprised to make this connection: much of my adult thought life has been spent grappling with the ideologies and morality I was raised with and how to tease those out of who I both believe myself and aspire to be. Many of my projects in my program at SCAD have touched on (with varying degrees of depth and intensity) the complexity of my relationship with my religious upbringing. I continued to journal about these messages, considering doctrine (Complementarianism), Biblical text (Proverbs 31, the Wife of Noble Character), and practice (the burden placed on girls to dress modestly so as to “keep their brothers in Christ from sinning”).
The one message I came back to over and over again is a phrase loosely tied to 1 Corinthians 6:20, used broadly in teaching, and summing up (for me) the messages that have had such a negative impact on my mindset: you were bought with a price, you are not your own. While the phrase is generally used and perceived in a positive light, for me, the message always felt malicious - speaking to the idea that humans are born sinful, not enough on their own, in need of redeeming. I wanted to find a way to communicate my experience and landed on a ransom note (Figure 6) as the right vehicle for instigating the same unsettled, discomfited, powerless feeling I have around this message. Through the process of making, I discovered I was able to lay claim to this message, subverting its meaning and intent to communicate the true impact it’s had on my mindset. Changing the message’s intent to align more closely with my experience afforded me power over a message that has had a profound impact on my perception of myself and my value.
As a result of these questions and continued interrogation, I ended up with two distinct but related avenues of exploration: the messages that communicated I wasn’t “enough” and their origins, and the gap between my idealized self and my true self. As I dug into the messages I’d received that formed my mindset and belief of not being “enough,” the most common origin point was my upbringing in a religious environment - specifically, evangelicalism, and more specifically, the Southern Baptist Church. I wasn’t terribly surprised to make this connection: much of my adult thought life has been spent grappling with the ideologies and morality I was raised with and how to tease those out of who I both believe myself and aspire to be. Many of my projects in my program at SCAD have touched on (with varying degrees of depth and intensity) the complexity of my relationship with my religious upbringing. I continued to journal about these messages, considering doctrine (Complementarianism), Biblical text (Proverbs 31, the Wife of Noble Character), and practice (the burden placed on girls to dress modestly so as to “keep their brothers in Christ from sinning”).
The one message I came back to over and over again is a phrase loosely tied to 1 Corinthians 6:20, used broadly in teaching, and summing up (for me) the messages that have had such a negative impact on my mindset: you were bought with a price, you are not your own. While the phrase is generally used and perceived in a positive light, for me, the message always felt malicious - speaking to the idea that humans are born sinful, not enough on their own, in need of redeeming. I wanted to find a way to communicate my experience and landed on a ransom note (Figure 6) as the right vehicle for instigating the same unsettled, discomfited, powerless feeling I have around this message. Through the process of making, I discovered I was able to lay claim to this message, subverting its meaning and intent to communicate the true impact it’s had on my mindset. Changing the message’s intent to align more closely with my experience afforded me power over a message that has had a profound impact on my perception of myself and my value.
“Ransom Note” Collage, cut letters from Lab Animal Journal. Text reads: “You were bought with a price. You are not your own.”
SELF-ACTUALIZED PORTRAITS
Following what I felt was a successful exploration and reconciliation of formative message, I took a similar approach in exploring the second avenue uncovered in my initial work: the gap between my idealized self and my true self. To dig deeper into this, I referenced Scott Barry Kaufman’s work Transcend, which discusses the difference between the ideal self and the true self (mentioned previously in this writing). To start, I set a time limit and began listing all of my personality traits as they occurred to me (the time limit technique helps create a sense of urgency that tunes out distraction). Ten minutes later, I organized my list into the traits that I consider the best possible version of myself—roughly half of all traits I’d added to the board—and the rest, which rounded out the “complete” picture of my personality, or my “true self.”
This exercise sparked the idea for a series of work that I called “self-actualized portraits:” I chose three of the aspects of my personality I generally obscure or downplay in my outward presentation (depression, playfulness, anger) and sought to reconcile them fully to my self-understanding through a process of printing and overpainting. To begin, I selected three images of myself that aligned with the experience of each aspect, either through memory, my feelings at the time the photo was taken, or the particular context of the photo. I printed the photos on canvas sheets, then used a process of overpainting with gouache and acrylic to bring these aspects forward and communicate them overtly in the final outcome.
I shared these works not only with my cohort and professor, but also publicly on my social media platforms with the posed question, “What do you see here?” Prior to this work, I can’t imagine myself having the boldness to put my depression, playfulness and anger on public display, let alone inviting commentary. And while the transformations of this series appears to be about taking something ugly and making it beautiful, I found it to be more about approaching the relationship between my internal understanding and external expression with a sense of curiosity and possibility instead of fear and judgement. This removed the “value” I associated with each aspect, effectively proving that the “value” of these aspects lies solely in their expression: when where, and how they show up. This process of elevating the “low” aspects of my personality to works of art allowed me to fundamentally see them differently - no longer are they shameful, scary, or mysterious, but rather expanded expressions I can now tap into and communicate through my larger body of work.
Following what I felt was a successful exploration and reconciliation of formative message, I took a similar approach in exploring the second avenue uncovered in my initial work: the gap between my idealized self and my true self. To dig deeper into this, I referenced Scott Barry Kaufman’s work Transcend, which discusses the difference between the ideal self and the true self (mentioned previously in this writing). To start, I set a time limit and began listing all of my personality traits as they occurred to me (the time limit technique helps create a sense of urgency that tunes out distraction). Ten minutes later, I organized my list into the traits that I consider the best possible version of myself—roughly half of all traits I’d added to the board—and the rest, which rounded out the “complete” picture of my personality, or my “true self.”
This exercise sparked the idea for a series of work that I called “self-actualized portraits:” I chose three of the aspects of my personality I generally obscure or downplay in my outward presentation (depression, playfulness, anger) and sought to reconcile them fully to my self-understanding through a process of printing and overpainting. To begin, I selected three images of myself that aligned with the experience of each aspect, either through memory, my feelings at the time the photo was taken, or the particular context of the photo. I printed the photos on canvas sheets, then used a process of overpainting with gouache and acrylic to bring these aspects forward and communicate them overtly in the final outcome.
I shared these works not only with my cohort and professor, but also publicly on my social media platforms with the posed question, “What do you see here?” Prior to this work, I can’t imagine myself having the boldness to put my depression, playfulness and anger on public display, let alone inviting commentary. And while the transformations of this series appears to be about taking something ugly and making it beautiful, I found it to be more about approaching the relationship between my internal understanding and external expression with a sense of curiosity and possibility instead of fear and judgement. This removed the “value” I associated with each aspect, effectively proving that the “value” of these aspects lies solely in their expression: when where, and how they show up. This process of elevating the “low” aspects of my personality to works of art allowed me to fundamentally see them differently - no longer are they shameful, scary, or mysterious, but rather expanded expressions I can now tap into and communicate through my larger body of work.
Depressed, Anxious, Exhausted, Drained, Lazy, Fearful
Rage, Cold, Wild, Vicious, Ferocious, Dramatic, Powerful
Pretty, Bubble, Mischevious, Silly, Playful
Thesis III: Validation & Execution
My final work towards completing my thesis be3gan this quarter with Thesis III. At this point, students are expected to have a fairly dialed-in thesis statement, a solid draft, and a plan for executing on it and exhibiting that work in this exhibition.
Right at the end of Thesis II, I had the unbelievable opportunity to interview Jessica Helfand. She was so gracious with her communication and her time, and I soaked up all the wisdom she shared with me. It’s shared on the following pages.
In my previous self-examinations and reflections, I’d identified several aspects of myself that I wanted to address or adjust in some way or another: imposter syndrome and associated feelings of not “being enough,” my longing to be seen and understood, and my concern for the discipline of graphic design to be seen for the valuable, powerful practice that it is in society.
Bearing this in mind - I was given the opportunity at the company I work for (as a Visual Designer) to identify training or education opportunities I’d like to attend, and where I previously would have chosen some kind of online course or webinar where I could be anonymous and not have to “put myself out there,” I made a leap and registered to attend AIGA’s Design Leadership and Advocacy Conference in Washington, D.C.
My interviews with Jessica, Marysol and Sophia, and the conference content proved so valuable to my ideas for this work, and to how I approached building a framework that others might follow, as well as developing a tangible execution of this work.
Working Thesis Title, Abstract and Keywords:
Graphic Designers do this “One Simple Thing” for Great Results:
Intuitive Practice for the Complex World
This thesis proposes that a greater awareness of our world’s complexity requires graphic designers to think, behave, and operate in ways that embrace this reality, and can work towards understanding and action through a process of self-examination. This process, described here as “designing inward,” positions the individual practitioner under the microscope of critical thinking, interrogation, and problem-solving inherent in the discipline. The outcomes of designing inward—identification of experiences, influences, mindsets, and attitudes—must lead to greater inclination and enhanced ability to connect with other humans, with the discipline, and with the broader society and world. Designing inward—affecting system-wide shifts toward a more relevant and human practice through individual transformation—has the potential to drastically shift not only how graphic design perceives itself and is perceived, but also what our relationship with the complex world is now and has the potential to be in the future.
CONNECTION TO SELF:
My understanding of self incerased greatly over the process of designing inward I experimented with in GDVX791.
My deep desires to understand and to be understood, coupled with a newfound confidence in my work and practice, prompted me to take
a leap and attend the AIGA Design Leadership and Advocacy Conference.
The connections I made and the knowledge gained have been transformative in my thesis work and visual outcomes.
My understanding of self incerased greatly over the process of designing inward I experimented with in GDVX791.
My deep desires to understand and to be understood, coupled with a newfound confidence in my work and practice, prompted me to take
a leap and attend the AIGA Design Leadership and Advocacy Conference.
The connections I made and the knowledge gained have been transformative in my thesis work and visual outcomes.
CONNECTION TO OTHERS:
The practice of being in dialogue with my work has led me to think about my professional practice and how I show up in the designer/client or designer/stakeholder relationship.
I recognize (both in myself and others) a tendency towards frustration, disappointment or impatience when the work of design (and by extension, my contribution and expertise) is misunderstood, devalued, or misrepresented.
Given what I know now, I can see this response as a single point in a complex system made up of factors both within and outside of my control.
This view allows me to “zoom out” - instead of focusing on the other person as the source of my frustration, I can focus my attention on the factors and circumstances that cause misalignment (the ultimate source of frustration).
With this mindset shift, curiosity leads! The openness and authenticity of communication from this mindset create an environment of “design with” versus “design for,” collaboration over competition, and greatly improved experiences and outcomes.
The practice of being in dialogue with my work has led me to think about my professional practice and how I show up in the designer/client or designer/stakeholder relationship.
I recognize (both in myself and others) a tendency towards frustration, disappointment or impatience when the work of design (and by extension, my contribution and expertise) is misunderstood, devalued, or misrepresented.
Given what I know now, I can see this response as a single point in a complex system made up of factors both within and outside of my control.
This view allows me to “zoom out” - instead of focusing on the other person as the source of my frustration, I can focus my attention on the factors and circumstances that cause misalignment (the ultimate source of frustration).
With this mindset shift, curiosity leads! The openness and authenticity of communication from this mindset create an environment of “design with” versus “design for,” collaboration over competition, and greatly improved experiences and outcomes.
CONNECTION TO COMMUNITY (DISCIPLINE):
At the company where I work as a Visual Designer (JumpCloud), one of the first things I noticed about designing within the Marketing org was the complete lack of understanding around design and working with designers. From my interactions with more tenured employees, I understood it to be a pervasive challenge that creates a great deal of tension and frustration for everyone involved in the design process.
My initial inclination was to interpret my own challenging experiences as specific to the individuals involved. This was seemingly confirmed by other designers, working with the same individuals, who had similar experiences.
While it does have at least a little to do with the individuals and the lack of design literacy or familiarity, it’s a much more complex problem, with many more variables:
By zooming out to get a look at the entirety of the problem, it’s become possible to see the complexity, identify variables, and come up with ways we might move towards a “design with” vs. “design for” environment, improving the design experience for everyone in the Marketing organization at JumpCloud.
I absolutely believe that improving the experience of design in even one context will make it possible to improve the experience of design everywhere.Interview with
At the company where I work as a Visual Designer (JumpCloud), one of the first things I noticed about designing within the Marketing org was the complete lack of understanding around design and working with designers. From my interactions with more tenured employees, I understood it to be a pervasive challenge that creates a great deal of tension and frustration for everyone involved in the design process.
My initial inclination was to interpret my own challenging experiences as specific to the individuals involved. This was seemingly confirmed by other designers, working with the same individuals, who had similar experiences.
While it does have at least a little to do with the individuals and the lack of design literacy or familiarity, it’s a much more complex problem, with many more variables:
- Tech vertical
-
Hypergrowth startup culture
-
Big projects, finite resources
-
Embedded designer model
-
Disparate tools and processes
-
Lack of design leadership
-
Young, YOUNG teams
By zooming out to get a look at the entirety of the problem, it’s become possible to see the complexity, identify variables, and come up with ways we might move towards a “design with” vs. “design for” environment, improving the design experience for everyone in the Marketing organization at JumpCloud.
I absolutely believe that improving the experience of design in even one context will make it possible to improve the experience of design everywhere.Interview with
Interview with Jessica Helfand
- DESIGNING INWARDLY (as I’m describing it) is a “one person, at one time, doing one thing, maneuver.”
-
“DESIGN EDUCATION IS PREDICATED ON ELIMINATING VARIABLES” - we’re learning that reductivism and binaries are increasingly inadequate in today’s world. Instead of reducing, how do we develop better skills and tools for embracing complexity?
-
“The AGENCY of this moment is deeply human ... People feel galvanized to change things in their lives.”
-
Be in DIALOGUE with your work.
-
I cannot overstate the importance of being in this moment: graphic design is in a symbiotic relationship with society, and I would not think to approach design this way, or to ask these questions, if we weren’t in a cultural moment that facilitated this kind of thinking.
-
When we recognize complexity and the mutli-faceted nature of being in ourselves, we can better understand how to and the importance of honoring that in others.
-
Assimmilating new information doesn’t mean we reject or abandon the traditions or knowledge of the past - we reconcile it to the present. Honor the past, bring it into the context of the present. (Virgil Abloh)
Interview with Sophia Bosch Gomez and Marysol Ortega Pallanez
PhD Researchers, Transition Design at Carnegie Mellon University
“We tend to try to be neutral or detached from, like thinking that the context that we’re coming from or the ones that we are entering. We don’t take into consideration enough the impact of those and like even the interactions among those.” MOP
“Oftentimes I needed to maybe step back a bit not try to push my own agenda and, being aware that maybe I have this ... ideas about what we should be doing. But stepping back and thinking, okay let’s listen [to] what people living in this specific reality at this point of time, what do they have to say about like what is being done and what is missing, and what we should avoid doing rather than just jump ahead and coming up with ideas, and like, making stuff. “ MOP
“It’s so easy for us designers to go into solution mode.” MP
“We are going to be biased. We can be transformed by what other people says, but we cant get out of our body! We are always going to be us. We bring something to the table, too, and it’s okay to acknowledge that, but not to get consumed by it. Not to impose our agenda but seriously considering what other people have to say.” MOP
“The STRONG OPINION position comes when you see yourself as the ultimate expert, I have the solution, this is what we have to do ... Being a designer is understanding that you are in a constant learning process. If you position or come to the table with that mindset of, I’m here to learn, as much as you are. We’re here to share expertise, but not to impose, is what may mitigate that mindset of, ‘I’m here to tell you what to do and how to do it.’” SBG
Final Thesis Title, Abstract and Keywords:
Designing Inward: Cultivating a More Human Practice through
Self-Examination and Self-Connection
This thesis proposes that our discipline’s outward-focused framework is insufficient for addressing our relationship with society, and that an expansion of our tools, skills, and mindset is required to create lasting, meaningful change. This theory, described here as “designing inward,” positions the individual practitioner under the microscope of critical thinking, interrogation, and problem-solving native to the discipline in order to identify and take ownership of our contributions to the current relationship with society. The outcomes of this theory have the potential to drastically shift not only how individual graphic designers perceive themselves and their relationship to the discipline, but also the discipline’s relationship with society now and into the future.
Keywords: graphic design, intuitive practice, designing inward, design frameworks