Meaning of the ‘G’ Word and the ‘D’ Word

Rethinking globalization and design

By Linda Fu              

My thanks to ICOGRADA, and the AIGA Centre for Cross-Cultural Design for inviting me to address this conference.

The effects of globalization have undoubtedly spread across the world. It is equally apparent that all of us here are operating in this ‘global environment’ either as practicing or future designers or design-related professionals. As we gather here in Seattle, from different parts of the world, attempting to Define Design on a Changing Planet, there is no better time for us to re-examine the meanings of the ‘G’ word and the ‘D’ word. In this instance ‘G’ stands not for graphic but for globalization, and ‘D’ for design.

Both globalization and design are broad topics. Instead of attempting to cover all aspects of each, I will focus on the cultural sphere of globalization and the communication aspect of design.

Meaning of globalization and its implications for design

Ten years ago, when Renato Ruggiero, then Director General of WTO stated that globalisation was a reality that “overwhelms all others”¹, he did not overstate the phenomenon. In one way or the other, for good and for worse, we are witnessing the tremendous impact of what we call globalisation on the world – on nation states, organizations, professions and individuals.

Globalisation has become ‘the’ term of our time, adopted quickly in scholarly, popular, and casual discourses alike. The problem is, the concept of globalization is often left undefined while being overused to an extent that it is likened to the term pornography – hard to define yet easy to spot. While it is convenient to use a buzz, ubiquitous and elastic word such as globalisation when people attempt to describe, justify or understand this current phenomenon, it does not help us to understand the world in which we are living in, or make sense of the hopes and ills, the advantages and disadvantages, the benefits and costs, the opportunities and threats.

So what is globalisation? Where are we now in the course of globalisation? What are the pressing issues of globalisation? And, perhaps of more relevance, what does globalisation mean to the design profession?

Smaller world, bigger responsibility

In defining the term, I draw on Robertson's notion that globalisation “as a concept refers both to the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole”². In my view, globalisation is both a phenomenon and a process through which the world has become smaller and bigger at the very same time and for the very same reasons. The idea of a bigger world is a less articulated, but important concept, which I would like to emphasise. We are all familiar with the expression “the world is getting smaller” but we rarely hear the opposite, because it seems to be a statement of the obvious for what is happening in this time and age. However, the obvious is often false, and truth often lies in the opposite.

While some aspects of globalisation can be described as somehow shrinking the world, it is partial, one sided and can be misleading if one thinks that it is all that globalisation means. With the help of advanced telecommunication and transportation technologies, the world is more accessible than ever for those who can afford to take advantage of such technologies. However it is precisely because the world is more reachable, that the circulation of our designs becomes wider. Therefore our stage is indeed getting bigger, and with this growing opportunity our responsibility is getting greater. The understanding of globalisation is not complete without considering both sides of the coin.

The temporal and spatial factors

There is a misconception that globalisation is a new phenomenon. Despite the term globalisation only coming in to wide use in the 1980s, the phenomenon can be traced back to 19th Century and has been discussed in terms of colonisation and internationalisation. In fact, according to the World Bank[i], we are now living in an era of the third stage of globalisation. The first stage of globalisation occurred between 1870 and 1914, with the second stage identified as the period from the 1950s to about 1980. These eras are identified as such due to the intensity of international economic links through trade, foreign investment and immigration. The current stage of globalisation is accelerating at an unprecedented rate, impacting a much greater population, and affecting affairs far beyond the flow of world trade that marked the previous eras.

Looking back, the first stage of globalisation benefited only the colonists and was ended by World War I. The second surge of global economic activity after World War II failed to bring benefits to the world except those countries considered as having ‘competitive advantages’ – whatever that means. A few years ago, I helped with the Southern Hemisphere contribution to a United Nations project designed by Helmut Langer. While communicating with colleagues in the Pacific Islands, I experienced the reality of the gap between the haves and the have-nots. While we enjoy the convenience of having the latest means of telecommunication at our disposal, people in less developed countries do not even have a basic phone, let alone access to the Internet. Indeed, research data shows that inter-country inequality actually increased as the world matched into the 3rd stage of globalisation[1]. So what does the third wave of globalization have in store for the world in general, and our profession in particular?

Cultural globalization and its critiques

Although globalization has been approached traditionally and primarily as an economic phenomenon, contemporary studies into globalization include additional spheres – particularly its influence on politics and cultures. Discussions on the political implications of globalization have focused on the threat it poses to the power and sovereignty of nation states; while concern about the cultural implication of globalization centers around the threat posed by the circulation of information, ideas, and images from the ‘West’ to the ‘Rest’ and the impact on the nature and survival of local cultures. As design is a time-space specific cultural activity, it is in our professional interest to have a grip on the criticism directed towards the globalization of culture.

In short, studies into cultural globalization raise concerns that the process will eventually result in a homogenous world culture. Critics warn that existing differences between the many cultures on the planet could be erased and replaced by a ‘global capitalist monoculture’ - essentially a consumer culture created and promoted by Western cultural dominance. More specifically, as a result of the overwhelming media and multinational brand power that America possesses over other nation states, it has been observed that ‘globalisation’ and ‘Americanisation’ have become largely indistinguishable terms[ii]. In the tradition of post-colonialism theory, the term Coca-Colonization gained a certain currency during the 1940s and 1950s, suggesting the imposition of American cultural values on the world through the spread of its consumer products. In contemporary literature, the number of similar expressions is growing. In addition to the repopularising of ‘Coca-Colonization’, we now find terms such as ‘McDonaldization’, ‘Disneyization’ and ‘McDisneyization’. Collectively, critics such as Howes, Ritzer and Liska use these terms to describe the phenomenon of globalisation and express the growing concern towards American cultural domination on the global stage.

We are part of the solution, but for what cause?

The idea of a standardized advertising approach to the global market, championed by renowned marketing guru Professor Levitt of Harvard in 1983, provides no better example of how the above concerns may relate to our profession. Following the direction of the world economy, Levitt suggested that the consumption communities were to be viewed as global in nature, and local communities had little relevance in the larger framework of a global economy. Declaring that “The world’s needs and desires have been irrevocably homogenized”³, he argued, “Different cultural preferences, national tastes and standards, and business institutions are vestiges of the past”⁴. Based on this assumption and the logic of capitalism, comes the suggestion that advertising agencies need to align with their clients’ move to become globalise, and to sell products to the global consumer market through a kind of ‘one sight—one sound’ message.

The standardized advertising approach to the global market still enjoys considerable support, and many experts count on the help of visual communication as a way to overcome the language problems in global advertising. In an article entitled “Global ads say it with pictures” for example, the authors suggest that “visual imagery is more powerful and precise than verbal description (which leaves too much room for personal interpretation)” in global advertising[iii]. Is visual language powerful? Very. Is visual language precise? Not quite (and I will get back to this point later). It is certain, though, whether by active participation or by default, whether we realise it or not, designers are not spectators but participants in the process of globalisation.

This level of participation has many implications for the profession, among which I would like to emphasise the following two. Firstly, we have become one of the privileged groups that have acquired a certain power to create, to construct, and to represent images and worldviews of our own culture for the consumption of a cross-cultural audience – as well as to create, to construct, and to represent images of other cultures for the consumption of our domestic audiences. In both directions, we are in effect shaping the way people perceive the world by promoting a certain ideology at the expense of another. Secondly, while the circulation of our designs has become wider, our stage is getting bigger, and our responsibility is getting greater.

As the design profession has emerged as a powerful force in helping to shape the cultural landscapes of the world, we are facing the globalisation challenge from ideal to practice. At an ideological level, we need to have a stance on issues such as whether the world would be a better place under a homogeneous cultural condition or a heterogeneous one; and whether or not we should respect and adapt to the local people and their cultures in the design of cross-cultural advertisements. This ideological consciousness guides all our judgments and decisions – be they ethical, operational or creative.

Designers can make a difference

The possibility of a ‘global capitalist monoculture’ is not just academic, it is very real. In my own experience, there are no shortages of situations in which clients express their desire, in one way or the other, for the design outcome to have a taste of ‘Americanness’ to benefit their cause, whether it is promoting national sports or consumer products. Such situations challenge our conscience and our judgment. Here are two different approaches that clearly expressed the stance of the designers toward Disneyisation: one was designed by James Victore and appeared in New York, and the other is found in Singapore as part of the revamped identity of an upmarket hotel, the New Majestic (designer unknown at this stage

A few years ago, I was commissioned to design the identity for the Australia-Korea Foundation, a bilateral government body. I was given ‘total creative freedom’, but with one condition – the logo must be based on the image of a kangaroo. This could have easily turned into a case of ‘visual kangarooisation’, but with this in mind, I fused symbols of both fascinating cultures into a design, which celebrated the diversity, and interconnectness of the two nations.

The point I am making here is that, just as the global modifies the local, local practices can also have an impact on the global. To this end, every bit of our effort counts in helping to prevent the much-predicted homogenous world culture from happening. In this regard, I commend the AIGA for initiating the Center for Cross Cultural Design, and for its effort to help develop a much-needed sense of awareness, understanding and respect towards the world of different cultures.

The meaning of design in an age of globalization

Meaning has two aspects in terms of design: one concerns the activity of design, as to how it is perceived by the public and by ourselves; and the other concerns the visual language of design, as to the crux of communicating intended meanings to target audiences through our rather unorthodox yet ever popular language. I will start by taking a critical and concise look at the meaning of the former, and then move to the latter with examples and discussions.

Meaning of design

Design always means something personal to each individual: it may mean a profession, a commission, an experience, an expression, an ambition, a religion, or any addition to, and/or any combination of the above. Terminology wise, if we search an English dictionary for the term ‘graphic design’ or its newest version ‘visual communication design’ for some definition, we will more than likely be disappointed – if not surprised or offended – either by its non-existence or the superficial interpretation of a term we feel so close to and passionate about. Given that there is no entry of our profession in most English dictionaries, including the latest version of The Oxford Dictionary for International Business, does the 1993 version of The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. Which includes the term graphic design but defines it as ‘decoration’ or ‘picture accompanying text’ gives us any comfort? How about graphic design being defined as “The art or skill of combining text and pictures in advertisements, magazines, or books” in the 2004 version of The Australian Oxford Dictionary? Obviously, these definitions sell our profession short. But most importantly, these approaches fail to acknowledge the true meaning and the ultimate function of the design activity – to communicate.

From the 1990s, universities around the world rushed into changing the names of their respective faculties, replacing the term ‘graphic’ with ‘visual communication’. Despite this change of name, the existing programs and the state of mind of educators by and large remain intact. Following the empirical tradition of the discipline, university programs focus mainly on aspects such as aesthetic, method and technique. Communication theory, critical thinking, social and cultural sensitivity – crucial to the intended and interpreted meanings of our creations, and the effectiveness of design as a mean of communication – are often neglected. In my capacity as an academic, during my presentation at the Re-inventing Design Education in the University International Conference in 2000, I asked the question – are we serious about nurturing visual communicators or are we simply paying lip service, given the lack of meaningful adaptation from curriculum to discourse to assessment?

We often complain about society’s lack of understanding of our profession. In this regard, I would like to quote the wisdom of Massima Vignelli: “There is not a clear idea of what a graphic designer is. Do you wonder why? Look around. We are getting what we deserve”[iv]. It is true that the society does not yet fully appreciate our profession, but only we can improve this situation. I hope some serious soul searching including redefining our own profession both literally and in substance – as we are doing here in this conference – can help solve the problem. Without a real commitment, the next generation of designers will be dealing with the same decades-old complaint, and the same question will be valid for years to come.

Meanings in the works of design: meaning—a prerequisite for visual language

Not every visual element can be taken for granted as language. According to Hall[v], to be considered as language, the image should be able to function as a sign and should be organised with other signs into a system that is capable of carrying and expressing meaning. If we accept the notion that our profession is ultimately about communication, then we need to pay greater attention to the importance of meaning in our works – like all professional communicators do.

Communication only takes place when participants are able to use and interpret the signs that make up the message between them. One person speaking to another does not automatically constitute communication: If the listener is able to make sense of the meaning of the verbal language, they are communicating; If the listener can make no sense of the spoken words, the communication is dysfunctional; If the perceived meaning of what has been said differs from the intended meaning, we have miscommunication. In communication studies, when a message fails to communicate its meaning to the intended audience, no matter how well articulated, such verbal signs achieve nothing more than being audible – therefore are considered simply as ‘noise’. The same principle applies to visual communication. If a work of design fails to communicate meaningfully to the target audience, it fails its ultimate function and therefore becomes ‘visual pollution’ – a term I use as a visual variation of ‘noise’. Designs of this kind, unless good enough to be considered as fine art, serve no purpose other than to pollute our natural and cultural environments.

Aberrant decoding is hardly precise

We now get back to the notion of preciseness of visual language. Contrary to the wishful thinking that the visual is more precise than its verbal and written counterpart in global advertising, some characteristics of visual language in fact make it harder to achieve the so-called ‘preferred reading’. Some examples follow:

(1) The meaning of an image is highly negotiable in a cultural system; many extra-textural factors can affect the outcome of acceptance or rejection.

Both the Red Cross and the Red Crescent share the same humanitarian principles and values. However, the rigidness of religious value is often hard to compromise and therefore, greater sensitivity is required in building visual identity.

The branding of Darkie was changed to Darlie together with a modification of the logo mark in 1987, as Colgate bowed to public pressure at home in America. In the global market, however, the brand name in local languages remain to be read as ‘Black Man’ and the image still perceived by the locals as ‘a black man’ in many of its overseas markets – in spite of the change. The intent to remove racial remarks from the existing identity is by and large unnoticed in those foreign cultures where racial tension and sensitivity are relatively low.

(2) The vocabulary of visual language expands and changes according to time and space; thus meanings are often unsettled.

The following example looks into the visual vocabulary of a five-pointed star with exactly the same shape in the same genre – the design of national flags.  In the context of the national flag of the United States, each of the stars symbolises a State of the Union; the only five-pointed star in the Australian national flag stands for Epsilon Crucis, one of the five stars of the Southern Cross; while the stars in the national flag of Singapore represent the five ideals of the country - democracy; peace; progress; justice and equality.

(3) The grammar of visual language is undefined and constantly being modified

Meanings of the following crosses differ, and are by and large self defined. Apart from the well-known Red Cross logo that is red on a white background, the reversed colour scheme is the century-old national symbol of Switzerland. A green cross inside a circle is the logo of a hospital; the blue cross is a animal rights charity; add four arrows to the blue cross, we have a logo for a organization helping homeless and disadvantage women; the yellow cross is the logo stands for the Faculty of Nursing in an university; and the very same red cross with a shadow and two tablets is a pharmacy logo.

The abovementioned examples, in their simplest forms with least possible variables, demonstrate that aesthetic codes allow, invite, or even encourage considerable negotiation of meaning according to cultural norms, beliefs and values. Both the perceptual message and the cultural message embodied in a work of visual communication design are, in effect, received by its reader at one and at the same time. Therefore, it is hard to expect that visual message can be read in a linear dimension like text. Aesthetic codes in visual language are crucially affected by cultural factors during both the encoding and decoding process – particularly on connotative, ideological and mythical levels. As Eco rightly suggests the reading of aesthetic text is a kind of ‘aberrant decoding’[vi]. It goes without saying that the belief of the preciseness of visual language is just a myth.

Get ready for the compounded communication challenge

Due to a higher degree of ‘interculturalness’ between the designer and the audience in the context of globalisation, both the act of ‘aberrant decoding’ and the challenge for professional communicators will be more significant. Interculturalness goes beyond language difference; it includes historical, political, social and aesthetic differences between participants. For example, when the branding design turned French Connection UK into FCUK, it spelt problem for the company in America, and yet there were no such problem in Australia and in many Asian countries, albeit for very different reasons.

As soon as a message produced in one culture is processed in another culture, we are in a situation of intercultural communication. In view of intercultural communication theory, it is more difficult to achieve the preferred interpretation of a work of design in a foreign culture by audiences with entirely different cultural experiences and backgrounds. As a result, the globalisation phenomenon adds a new dimension to the already problematic language of visual communication design, and the challenge for designers to communicate effectively is compounded in cross-cultural settings. Although this challenge is not new given we are now at the third stage of globalisation, it is fair to say that the profession is by and large under-prepared when confronting it.

 If visual communication design is in the business of creating optimum communication solutions to a design problem, we must be more mindful about meaning, culture and audience. We need to first understand the essence and scope of the problem before we rush to squeeze our creative juices to come up with a creative solution. My previous research into the communication of branding messages in an intercultural context, found that the intended and perceived meanings of the visual representation of Western brands are often not matched by their authors and readers. With many variables, such as the political and economic climate, attitudes, cultural values and tradition, cultural norms and codes, misunderstandings arising from cultural differences can undermine even the most reputable brands or the most accomplished designs. It appears that cultural compatibility is the crux of the problem, which can make or break the communication objectives of a design in a foreign market. There is clearly an urgent need for visual communication designers to recognise the importance of cultural compatibility in the course of encoding visual messages for a foreign market if their communication objectives are to be achieved.

Conclusions

For a profession which is caught in the middle of the cultural struggles while confronting the intercultural communication challenges in an ever globalise marketplace, globalisation and its effects cannot be adequately understood as merely ‘operating in a smaller world’. We cannot lose sight of the big picture – our wider stage, dynamic audience, greater challenge, and bigger responsibility that result from globalisation.

Visual language is powerful. As one of the privilege groups of culture elites, we need to realise what we are capable of: we are capable of helping to promote harmony or discord/strife; we can help spread love or hatred; we can help build an inclusive world or an exclusive one. In the context of globalisation, recognising that our attitude, ethic, practice and creative outcomes have consequences for the many cultures that share this planet with us can raise our consciousness and help us to exercise the power of representation more responsibly.

A more culturally sensitive and socially conscious design approach is essential for the profession to relate itself to the globalisation conjunctures, communicate effectively across cultures, and contribute positively to the many cultures of the world. Amid the globalisation and intercultural communication challenges, our designs have to be made meaningful to a culturally dynamic audience if we are to accomplish our professional duty, and to promote the equality, dignity, diversity and unity of humankind in order to serve our social and cultural obligation as cultural elites and global citizens.