Design Concept + Narrative (WIP)

(Work In Progress)

My propaganda images about global trading are intended to persuade through aversive stimulation/threat that nations rely too heavily on importing (and exporting) products; particularly those needed for the survival of the population (bare essentials).

Revised Design Statement

By using a sense of imminent threat I want to push the opinion that countries rely too heavily on the stability of global trading partners (especially for essential items like food), that we are very short-sighted when it comes to our economies, and this will all end up being a catastrophic problem.

Incorporating cultural images/icons and colours to represent different countries, I want to paint this threatening portrait of economic reliance and an eventual "implosion" (without being racist or too political). To appeal most effectively to my audience, I will probably use Australia as an example.

I believe very strongly in this issue because I feel it isn't being discussed enough and it's something we have the opportunity to address and deal with now, before it's too late.

(Initial) Design/Artistic Statement

Deciding on the final definition of my topic:

I investigated topical issues surrounding the political and economic relationship between Australia and China; the economic growth of both China and India and the impact this has on the current "Western" economic powers in the world (Europe and The Unites States). I think the current superpowers (in particular The United States) see China as this growing "threat"; already wielding eminent global power in business, cheap labour and mass production. As the "threat" continues to expand, and China outsources its labour to smaller, less developed countries and further increases productivity - it will develop an even greater stronghold of power, where other states will rely on China's business in order to grow themselves.

Australia is currently benefiting from China's continued expansion, so from a cultural viewpoint this is all a good thing. Personally however, combining the issue of economic expansion with the imminent "world recession" when the world starts running out of oil - I can see one big political and economic giant having so much control and power in so many different areas as being a major problem that will eventually implode with catastrophic consequences.

So therefore: what am I trying to push with my propaganda images? I want to use a sense of threat to say Australia, and in fact, all countries, rely too heavily on the stability of other states and powers, and this will end up slapping us all in the face. I think this is a topic that has many individual issues that tie in to the larger "global trade" issue -- because of this I think my images will have the potential to have more intricate, multi-faceted meanings.

Semi Permanent

On April 4 & 5 I attended the "Semi-Permanent" Design Conference at Darling Harbour. There are a lot of comments I could make on what I gained from attending, but the main point that relate to my studies in the Digital Design Studio class was related to:

• The different perspectives and attitudes people in the design, art and journalism industries have..
  

It sounds vague, but after sitting through two days of career wisdom and advice on what to do and what not to do both creatively and in business, hearing about and witnessing some of the amazing things people in the industry are creating and getting loads of free goodies - - my brain was pretty overloaded. What works well for someone doesn't necessarily work well for everyone, so the advice we received from various successful entrepreneurs was more interesting to me than fundamental to my design experience.

The central message I took out of the experience was all about perspective. As a designer or an artist or even as a writer or a journalist you have an opportunity to express messages or themes in ways that really make people think and consider them seriously. In our technology saturated society we've become numb to some of the truly beautiful (and truly ugly) things that take place in the world, and as a result we begin to ignore them. We see the news on TV; countless images of the depths of depravity in human nature -- all packaged up and thrown at us, commented on by a monotone news reader. Then, a minute later, something new, different; replacing what came before. Impact - absorb - ignore.

Expressive art forms can take the same issue or situation that we've seen on the news or maybe an issue we've never even considered before or didn't know about -- and really force us to reflect and think. With this kind of visual communication it seems a greater impact can be made through a smaller audience.

Mostly this perspective came out of Semi-Permanent's speaker Spencer Platt - a photojournalist from New York. He spoke about the impact of single images and about all his experiences in remote and war-torn parts of the world. For me, he was definitely the best speaker there, and I got the most out of what he had to say (and his amazing photographs).

The point I'm making is that I've never really thought about art in this way before, which is bizarre because now I guess I feel that being able to have this impact as an artist or a designer is what art is truly about. This gives me a lot more to think about with my topics, my visual language and what I really want to be saying when I display an image or write something.

It's very deep to have this awareness that as a designer (or as an artist or a writer) I can have the power to affect other people's view of the world.

India, China and... Australia?

My ideas for a propaganda sort of "message" have been building and changing as I do research into the cultures and economies of both India and China. I've been brainstorming visual interpretations of possible issues to choose, and at the moment I've been looking at a particular question/issue (see below).

Will Australia be advantaged or disadvantaged by the economic growth of both China and India?

The answer to this issue is very murky ("YES" might say prices will plummet from Chinese and Indian products that are made more cheaply and Aussie products will be driven from the markets, causing job losses; "NO" might push that the Australian economy benefits as we sell minerals and products to these economically expanding states) - so pushing a point either way would be really interesting because there is no clear cut answer.

At the moment I kind of think it's both, and I can visualise a whole range of angsty pictures and posters and messages for both that I can "push" on people: so in my developmental work I think I'll explore both sides of the argument/issue further.

I'm not completely settled on this "Australia disadvantaged YES/NO?" issue, but at the moment it's one of my primary avenues of research!