Screen Prints

A shirt designed to carry a simple message written by Martin Richard, 8, who was killed in the recent Boston tragedy. Little brother showing of the shirt.

Screen Printing/Slingshot

Jorge Rosales

Art 301                             Screen Printing

April 22, 2013

            I think it was very interesting to see how screen-printing is a common use to make propaganda. A lot of times we see shirts and poster which are screen printed but we never stop to think on how they are done and how easy it is to actually make a screen print. Kazoo’s talk about the power of art was also very interesting because it goes to show how we must be conscience of what message we are putting out into the public. Her example of the GAP creating a tee shirt that had “Manifest Destiny” in big bold letters is a perfect example of artists simply creating something in order to sell and not thoroughly thinking about what message they are expressing. If you print a shirt with Manifest Destiny it further reinforces that genocide of the natives was justified because the Europeans that came here had “the right to expand westward”. Not only is it sponsoring genocide but also violence and war such as the war against Mexico where many losses occurred on both sides of the border. I think Slingshot is definitely one of the most surprising organizations I have heard of because the way they handle their business is very unique. It brings in the element of community all the way across the board and to have a newspaper and planner each with different artists and writers is something that can empower a community. I think the way Slingshot approached their newspaper is something that many organizations can replicate because a lot of the times we talk about incorporating the community but it rarely gets so integrated and open as the way Slingshot handles it.

Taller Tupac Amaru

Jorge Rosales

March 31, 2013                     Taller Tupac Amaru

ART 301

            I thought it was very interesting that USF chose to bring Taller Tupac Amaru to the Thatcher gallery because they are on the more “radical” side of the art world. They have beautiful work but in a setting like USF it was a bit of a surprise. It is very inspirational work because it focuses all on creating a better world or at least a more conscience world that we live in. My favorite piece at the gallery was “Zapateado De Los Muertos” which is a woman in front of a green background with a skull covering half her face and she is looking down at her feet. This image seemed very mysterious and powerful because it was a reminder to people that death is something that exists in our everyday lives. I sat in front of this poster for at least thirty minutes contemplating what the meaning was behind such an image.                                                                                      During the panel discussion one of the artists said something very important. Favianna said that most of the times we ask artists to make posters for us after we have our ideas set on what it is we want. She told us that this is a huge mistake because we are simply asking the artist to take action by helping us with an already conceptualized idea. We must include the artist in the process of brainstorming and coming up with ideas according to Favianna. I fully agree with her because it is the truth, most of the time we use the artist for the labor and not the input of ideals. She also stated something along the lines of how sometimes artists think on a bigger almost impossible scale sometimes and how this can be helpful because it begins a change in conscience in people who see their art work. I think if the artist is included in the ideals of a movement instead of just the process it creates a stronger piece of work where the artist is also connected to the movement instead of printing/creating already set in place ideals.   

Designing Pornotopia

Jorge Rosales

March 24 2013          Designing Pornotopia

ART 301

            In “Designing Pornotopia” we get a very important message which is that we need not to only change the way design is used but change our own mindsets. In order for design to change and how it is used we must first change our mindsets. If we try to change design before changing out mindsets than the design work will still be the same that we created before trying to create change.                                                                                              An important aspect that comes up I think is when the author mentions the street as a place where we already incorporate commercial in. This is important because if we want to create change in the world it must begin with aspects of community. You cannot just send out one broad message to the entire world without taking into consideration how the space in their surroundings is set up. The street is considered a public space yet often we see capital advertisements surrounding it and us. I think that changing our mindset goes along with changing our surroundings and taking ownership of that public space and no longer allowing dangerous, capitalist propaganda to take over our public space.  

Week 3 response

I think Amnesty International is a big, important example of Design and Social change because they are a group that raises awareness for things that usually go unnoticed or are seen but easily ignored. An example is this image which shows children on a seesaw with weapons yet it is the same sign we see near playgrounds. I think it is interesting that they chose a common image which is slightly edited to convey such a powerful message.

The 2nd example of design and social change I think is fairly important is the floppy disk. Although not very artistic looking or beautiful, the floppy did function exactly the way it was supposed to. It was a small, portable way to carry information from computer to computer. It revolutionized the way we exchanged files and memory in our computers and giving way to a more portable form of media sharing that had not been available before its commercialization.                                                                                                  

Week 2 Response

Jorge Rosales                      

February 22 2013                     Weekly Response 2

ART 301                    

            Katherine McCoy’s writing brings up a very important in her writing when she is speaking about the “white lab coats” that many designers put on. She criticizes designers for acting as if they are able to design things without fearing consequences of how those used or what context they are put in. I have to agree with her that we have to be conscience of our surroundings and the context in which our work can be placed. Her point about how design has created self censorship is also very important because it is the truth. We now have an idea of design as something that should be made to be visually appealing and pleasant or to sell something. When we see something deemed “radical” we shun it as being too extreme as if political or thought provoking design were outside the limits of our realm. In reality we must take this power of thought provoking visual art and use it to create a better place here on this Earth. If we try to push ourselves away from this political/thought provoking setting then it only means that the truth is that our work, our design is always inside a certain political/thought provoking realm. In “Obey The Giant” by Rick Poynor we are given a final statement in which we are told, “that there are too many occasions when it is confiscated, controlled, doctored, diluted and sold back to us with its meanings changed for completely different purposes”. Rick is touching upon the censorship that revolves around graphic design and how it has affected how we see things. Sometimes our work is taken, modified and forced to fit other contexts with both negative and positive consequences. These two articles touch upon something that seems to be forgotten in the design world which is that we must not be afraid to push the boundaries, on the contrary we must continue to push them. For too long the design community has been satisfied with designing logo’s for American consumers and not enough time trying to change the consumer society in which design is restricted to only sell products.