We all love fads—for a while. When does a fad become a trend, what do trends tell us about ourselves,
and how do they affect the evolution of design? A look at this year’s STEP 100 winners
shows us where we are. ¶ “Trend” is a dirty word. No one wants to think their work is based on
an ephemeral fad. At the same time, we can’t resist the latest thing. It’s new, it’s fun, it’s young
and hip, and absurd—and we love its energy. We can’t help but be affected by it. ¶ Is this a bad
thing? Does a trend have to be trendy? Or do the tides of trends reflect real changes and developments
in our world? ¶ Of course they do. ¶ Fads bubble up out of the ebullience of youth,
who work hard on being diΩerent from their parents (and similar to their peers). They do crazy things. They do lovable things, too, and then all us old people start co-opting their fads. After a
while, what was a fad becomes a trend, as elements of the fad enter the design vocabulary. With
more time, those elements acquire polish as successive individuals redesign it, and it becomes
an accepted, even classic, design trope. If we’re smart about it, we figure out why the fad started
in the first place, and explore other ways of expressing the ideas behind it. ¶ To see how trends
work, look back—the present moves too fast to see it clearly. Trends are driven not only by reactions
against existing aesthetics, but also by technology, available image sources, and, of course,
cultural or political change. Let’s consider the 1990s as an example.
1. 1990s TRENDS
It was a decade of relentless, extravagant experimentation. In researching my article, “A Decade of Design Trends” for HOW magazine, February 2003, I found four main drivers for the trends:
DRIVER 1: Aesthetic reaction
to the bright pastels, decorative
geometry, and mannered compositions
of the ’80s |
DRIVER 2: New technology—
the Mac, QuarkXPress, Adobe
Photoshop and Illustrator, et
al. Power to the designer!
|
DRIVER 3: New image archives
and sources, plus cultural reaction
to corporate sterility |
DRIVER 4: Cultural reaction to
slick, false communications |
RESPONSE: A return to classic
typography and illustration
in layouts inspired by book design —in dark, earthy colors
|
RESPONSE: Mixed fonts and
sizes in oddly shaped copy
blocks; dense, collaged, layered
designs; digitized imagery; novelty
and distressed fonts; grotesque
assemblages of archival
images into figures; the ascendance
of archived images over
original illustration See Nancy’s very own pet theory* |
RESPONSE: Retro image sampling;
vernacular sampling;
techno-look graphics; deliberate “un-design” |
RESPONSE: Industrial-look designs
and industrial materials;
hand-bound books using twigs
and corrugated stock; trompe
l’oeil, or genuine-artifact concepts,
such as medical records
or personal journals; real people,
in snapshot-style photos;
human-story concepts |
By the late ’90s, designers got tired of all this visual extravagance and rediscovered minimalism, naturally.
*TECHNOLOGY AND TRENDS
Any time technology gives designers new control over production,
we get an efflorescence of experimentation.
1830s: Color lithography on stone plates was perfected. Designers
delighted in drawing directly on the stone with soft, responsive
crayons, and the French poster was transformed by Jules
Cheret from all-type handbills into a swirling froth of lovely ladies
in full color. Others followed.
1920s: Constructivists took over printers’ typecases to design
abstract compositions with fonts and rules only. They abandoned
printers’ composition sticks so they could set the metal elements
at angles, anchoring them to the platen with plaster or glue.
1950s: Photostat technology allowed designers to transform
existing faces, overlap letterforms, and draw their own calligraphic
fonts. Think of Herb Lubalin’s fluid, interlaced logotypes,
and, ultimately, Victor Moscoso’s curvy, psychedelic poster texts.
1990s: The Mac put the designer in full control of type and image,
while eliminating the need to make color separations for graphics
by hand. We got bitmapped images, deconstructed fonts, layered
graphics, and collaged photography. Original illustration declined
as CD-ROM archives exploded, giving designers almost infinite
choice among images from across time and across the globe, which
they could then transform at will.
2. PROFESSIONALIZATION
Underneath the trends, good design—regardless of its sources or
vocabularies—kept up a steady evolution toward increased professionalism.
The public responded with increased awareness and appreciation
of design.
This year’s crop shows us that most of the ’90s trends are still
active—probably because there were so many we’re still trying to
make sense of them. However, the style elements have been polished,
integrated into the canon, and redeployed in clean, strong
compositions. Techno, retro, and industrial styles are still around,
but instead of seeing entire pieces in these styles, we’re seeing elements
used as details in spacious, modernist layouts. Target’s park
bench fundraiser catalog, designed by HartungKemp [1], is bolted
together and uses the boxed-copy device of industrial style, but it
also has an asymmetrical cover with a strong silhouetted graphic on
it. Wink’s designs for Frango [2] show retro elements on pure chocolate
grounds in minimal compositions.
We still see some genuine-artifact items, but instead of being
campy, they’re exquisitely designed. The Six Feet Under [3] book
is designed as a scrapbook, and the Balthazar Cookbook [4] quotes
19th-century sources, but both have clean, open layouts with
strong contrast and hierarchy. In short, ’90s fads have been professionalized,
and basic principles of good design have taken over.