Dissecting Designers: An Interview with Steven Heller
by Craig Schlanser
March 16, 2007Did you ever wonder where great designers get their ideas from? Steven Heller does. In his latest book, The Anatomy of Design: Uncovering The Influences and Inspirations in Modern Graphic Design (co-authored by Mirko Ilic), Heller compares the work of 50 contemporary graphic designers to the work of many other designers, past and present. By uncovering the sources of inspiration in a designer's work, Heller challenges the idea that creative design solutions develop in a vacuum. Here, Heller talks about recurring design tropes, the fine line between borrowing and stealing, and the quest for originality.
Schlanser : If designers are inspired by the work of other designers, then what about design writers? In other words, where did you get the idea for this book?
Heller : The idea for the book came from a perpetual interest I have in derivation, inspiration, and plagiarism. I've written or co-written various articles and books on the theme (i.e. Borrowed Design {with Julie Lasky}, Van Nostrand Press, and Genius Moves {with Mirko Ilic}, Northlight Books). In this case I wanted to examine which design languages (and motifs) are so common that they recur in work that spans a century or more. And I wanted to see how much of these are tropes and conceits that are simply integrated into new and novel work versus copied. I laid the idea before Mirko Ilic saying I wanted to do something like a side of beef, where you cutaway the facade of a particular work and then dissect all the component parts. Originally, I just thought we'd show four or five influential representative pieces, but Mirko being Mirko went crazy and started locating ten, twenty, thirty similarities for each original work. By the time we finished collecting, Mirko had three or four levels of inspiration—some of which downright stealing—for every major piece we selected. He also devised the idea to show all this on gatefolds.
Schlanser : In the book, you compare examples of recent graphic design to works from the past and present. Why did you do this?
Heller : As I said before, we want to show how language develops. So, it’s necessary to show the past 100, in some cases 500 years of graphic endeavor. It’s cool to see it in one timeline like that too.
Schlanser : Each main example of design is compared to roughly 30 other samples of work. As far as comparisons go, what was more challenging: developing the list or narrowing it down?
Heller : Good question. The most challenging is figuring out the main piece. Arguably, not all the main pieces were worthy of a main stage spotlight, but we decided that even those that were not paradigms of design accomplishment were windows on design invention. So finding those that would provide the proper gateway was exceedingly difficult.
Schlanser : Since the release of The Anatomy of Design, have you heard from any of the designers in the book about the accuracy of your comparisons?
Heller : Not one. I'd be interested to hear that. The fact is, we're not accusing anyone of anything. We're only showing that there is a continuum and it’s obvious which images (for any number of reasons) fit into that continuum. I know, for example, that with the famous Penis map, many of the other "erotic" maps were not specifically influenced by it, nor was it particularly influenced by them. You see the main piece is not the most original, and the first piece in the timeline is not the most original either. It’s simply an aerial view of the landscape. So, no value judgments are overtly made.
Schlanser : While looking through your book, part of me wanted to make my own guesses about what the work was inspired from, but the other part of me wanted to cheat, flip the page, and see what you picked. Was the book set up to encourage this?
Heller : The book is designed to be interactive within limits. I think once you see the timeline pieces you start thinking what's left out—or what really doesn't fit. But that's the nature of most books dealing with the history of visuals. You remember things that others do not, and it’s a game to see what the "experts" forgot and you remember.
Schlanser : The idea that most design derives from another source brings to mind the biblical statement about there being nothing new under the sun. If this is true, should designers stop worrying about being original?
Heller : Paul Rand used to quote Meis Van Der Rohe as saying it’s hard enough being good. To be original, too, is much more difficult. I think originality happens as a consequence of creation, but if you are strict with yourself, and do not accept clichés, then you'll be more apt to be original.
Schlanser : In the introduction to the book, you mention that designers are not typically conscious of the sources of their work. Does this lack of awareness help or hinder the creative process?
Heller : Well, I'm not sure it hurts or helps in the long run. In fact, it may hamper the process if you're too conscious of what preceded you. But I do think it’s useful to know history for the old canard that you don't repeat it. At the same time, I think it’s useful to know all aspects of one's field—it’s called literacy.
Schlanser : Many of the examples in your book, like Stephen Schmidt's cover for Karim Rashid: Evolution, are clearly borrowing from the past. How do you make the distinction between borrowing and stealing?
Heller : Ah yes, borrowing and stealing. One person's theft is another's inspiration. Picasso said something like when he does it, it’s inspiration, when some one does it to him, it’s theft. That makes sense. As I said before, we're not making the value judgment—that's the reader's job—if I interviewed everyone represented in the book, I'd get a first hand report. But we're just saying these are all part of the language system. The answer to your question, though, is if you are premeditatedly copying for financial or other gain, then you are a thief. If you are using the material as a resource, as a means of getting from point a to point b, then it’s borrowing. Frankly, if you want to be literal, if you don't give it back you are a crook. For me, that means that if you are not making something new out of the past, you're doing something wrong.
Schlanser : Madison Avenue has long been accused of co-opting the slogans, images, and graphics of the radical left (e.g. Che Guevara). Yet in one of the examples in your book, Cooper Greene's iRaq poster, we see a designer appropriating the look of a recent ad campaign. Who's co-opting whom?
Heller : That's a pretty clear example of parody in the service of political commentary. The courts say it’s okay to parody because it is a critique of the original. I agree with this piece, it’s a brilliant use of a popular ad campaign to make a bold statement about injustice. The Apple campaign is also quite unique, but it wasn't totally original, as we show in the book. Still, the blending of art, design, music, sillo, etc. results in a unique entity for iPod.
Schlanser : One last thing: With the growing number of books on design (ahem), can designers really continue to plead ignorance about the sources of their work?
Heller : Sure. You can plead ignorance to anything. We have a huge amount of information at our fingertips, but you've got to be sickened by how few things we actually know, and designers are no exception.
ABOUT THE SUBJECT: Steven Heller, founder and co-chair of the MFA "Designer As Author" program at the School of Visual Arts, has authored and co-authored over 100 books on graphic design and popular culture. He is currently completing "Iron Fists: Branding the Totalitarian State" for Phaidon Press. www.hellerbooks.com
