Anatomy

RIP Émigré Magazine

A few weeks ago, I received an E-mail from “émigré.com” announcing and soliciting their “last” issue of Émigré magazine sincerely titled “The End.” It is offered with a twist of unusual marketing gimmick of giving away a porcelain plate as bonus. The end of Émigré came to no surprise. Its steady decline was apparent from 2001, when the magazine gradually stopped publishing writings about graphic design and even resorted to CD-ROM formats. Their latest reinvention, a paperback format in 2003 and the return to publishing writings on design and criticism (minus the visual explorations that helped establish the magazine initially) didn’t help. In the final issue, Rudy VanderLans, the founder and proprietor frankly admitted that Émigré magazine’s demise was due to plummeting sales.

Émigré was widely known by the 1990s graphic designers through their digital fonts. Over the course of two decades Émigré has established itself as one of the biggest or at least most influential digital type foundry in the US or probably in the world. The first bitmap fonts designed by Suzana Licko (Rudy VanderLans’ partner and wife) pioneered the surgence of designed digital fonts. But it was VanderLans who utilized those fonts in his magazine that paved the way for the digital graphic design revolution. Some would argue that this was inevitable, but it was a fact that VanderLans and Licko were the few handful graphic designers that truly invested in the first Mac computers for professional design purposes. Émigré magazine was so much more than just a type catalog or digital graphic pioneer. To many graphic designers who were trained and practiced in the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s, Émigré was the avantgarde / radical intellectual and critical voice that provided them a societal, cultural, and professional reflection of their discipline in the digital world. There were many graphic design publications at the time of its conception, but they mostly discussed design process and technicalities, self-promotional insight and interviews, as part of the numbing of the profession at the time. Along with the emergence of the personal computer, Émigré provided room for discussing the external environments that influence graphic design, such as the question consequence, the debate between style and expression over function, the reaction toward legibility in typography, debates of professional ethics, graphic design’s cultural and societal significance, and so much more. This depth and self admitted passion in Émigré established its radicalism and represented a contemplative room that many other design periodicals didn’t provide, especially for students. For them, in their restless search for their own form, the magazine was a source of not just visual but also reflective and critical inspiration.

The idea grew out of a frustration of not being able to showcase their unpublished work. Graphic designer, Rudy VanderLans, and fellow Dutchmen, Marc Susan, an artist, and Menno Meyjes, a screenwriter, formulated the idea of a magazine that showcased their own art and emigrant countrymen’s art. This was obviously how the name Émigré was conceived. The first issue was published in 1983, and it presented art, critical writing, poetry and short stories from artists, designers, architects, and writers from around the world. The content was familiar territory. Although the subheading revealed “a magazine that ignores boundaries,” they included the works of people they knew or have passion for it. The editing style was loose. The trio had no professional editorial experience. The visual form was emphasized. The design approach free and unrestricted. VanderLans’ past struggle over rigid modern Dutch design unleashed the raw and unconstrained look or style of the first issue. He experimented with xerography to exemplify the dull typewritten copy and to cope with their out of pocket budget. He tore his precious photograph prints to achieve the looks he wanted. At this time everything was cut and paste, and even with the raw and loose design approach, the process was every bit time consuming, rigor and tedious.

The twice-yearly magazine struggled through its first three issues. Early in the beginning, the magazine was a side project for the three founders. VanderLans was working full time for the San Francisco Chronicle at the time as designer. After Susan and Meyjes left, VanderLans decided to leave the Chronicle and focus his work the magazine. He founded Émigré Graphics and through graphic design projects, he funded the publication of the magazine. But it was Suzana Licko’s involvement in the magazine that propelled its financial support. Licko’s experimentation with digital typography created a new worldwide market for digital fonts. After VanderLans showcased her fonts by typesetting the magazine with it in issue 3, graphic designers began noticing her fonts and requesting to buy them. By issue 4, Licko was promoting her fonts through order forms she offered in the magazine. VanderLans’ total use of the Mac for layout created the distinctive, rugged, and multi-layered Émigré look. Still investing in his wife’s fonts and a distinct, rebellious typographic approach, he achieved a sub-culture, anarchistic atmosphere. Every issue was different, or seemed to grow and develop.

Initially Émigré also relied on outside clients to be able to fund their magazine project. But the fonts’ success and high demand led Émigré to focus most of its energies on type manufacturing. The computer and the advent of the graphic applications such as Aldus Pagemaker and Macromedia Freehand were revolutionizing typography and helped propel graphic design toward the digital age. Émigré was established at the right time and at the right situation. The distinct visual of the Émigré fonts and the “radical” graphics of the magazine appealed to the graphic design community. It was also evident from the letter responses and critique that most of their readers were those who cared for its visuals. Gradually it shifted its contents toward design related issues. It wasn’t only to there to cater to the market. VanderLans claimed to be passionate about what he was doing, about designing and being critical about his profession as a graphic designer. He noticed how the revolutionary backdrop that was taking place wasn’t thoroughly examined, or exposed critically to his fellow graphic designers. Realizing that Émigré could be that release of his reflective and critical agenda, by issue 10, it un-officially became a graphic design journal.

The loose editorial style and diverse content perhaps allowed the magazine to be flexible in reinventing itself. VanderLans assumed the editorial helm with a liberal direction. The only guide to the content was the theme of each magazine issues. Each issue had a different theme to discuss and had a different visual approach to it. There were many issues that granted the designers profiled to take control over the layout and editorial. Guest editors and art directors were frequent. VanderLans was proud of the fact that most of his writers were visually oriented as opposed to most magazines, published by writers who were verbally oriented. But he noticed how those magazines had editors who also assumed the art directorial position. That was how he rationalized his editorial and art directorial function in Émigré. Professional graphic designers and unknown designers contributed the writings; some of them were even fresh out of design school. VanderLans explained that he had no aspiration to be a writer. But he and his contributors loved writing and he feels no one can write with more passion about the things graphic designers care about than graphic designers themselves. Professional graphic designers are also uniquely qualified to write about design because of their inside knowledge and observation, he argues. With progress of computer, writing also became easier, he admits. Although humble in admitting his amateurism, his sharp focus on choosing themes and current issues that matter to graphic designers is commendable.

In some aspects, the magazine stayed true to its original content, still exhibiting art, poetry and short stories, but the majority of its articles and the theme were reserved for design. In accordance to the rapid development of the field, the leaps in theory and practice, and the wide space for criticism that it allowed, the writing content and design synonymously became complicated and rigorous touching issues on design advocacy, the debate over design commitment, authorship, hybridity, and the vagueness of design education. It even defiantly stood up to its criticisms. Massimo Vignelli harshly attacked the magazine. In his view the magazine was a ‘national calamity’, ‘aberration of culture’ and a ‘factory of garbage’. Steven Heller wrote about his anxiety over the misapplication of rule-breaking by impressionable foreign designers. They graciously retaliated by commissioning reactionary writings and conducting interviews with the parties involved, therefore maintaining consistency with providing voice of their profession, including those against the magazine’s presumed agenda. Jeffrey Keedy, otherwise often referred as Mr. Keedy, a type designer and design teacher often provided critical writings for Émigré, an ‘adequate’ example of the rigid content and direction that Émigré had grown into. His critical writings advocated graphic designers’ role in the digitization of communication, and opposed modernism’s rigidity, sterility, and utopian vision. In issue 67, he wrote an article as a reaction toward the condescending attitude toward design by art and culture critic by arguing through historical and cultural reference of the appropriation to style and complexity in ornamentation in design by his contemporary peers. Titled “Style is Not a Four Letter Word,” he wryly points out the economical factor that drives the modernist movements, and the unjust rationalization and purification of it. He then rants and argues against Hal Foster’s criticism on the consumeristic nature that design has developed into. He explains the inability of Hal Foster accurately exposing the problem, as he is incapable of submersing himself in a field he’s not familiar with and thus unjustly oversimplifying its complexity: “Foster only sees design as a barrier to “resistance” (fight the power, right on!) and a threat to the distinctions between practices,” (art is special!). Design is often erroneously conflated with marketing and consumerism to serve as a whipping boy, to enforce “disciplinarity,” and to keep us in our place. He is attacking the messenger because he doesn’t like the message. Design is just the messenger. The idea that art doesn’t matter is the message.”

Keedy’s conclusion is typical of reactionary writing as it is defiant, ranty and at times seems arrogant. He prematurely or rather ambiguously concludes that in the age of aesthetics, it is the designer’s role – if they choose – to develop style as it had been proven throughout history that it enriches culture. Keedy suggests that designers should advocate style instead of just problem solving, communicating, organizing information, and branding – the stereotypes that concur some commercial aspects of design. He desires designers to be gurus of style instead of amateurs, otherwise how can culture be expressed and understood accordingly. Mr. Keedy’s writing and many others seem to have a similar reactionary – defensive voice. Contributors such as Scott Makela and Katherine McKoy are often categorized as the experimental jet set group in design, including Keedy, who was trained by the latter.

This critical voice, no matter how mediocre it seemed, was what many graphic designers needed, not to justify their practices but function as a contemplative space. This is important in a field that mostly invests in visual communication. As a foreign graphic designer, during school I was informed about Émigré through design history class. It was here, through brief lectures, Émigré was explained as a reactionary force in progressing the digitization of graphic design and typography. As I tried to recall, a blur it seemed, that Émigré at a glance seemed important not only for the digital revolution of graphic design, but also for speaking up for the profession, endorsing and championing it through criticisms of its failures and commercial turns. For many graphic design students at the time when Indonesia was in the midst of political and economic crisis, this form of visual “radicalism” such as Émigré, and graphic designs of Neville Brody, David Carson, Tibor Kalman, and of late Stefan Sagmeister had some effect (of course to those that were exposed to it). It is ironic that in the end, this magazine was viewed impressionistically instead of extensively through the contents it provided. There is no design criticism in Indonesia, a country that endorses design as tools of industry instead of acknowledging its potential role in society. It is keen toward the fast paced transformations of style, but as Steven Heller fears an impressionistic absorption may be the case. In the case of design and criticism, I doubt the influence of the critical voice that design promises through Émigré over foreign countries such as mine is feasible in short period. Graphic design in Indonesia is an extremely young profession and is still learning. There is hope for teachers to expose contemplative modes and train them in the future with hopes that in can trigger societal consciousness much needed among future generations. Émigré’s return to design and criticism starting with issue 64 and its abolishment of all visual embellishment exemplifies VanderLans concern and future agenda of what depth design should take form. This is a utopian compromise that led to its demise, as it is apparent that the visual culture that graphic designers are accustomed to overlook the verbal and critical aspect that is also potential in this field.

The printed format is dead, but the digital domain lives on. Through blogs and online articles, VanderLans hopes to maintain the Émigré tradition alive. But Émigré isn’t the only graphic design journal available. There are many design related journals and periodicals that have sprouted due to the implicit need for reflective criticism in design. Adbusters and Dot Dot Dot offer reflective creative writing expressions, satires and sharp ciritcal writings on art and graphic design, and so does the University of Illinois at Chicago’s Design Issues. The writing and research of Ellen Lupton and her husband Abbott Miller exemplifies such. Mainstream magazines such as Print, How, ID, and Communication Art are providing such voice in columns such as Rant. Countless aggressive reactionary blogs and website with the Émigré spirit. This is an opportunity that graphic designers need to exploit to make sense of their profession and most find their ground in society.

Sources
- Rudy VanderLans, Suzana Licko, Mary E. Gray, Émigré: Graphic design into the digital realm, 1993 Byron Press Books, Canada
- Émigré No. 67: Graphic Design vs. style, globalism, criticism, science, authenticity and humanism, edited by Rudy VanderLans, 2004 Princeton Architectural Press, New York
- Rick Poynor, No More Rules: Graphic design and postmodernism, 2003 Yale University Press, Connecticut
- http://www.emigre.com/VanderLans.php
- http://www.underconsideration.com/speakup/interviews/rudy.html
- http://www.howdesign.com/dc/features/vanderlans1.asp
- http://www.typotheque.com/site/article.php?id=73
- http://www.typotheque.com/site/article.php?id=5
- http://www.designobserver.com/archives/007816.html#more

This entry was posted on Sunday, August 27th, 2006 at 9:07 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.