(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:118
110-133_28858.indd 118 8/30/12 4:47 PM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:119
110-133_28858.indd 119 8/30/12 4:47 PM
Writing & research for graphic designers
(Text)
118
You are writing for designers on DesignObserver.com. Is there
a style or form that you use to reach this audience?
Not necessarily. One of the most wonderful and fascinating things about
“designers”— and by that I mean the broad spectrum of people who
practice, observe, write about, or are intrigued and inspired by any aspect
of design culture — is that they tend to be very cross-disciplinarily curious,
receptive, and willing to engage in just about any conversation, whatever
medium or form it may come in.
This is a distinctly critical piece in which you attack “buzzword-
encrusted language.” What is this language and how do you avoid it?
The design world, especially the ever-growing piece of it that deals with the
intersection of design and business, or creativity and corporation, tends to
reduce complex arguments and ideas to sound bites that can fit on a Power-
point slide. (Okay, perhaps Keynote.) Over the past few years — or, some
might even say, decades — words and terms that once stood for something
have become vacant of meaning, thrown around as weightless fluff. I’ve
sat through countless conferences, presentations, panels, and other public
forums where a speaker would machine-shoot buzzwords —“innovation,”
“design thinking,” “systems design,” “process not product,” and so
on — without contributing any original insight or, in many cases, without
even rooting the respective term in a larger argument or case being made.
My philosophy is, if you have something of substance to say, you can say it
in natural, honest language that doesn’t sound like it came from a Malcolm
Gladwell book title generator. Inside every business executive and creative
director and journalist is a curious and creatively restless five-year-old;
get that five-year-old excited about whatever you’re arguing for and you’ll
get the grown-up to pay attention. But that won’t happen with clunky and
contrived buzz-speak.
You write that “The way we talk and write about these issues is incredibly
important.” How should writing about design be accomplished?
I don’t believe in prescriptive one-size-fits-all approaches, especially when
it comes to something like writing, which hinges on the… here’s another
buzzword, but it doesn’t have to be…authenticity of the voice that’s
presenting the idea. So I can only speak for myself. I recall something
I read in a philosophy book once; it was about the Buddha’s advice on
mindful speech, which has to answer to two simple criteria: Is it true,
and is it helpful.
A lot of design criticism, and criticism in general, focuses all too heavily,
solemnly even, on the former. It’s much harder to critique and offer a
solution than it is to just critique, and often much less immediately
gratifying. When I write, I try to think about both — whatever I’m arguing
has to always be true for me (because, in the end, there’s no such thing as a
Maria Popova Talks about Buzzword-Encrusted Language
grand capital Truth), and it has to, in some way, leave readers with some-
thing beyond the mere recognition of the problem — an idea, an insight,
a direction of thought that might, just maybe, lead to a solution.
Do you find that you slip into jargon, simply because it is
such a viable shorthand?
Oh, absolutely. We all do. Jargon is to writing and speaking what
stereotypes are to thinking—mental schemata, shortcuts, which free up
cognitive load in allowing us not to make the same mental computations
and assessments every time we address the same problem. These shortcuts
can be good (roaring lion usually means run because you’re about to
get eaten) or bad (racism, sexism, you-name-it-ism). But what’s true of
stereotypes is also true of jargon: In the end, no universal rule of thumb
is an acceptable substitute for personal judgment and integrity. We do our
best to express ourselves honestly and with conviction, and that’s the most
we can do. Sometimes jargon helps us do that, sometimes it hinders us, and
the gift for telling the difference between the two is among the gifts, or
perhaps arduously acquired skills, that set great writers apart from the rest.
What is the language that designers should speak in their writing?
A language of cultural curiosity and compassion but, above all, a language
that’s all their own. Who am I to prescribe that?
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:118
110-133_C67944.indd 118 9/22/12 11:26 AM
section 4
learning from experiences writers discuss their writing
(Text)
119
“humanitarian design”; we need new language that doesn’t
homogenize entire cultures, new vocabulary that better reflects
the intricate lace of the world’s biocultural and psychosocial
diversity as a drawing board for design.
To borrow from science and resilience theory, the work of
Italian anthropologist and linguist Luisa Maffi, founder of
biocultural diversity conservancy Terralingua, offers ample
evidence that the loss of indigenous languages is followed
closely by a loss of biodiversity. Without trying to oversimplify
what’s clearly a complex issue, this raises an obvious question:
Could it be that as soon as we lose our linguistic grasp of a
species, we stop talking about it, then thinking about it, then
caring about it? When it comes to humanitarian design, we
never invented this language in the first place, a language that
allows us to properly talk, think, and care about indigenous
communities and their biocultural landscape. Our jargon has
set us up for failure from the get-go.
So what can the design community do? I don’t have the
answer. And I am certain no one person does. But cross-
disciplinary teams of designers, scientists, anthropologists,
linguists, and writers might. Teams that include what
GlobalVoices founder Ethan Zuckerman recently called
“bridge figures”—people who have one foot in an expert
community, be that technology or design or another
discipline, and one in a local community benefiting from
this expertise. For now, let’s embrace our responsibility as
designers and design writers to honor cultural diversity.
Let’s stop hiding behind industry jargon. Let’s invent a new
language that allows us to better think, talk, and care about
indigenous cultures and microcommunities before we try to
retrofit them to our projects and our preconceptions. Language
that is just, because this is not just semantics. Above all, let’s
welcome voices and viewpoints from other disciplines, other
parts of the world, and other paradigms. Enough with the
industry panels already.
Could it be that as soon as we lose our linguistic grasp
of a species, we stop talking about it, then thinking about it,
then caring about it?
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:119
110-133_C67944.indd 119 9/22/12 11:26 AM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:118
110-133_28858.indd 118 8/30/12 4:47 PM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:119
110-133_28858.indd 119 8/30/12 4:47 PM
Writing & research for graphic designers
(Text)
118
You are writing for designers on DesignObserver.com. Is there
a style or form that you use to reach this audience?
Not necessarily. One of the most wonderful and fascinating things about
“designers”— and by that I mean the broad spectrum of people who
practice, observe, write about, or are intrigued and inspired by any aspect
of design culture — is that they tend to be very cross-disciplinarily curious,
receptive, and willing to engage in just about any conversation, whatever
medium or form it may come in.
This is a distinctly critical piece in which you attack “buzzword-
encrusted language.” What is this language and how do you avoid it?
The design world, especially the ever-growing piece of it that deals with the
intersection of design and business, or creativity and corporation, tends to
reduce complex arguments and ideas to sound bites that can fit on a Power-
point slide. (Okay, perhaps Keynote.) Over the past few years — or, some
might even say, decades — words and terms that once stood for something
have become vacant of meaning, thrown around as weightless fluff. I’ve
sat through countless conferences, presentations, panels, and other public
forums where a speaker would machine-shoot buzzwords —“innovation,”
“design thinking,” “systems design,” “process not product,” and so
on — without contributing any original insight or, in many cases, without
even rooting the respective term in a larger argument or case being made.
My philosophy is, if you have something of substance to say, you can say it
in natural, honest language that doesn’t sound like it came from a Malcolm
Gladwell book title generator. Inside every business executive and creative
director and journalist is a curious and creatively restless five-year-old;
get that five-year-old excited about whatever you’re arguing for and you’ll
get the grown-up to pay attention. But that won’t happen with clunky and
contrived buzz-speak.
You write that “The way we talk and write about these issues is incredibly
important.” How should writing about design be accomplished?
I don’t believe in prescriptive one-size-fits-all approaches, especially when
it comes to something like writing, which hinges on the… here’s another
buzzword, but it doesn’t have to be…authenticity of the voice that’s
presenting the idea. So I can only speak for myself. I recall something
I read in a philosophy book once; it was about the Buddha’s advice on
mindful speech, which has to answer to two simple criteria: Is it true,
and is it helpful.
A lot of design criticism, and criticism in general, focuses all too heavily,
solemnly even, on the former. It’s much harder to critique and offer a
solution than it is to just critique, and often much less immediately
gratifying. When I write, I try to think about both — whatever I’m arguing
has to always be true for me (because, in the end, there’s no such thing as a
Maria Popova Talks about Buzzword-Encrusted Language
grand capital Truth), and it has to, in some way, leave readers with some-
thing beyond the mere recognition of the problem — an idea, an insight,
a direction of thought that might, just maybe, lead to a solution.
Do you find that you slip into jargon, simply because it is
such a viable shorthand?
Oh, absolutely. We all do. Jargon is to writing and speaking what
stereotypes are to thinking—mental schemata, shortcuts, which free up
cognitive load in allowing us not to make the same mental computations
and assessments every time we address the same problem. These shortcuts
can be good (roaring lion usually means run because you’re about to
get eaten) or bad (racism, sexism, you-name-it-ism). But what’s true of
stereotypes is also true of jargon: In the end, no universal rule of thumb
is an acceptable substitute for personal judgment and integrity. We do our
best to express ourselves honestly and with conviction, and that’s the most
we can do. Sometimes jargon helps us do that, sometimes it hinders us, and
the gift for telling the difference between the two is among the gifts, or
perhaps arduously acquired skills, that set great writers apart from the rest.
What is the language that designers should speak in their writing?
A language of cultural curiosity and compassion but, above all, a language
that’s all their own. Who am I to prescribe that?
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:118
110-133_C67944.indd 118 9/22/12 11:26 AM
section 4
learning from experiences writers discuss their writing
(Text)
119
“humanitarian design”; we need new language that doesn’t
homogenize entire cultures, new vocabulary that better reflects
the intricate lace of the world’s biocultural and psychosocial
diversity as a drawing board for design.
To borrow from science and resilience theory, the work of
Italian anthropologist and linguist Luisa Maffi, founder of
biocultural diversity conservancy Terralingua, offers ample
evidence that the loss of indigenous languages is followed
closely by a loss of biodiversity. Without trying to oversimplify
what’s clearly a complex issue, this raises an obvious question:
Could it be that as soon as we lose our linguistic grasp of a
species, we stop talking about it, then thinking about it, then
caring about it? When it comes to humanitarian design, we
never invented this language in the first place, a language that
allows us to properly talk, think, and care about indigenous
communities and their biocultural landscape. Our jargon has
set us up for failure from the get-go.
So what can the design community do? I don’t have the
answer. And I am certain no one person does. But cross-
disciplinary teams of designers, scientists, anthropologists,
linguists, and writers might. Teams that include what
GlobalVoices founder Ethan Zuckerman recently called
“bridge figures”—people who have one foot in an expert
community, be that technology or design or another
discipline, and one in a local community benefiting from
this expertise. For now, let’s embrace our responsibility as
designers and design writers to honor cultural diversity.
Let’s stop hiding behind industry jargon. Let’s invent a new
language that allows us to better think, talk, and care about
indigenous cultures and microcommunities before we try to
retrofit them to our projects and our preconceptions. Language
that is just, because this is not just semantics. Above all, let’s
welcome voices and viewpoints from other disciplines, other
parts of the world, and other paradigms. Enough with the
industry panels already.
Could it be that as soon as we lose our linguistic grasp
of a species, we stop talking about it, then thinking about it,
then caring about it?
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:119
110-133_C67944.indd 119 9/22/12 11:26 AM
..................Content has been hidden....................
You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.