Art/Design Superflex, M/M, Rick Poyner, Experimental Jetset, Kees Dorst--------Combined

Design and Art have always shared a common ground. Some say that Art is Design and others think it is vice versa. In the older times Art and design were one and the same. There are many visually and practically stunning pieces from these times where design fundamentals and art fundamentals worked in unity. Earlier modernist, such as Laszlo Moholy-Nagy, mentioned in Experimental Jetset, wanted to implement on this idea of uniting art and the everyday. This synthesis of art and design would discard the idea that art is just an added decorative layer. Instead, art would be fully integrated in every activity that we participate in. This makes much sense as art and design usually departs from each other along the lines of mere "function". Kees Dorst mentioned how "artist do not aim for any practical application but strive to influence the feeling or thinking of an audience." And she also nailed this subject of design/art when she stated that "artists have effectively turned their self-made challenge into a design problem."
What can be understood from the 2 aforementioned quotes is that designers can learn a great deal from artists and vice versa. This idea itself should be enough to suggest that the merging of art and design would be profitable to both sides of the party. By incorporating elements of art into design, designers can learn how to better influence the feeling and thinking of their audience. By incorporating design fundamentals into art or the processes of creating art an artist can learn to more effectively impose their self in their artworks.

Manifesto

"Philosophy is a play on words"
so they say.

that may seem as gloomy an insult as April showers
and yet is as beautiful as the flowers of may
I do not take that too lightly
hell,
by definition, the aforementioned quote is a play on itself
well,
Let us ask what is "definition", what is "philosophy"
What is "a"... what is "play"... what is "on"... what is "words"
I ask, most important of all what is "what"
WHAT is "IS"???

THEY SAY that
"is" confirms existence
that, I think therefore I am, I think therefore I is
does "I is" make sense?

it does in the southern USA

In this sense they are telling ME
that everything must be able to think and confirm their existence
else they don't exist at all,
What we perceive with our senses,
does not necessarily represent what "is:
IT'S ALL IN THE LANGUAGE
IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND MY LANGUAGE THEN YOU DON”T UNDERSTAND
ME

In a foreign land where I do not speak your language,
where I do not walk around confirming my existence do I really exist to you?
Because I cannot articulate my existence in your native "dialect"
(be it verbal or by means of any other senses)
I DON'T EXIST
I will assure you that this is an experience that all immigrants go through

"The foreigner's speech can bank only on its bare rhetoric strength, and the inherent desires he or she has invested on it...
I do what they want me to but it is not "me" (*1)

I spend so much time trying to do what "society" (this system) wants me to do that I lose sense of myself

I lose sense of who I am
That is the existence of an immigrant
DO I SOUND FAMILIAR TO YOU NOW?
In a society that is constantly shifting around us "are we not all foreigners"?
I AM A FOREIGNER
I DO SOUND FAMILIAR TO YOU,
I sound like...
...YOU
WE ARE ALL FOREIGNERS
foreigners, all bounded by our thurst for democracy.

"democracy involves the recognition, if not perpetuation of difficulty and disagreement." (*2)

Do YOU disagree?
curious?
Is it because I sound peculiar, strange?

"People's lives are haphazard paths that have no meaning and lead nowhere and which, for that very reason, are "curious" " (*3)

Let us not focus on OUR "haphazard paths" but on one another's

I have been misunderstood, way too often
I want to be understood
to be understood one must first understand
I will take the initiative to understand you
"One must follow in order to be followed" (*3)
But then if I follow you then I revert back to being an immigrant
a clone, a shadow, a robot...
I would not be James Kenley Morantus

"All our power is in what we can follow, in what we can attain with eyes closed" (*3)
So I will follow you with my eyes closed
You should do the same
I WILL FOLLOW YOU... YOU WILL FOLLOW ME!
*Following the other one replaces him, exchange lives, passions, wills, transform oneself in the other's stead. It is perhaps the only way man can fulfill himself" (*3)
Social equality, Democracy
That is the only way for man to fulfill himself

he must turn into himself while also following all others

I will not interpret your actions internally
I will ask you directly... WHY DO YOU ACT as such?
I will not only follow and interact with the public
I will allow the public to interact with me

Democracy is founded on public space that should be, essentially empty. (*4)

I will exchange lives, passions and wills with the public,
I will replace the public, rather;
I will become one with the public
I will empty myself
I will become an "empty public space"
"this emptiness will not belong to any individual or group" (*4)
it will be available to anyone who can bring meaning to it
YOU BRING MEANING TO MY LIFE

"To survive, the immigrant must establish a utopia, a "no-place" that is located in the present time, not hidden in the horizon of some idealized future." (*5)

I will make the "empty public space" MY UTOPIA
you should do the same
after all
we are all foreigners... all of us
each of us,
an immigrant to the future, the ever transforming public space
to each his own
to each his own "foreigner's" experience in the public space
my public space, my utopia,
your utopia, your public space
you have been following me all along
you have become me
Let us live one another's life EVERYDAY, in the public space,
our public space
let us become the PUBLIC SPACE
let us become the EVERYDAY

"It is in the everyday life and starting from the everyday life that genuine creations are achieved"...
..."The region where man appropriates not so much external nature but his own nature" (*6)

Every situation that I am faced with is derived from a previous choice
a choice that I made according to my "own values"
what if we all had the same values?
what is we all dwelled in each other's "public space"?
As a friend of mine once said;
"you are a blink of an eye in the sands of time" (*7)
Close your eyes, do not blink,
ELIMINATE AS MANY OF YOUR SENSES AS YOU CAN
"IN ORDER TO"
pay attention to me, empty your mind
become an "empty public space,"
so that I can become you
become one with time, become one with me,
If we are to understand each other we have to know that
we are all grains of sand in the hourglass that we call time

the clock is ticking,
many grains of sand have fallen through the connecting tube of the hourglass
...by death
let us not wait to fall through the tube in order to understand each other
To fall through the tube,
that is our final destination.

I will not live in fear, denying a final destination,
death
I will live just as the grains of sand in the hourglass
I will
I will not be afraid to follow, and in turn be followed
I will not be afraid of failure, there will be no doubts
for doubt IS The Enemy Of Success

THIS IS NOT PHILOSOPHY
THIS IS NOT A PLAY ON WORDS
THIS IS NOT ART
THIS
IS ART
YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND ME!!!... “NOTYET”......

HOWEVER
YOU DO UNDERSTAND THAT WE ALL DIE
...ALL THE SAME!
YOU DO UNDERSTAND THAT WE SHOULD ALL LIVE THE SAME
YOU DO UNDERSTAND THAT WE SHOULD ALL DWELL IN EACH OTHER'S EVERYDAY
YOU DO KNOW THAT WE SHOULD ALL DWELL IN EACH OTHER'S "PUBLIC SPACE"
WHAT YOU ARE READING IS NOT A MANIFESTO
WHAT YOU HAVE JUST READ IS...

...ME...

...JAMES MORANTUS !

NOW,
WANT TO READ............. "YOU"

*1 Julia Kristeva, "Transitional Artifice"
*2 Patricia C. Phillips > Rosalyn Deutsche, "Creating Democracy: A Dialogue with Krzysztof Wodiczko"
*3 Sophie Calle, "Follow Me"
*4 Claude Lefort, "The Logic of Totalitarianism"
*5 Stephane Moses, "immigrant utopia"
*6 Henri Lefebvre, Clearing the Ground
*7 Your very own Z JAY

ATTENTION??!!

For my "PUT SOMETHING HERE" project I made a poster of myself and put a note on it with the following words: ATTENTION--- IF YOU SEE THIS STUDENT PLEASE TEXT US HIS LOCATION AT 201-680-8042". For the experiment I wore the same jacket I would place the poster somewhere in a public domain and I would sit or stand in a close proximity to it. In such a way that the viewer would see the poster and be able to see me at the same time.

wanted 2, originally uploaded by Jersonx3000.

What Does Nature Have to Do With Design?

I believe it was Buckminster Fuller who argued that "Nature is always most economical". His main point was that designers have to turn to nature as a point of reference. This is the same idea that is presented by Susan S. Szenasy. It is very interesting how both Fuller and Szenasy made key points such as technology, nature, and power structure. Szenasy quoted that "we should see the world as a system of relationships modeled on nature's own systems." This calls for designers to consider the sustainability factor of nature. Nature's system functions in a harmonious cycle or rather "everlasting" cycle. It is as if every act of nature that occurs today always has tomorrow in mind, and tomorrow will happen with the thought of he next day and so on. In this sense every living being in nature is part of a system, and humans (specifically designers) need to figure out how to work with the thought of tomorrow in mind.
A designer is an advocate and revolutionary, there is no socio-economic force too strong for a brave designer. The designer is supposed to stand for other humans. "To ameliorate the human condition" that is the primary goal of the designer; and there is no better teacher of amelioration then nature. Designers must learn to "work from nature, with nature and for nature." This is the best way for designers and human in general to become responsible and effective.

Sweatshop VS Hypersexuality

The main argument in the American Apparel issue concentrated on the ethics behind production versus those of promotion. While the company might be "sweatshop-free", it's advertising strategy is (as we may put it) "garment-free". This is a pun mainly on the idea that American Apparel uses hypersexual imagery to help sell their products. My take on this can be summarized in 7 simple words. "DO WE REALLY KNOW WHAT WE WANT?" First we were against the poor treatment of sweatshop workers, now we are are against "hypersexuality" in advertisement? It's one thing to rightfully complain about underpaid factory workers, but it's entirely another to complain about "sexuality in advertisement". In a world where we cannot have two sides of the coin, I would much prefer "hypersexual-advertising" over "sweatshop-barbarity".
American Apparel is one of the few companies who is "sweatshop-free" (so they say). I am in no way in support of degradation and exploitation of women, but the idea that American Apparel uses "images of young women that continue practices of subordination" sounds really exaggerated. There are gazillion more companies who use this same "unethical" strategy for advertising. The important question is are they "sweatshop-free"? American Apparel is. (well, so they say)

Branding the Individual

It has not been long since people have started to consume goods not only because of their functions, but for the emotional and social meanings that are embodied in those particular objects. 'Personal Identity' is the most common and understandable reason for consuming a certain product. We mix and match certain goods to create a sense of self. 'I only wear pants from such and such place, I use only Old Spice products, I only shop for groceries at this supermarket.' The word "I" in these statements reinforces the idea that the consumer is 'a unique individual.' This creates a form of identity for the individual that are characterized by all the goods that he or she consumes. This gives way to a deeper understanding to why people spend outrageous sums of money for a pair of Guess Jeans, for example.

This was Jane Pavitt's main point in "Branding the individual." By identifying themselves with a particular brand, consumers gain a sense of belonging to a particular social group. "In this way, brands are used as means of expressing personal identity and identifying with a collective taste." People gain a sense of belonging and uniqueness by associating themselves with certain brands or styles.

Thorstein Veblen states that "Investing in the construction of one's social self by consuming was a way for people to announce their membership of the bourgeoisie." It is very true that people use fashion as a mean of demonstrating their wealth and high social stature. People identify themselves and regulate their lives with certain brands as a way of placing themselves in society. Although the products that we buy are produced in mass quantity and therefore consumed by thousands of others besides us, we still feel a sense of individuality by customizing and mixing and matching the goods that we buy. Everyone is then able to associate themselves with a social group, or create their own lifestyle and taste. If the motives of consumption is to create or stabilize one's identity then people are 'rational' in what they buy no matter how absurd the 'price to quality' ratio may seem.

Brand on the Run

Richard Benson made a very clear point with his first short story on "Brand on the Run". He used the example of a man named Bernard who always liked clothes from good labels. The more expensive the clothes were, the better. Later on, Bernard discovered that a pair of Italian-label shoes had been made in Taiwan. He then realized that he's not really paying for the proper craftsmanship associated with such "Italian-heritage" shoes. Why should he be paying all that money for the shoes if they are "made the same place as everything else, 'cos then it's just the label, innit?"
This idea of the consumer paying for the label, and not necessarily the quality of the product, has recently escalated to a point of absurdity. I have experienced this first hand, as many of my friends have fallen victim to the "brand trend." Every youth from a particular neighborhood can be seen wearing either NIKE or JORDAN's footwear for the sole purpose of being "cool." We don't buy clothes because they feel comfortable anymore, nor do we buy them for their long lasting and high quality. We only want and buy what is "hot" at the moment. If this is taken into consideration, then we can see why "the power of a corporation often exceeds that of a democratically elected government." The "brand" can easily use propaganda to market it's products; as Benson described, with marketing departments using "activists techniques" to enhance their counter cultural allure.