Opinion: Author and instructor Erika Kendra would like to see the level of professionalism improved in the ranks of young graphic artists, and she has some ideas for doing it.Editor's Note: This is the first installment of a two-part series. Click here to read Part 2.
Graphic designers have always had a relatively bad reputation in the publishing world.
We are "those creative types" in the darkroom with the strange pictures all over the walls. We are sensitive (read: temperamental) and artistic (read: unprofessional).
I remember attending a conference 10 years ago, just a few months after I started my professional career. A fairly prominent printing industry guru went on a lengthy and critical diatribe about "those creative types." At the time, I couldn't have been more offended.
Since then, I've been in the position of hiring "those creative types," and I've learned that some stereotypes exist for a reason. I've seen new designers start crying when told to take a different approach for a brochure layout; storm from the room when told to use a different color in a logo; throw a pen across the table—in a meeting with the client! —when asked to use a different font for the headings in a product catalog… you get the point.
At the Quark Summit in June, I attended a conference session about "Tomorrow's Designer," presented by Carl Huhn and Janet Tacket of the Art Institutes. Based on my experiences working with neophyte designers, I had hoped to get some idea about how the problems facing graphic arts education were being handled.
The majority of the presentation focused on the general characteristics of students at the Art Institutes. Words like "entitled," "edutainment," "cynical," "disengaged," "self-interested," and "instant gratification" cropped up a number of times to describe tomorrow's designer.
Adobe and Quark compete in schools. Click here to read more.
Keep in mind, we're talking about a generation that was raised with the "everybody plays" mentality, and merit is based on effort instead of actual accomplishment. (Of course, virtually every generation has the same type of negative attitude about the next one. I'm from the tail end of "Generation X" —we don't even merit a name, just a letter!)
Among the specific points presented, some of my favorites were:
• Students now want information to be interesting, entertaining, easy, and fun.
• Student attitude is now, "I paid my tuition, now give me the grade I deserve and the knowledge I want the way I want it."
• Students want to know what they will be graded on ahead of time so they don't do more than they have to.
• Parents are now more actively involved in their children's education than in past generations. (This was half-jokingly referring to parents who yell at the school principal because Little Johnny only got an A-minus instead of an A and don't you understand how hard he tried!?)
And despite these and other similar characteristics, a later point stated:
• Students have a realistic outlook of life and know industry standards at a young age.
I wonder how "realistic" an outlook can be if no one is challenging the entitlement complex that is so prevalent?
Most of the attendees at the AI presentation were employers who, like me, had hoped to find some insight about how these attitudes were being addressed and corrected. In other words, how were students being prepared for real life with real jobs and real responsibilities and real mortgage payments?
Unfortunately, no such insight was offered. In fact, I got the distinct impression that we (the employers) were the ones who would probably have to adapt to accommodate the attitudes and behavior of "tomorrow's designer."
Author David Blatner says the desktop publishing wars are over, and Adobe is the winner. Click here to read more.
I wonder, will we be getting phone calls from angry parents who want to know why we didn't hire unqualified-but-really-tries-hard Susie?
Should we start issuing assignments as if we were writing a personal ad? "Art director seeks designer for thrilling adventure in transportation decoration. Must like kittens and diesel fumes."
Are we, as employers, supposed to accept poor work simply because "tomorrow's designer" spent a lot of time creating something that completely failed to meet the stated objective?
Should we tell the client, "I know this ad has nothing to do with your product, but the designer tried really, really hard. Just look at the effort that it took to create all of these spot colors and align that text perfectly in the shape of an eggplant!"
Maybe we should start passing out bumper stickers: "My child/wife/hairdresser's sister is Star Designer of the Month at Ad Agency Inc."
Erika Kendra is a freelance graphic designer and writer in Los Angeles.
Graphics Tools 
