The product of an artist and designer are very similar. Good design and good art have similar visual qualities. George Nelson briefly touched on this idea in his chapter “Good Design: What is in for?” Although both create work using similar elements –  such as line, value, and rhythm – the purpose of the art and the method is different. As Norman Potter wrote, “the designer works… for other people” (29). Designers create with practical purpose and for others. Although creativity is involved in the process, the emphasis of their work is on public perception and the use of the final product. In contrast, the artist has more of a focus on expression and creativity for their end work. Art can involve a group effort, but in the end, art is still an expression of this group.

Just like Kees Dorst mentioned in the chapter “But, is it Art,” I agree that the line between art and design is slightly blurring. Design is becoming multifaceted and heavily relies on artistic expression. When I think about this transition, I think about architecture. Most architecture today would fall under the category of design, but the same architecture is studied as art in the accepted art history canon. I find this interesting, because it shows that there is a grey area between art and design.

Currently, I consider myself more of an artist. The work I produce is done out of expression and creativity. It is done for myself (even if it is part of a class assignment) and not for a larger goal. My work does not exactly have a practical use, but, rather, is focused on being well-made visual pieces that can generate responses from audiences.

Book reference: Design and Art; Edited by: Alex Coles

Class: Foundations of Art and Design