* Emigre magazine focused on typography
* look at relation to Octavia magazine
* leaning towards post modern in Emigre and modern in Octavia
* look at aesthetics of each
The founders were Rudy Vanderland and Zuzand Licko. The original intention was "liminality" - "In between cultures".
Emigre was also a type foundry and focused on typeface development.
Critics:
* Neo-modernists -> Massimo Vignelli - "A national calamity"
- "An abbreviation of culture"
* Stephen Heller (middle-ground) - "A blip in continuum"
"cult of the ugly"
*David Carson (post modernist) - designers who had once championed their work for aggressiveness began to condemn it as too readily identifiable, and therefore unusable. Ironically Carson popularised its style.
-
The aesthetic of the magazine was artistic and punk - engage/involved in the forms, playful experimental texts.
What is so distinctive about Emigre?
* Plays out a political debate but by focusing upon formal design design issues e.g type and composition.
* Technological effects on page design - reflected political and social shifts in art, culture and mass communication.
* Destablised a post-war design ethic of 'righteous form' that was built on rationalism, minimalism and modernism.
* Contested universal graphic vocabulary built on grid systems adapted by corporate culture.
* 'Provocative clutter'
We then looked at Old Modernism (respected) vs Modernism 8.0 (negative views on this)
Emigre was famous for it's letters to the editor - emphasis on engagement with audience.
*It's last few issues focused on writing.
* The magazine had lots of format changes
The founders of the magazine declined to be interviewed for Gary Huswit's 'Helvetica' film.
The magazine informed generations of designers and academics.
Octavia magazine ran concurrently to Emigre. It was concerned with typography and layouts were hand-crafted things.
