Written Response
I will use the methods mentioned in Exercises in Style (Raymond Queneau,1998) to translate arguments in The debate the legendary contest of two giants of graphic design (Wim Crouwel and Jan Van Toorn, 2015) into the form of different types of speech. (Exercises in Style, Raymond Queneau,1998) and different types of written prose. (Exercises in Style，Raymond Queneau,1998).
The arguments about subjective and objective of designers from the debate of Wim Crouwel and Jan Van Toorn have same similar perspective with It seems that if we are to enjoy anything then we must not have to think about it, and, conversely, if we are to think about anything, then we mustn’t enjoy it.(Exercises in Style，Raymond Queneau,1998).
Declaration
Wim Crouwel Version
We live in an age of information overload; the sheer volume of information overwhelming us is beyond our capacity to process.
As graphic designers, we must engage analytically and create long-term value with an objective attitude.
We must establish ourselves professionally, maintain a sense of social responsibility, and objectively expand our scope of work without venturing into areas beyond our expertise.
We make the content visible, not the designer.
Jan Van Toorn Version
In today’s society, we must question our own goals and responsibilities. We shouldn’t limit our pursuits to the means at our disposal; we must bravely face the unknown and challenges.
We must find our own stance and attitude, acknowledging the content and emotional value carried by design, but without interfering with the expression of the content itself.
We must delve beyond disciplinary boundaries, actively participating in the delivery of content, refusing to become passive “agents.”
He is/Introduce
Wim Crouwel Version
He is objective and neutral.
He loves technology, but he is not an extension of technology.
He provides design services in a wider range of fields.
He specializes in his field.
He considered Jan van Toorn’s calendar design for Spruijt to be pretentious.
He aspires to be a great graphic designer, not a visual artist.
He believes identity and aesthetics can be quantified.
He sees graphic design itself as a process of ordering.
He believes that emphasizing grids makes content more powerful.
When designing for museums and artists, he doesn’t incorporate his personal narratives, but rather translates them—something artists or museums cannot do.
Jan Van Toorn Version
He doesn’t believe designers can be completely neutral.
He believes in acknowledging and utilizing the dialectical relationship between a designer’s subjectivity and objectivity.
He believes design itself carries values, and he’s not afraid that his own involvement in the design process might compromise the identity of the content or information.
He believes rational disciplines cannot encompass universal human experience;.
He did his calendar design for Spruijt as an experiment.
He believes grids are merely the starting point of design, and over-reliance on grids reduces the sense of identification with the content.
When designing for artists and museums, he incorporates his own perspective and participation, which allows the design to reflect shared thinking and a holistic approach.
Crouwel, W. and Van Toorn, J. (2015) The Debate: The Legendary Contest of Two Giants of Graphic Design. London: Unit Editions.
Queneau, R. (1998) Exercises in Style. Translated by Barbara Wright. London: John Calder.