Positions through contextualising: Written Response

• McLuhan, M. (1994) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Marshall McLuhan’s influential work introduces key concepts like “the medium is the message” and the distinction between “hot” and “cool” media, emphasizing that media forms shape human perception and social structure more than content itself. He saw media as extensions of the human senses, each engaging us in different ways. Though his language is complex, his ideas foresaw the information age and continue to impact design, communication.

In the past, I rarely considered factors such as the richness or clarity of information, or the level of audience engagement when choosing media. It was the theory of “hot and cool media” that inspired me to rethink the relationship between medium and message. In my work, I try to reduce the amount of information in hot media to increase audience participation, thereby encouraging deeper reflection on the topics I present.

• Papanek, V. (1985). Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change. 2nd ed. London: Thames and Hudson.

Today, data visualization has become a vital tool and expressive medium for graphic designers.

After reading Design for the Real World, the well-known design theorist and writer Victor Papanek’s statement—”Much of design today is wasteful, misleading, and based on the illusion of choice” (Papanek, 1985) —prompted me to reflect critically on the nature of data visualization itself. While it is often seen as a means of revealing truth, it can just as easily be used to obscure it.

This realization underscores the core of my project: a pursuit of clarity and critique rather than aesthetic embellishment. My aim is to make the systemic inequalities behind pricing choices legible and legibly designed.

• Barthes, R. (1977) Image, Music, Text. Translated by S. Heath. London: Fontana Press. (Essay: “The Death of the Author”, originally published 1967.)

As a philosopher and literary theorist, Roland Barthes also had a profound impact on art and design. He argued that the meaning of a work is not determined by the author, but generated by the audience through reading or viewing. This groundbreaking idea challenged author-centric thinking and provided theoretical support for audience participation and open-ended design, promoting contemporary values of freedom, diversity, and deconstruction in creative expression.

This also resonates with the inspiration I drew from reading Understanding Media, as it emphasizes elevating the role of the audience in relation to the work. By doing so, it invites the audience to reflect on the often-overlooked phenomenon of contemporary everyday consumption, transferring the interpretation and meaning-making of brand symbolism and consumer relationships to the audience.

• Hall, S. (1997) The Work of Representation. In: Hall, S. (ed.) Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices.

Hall’s framework on representation deepened my understanding of how meaning is constructed through cultural codes. It offered a critical lens to analyze how design mediates and reinforces social realities. In my project on perceptions of low-priced daily goods, I now reflect more critically on how visual elements—such as typography, color, and packaging—signal notions of ‘cheapness’ or ‘value.’ These signals are not objective but shaped by cultural assumptions. Hall’s ideas have thus sharpened my ability to decode the ideological functions embedded in everyday design.

Hall also prompts me to question: in my own work, whose voices do I amplify? Which meanings do I allow or suppress through tone, structure, and citation?

• Lupi, G. and Posavec, S., 2016. Dear Data. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

This project demonstrates the multifaceted nature of data—it can be both analytical and emotional. Lupi and Posavec collected mundane, personal data (like “how many times I said thank you”) and visualised it using hand-drawn symbols, patterns.

For my project, Dear Data reveals how visualisation is not just about clarity, but also about intimacy, personal identity, and storytelling. It inspires me to adopt more expressive forms—like color and texture—to add critique into visual communication. In addition, their use of slowness and imperfection also reminds me that small data—when thoughtfully visualised—can speak more truthfully than large, impersonal datasets.

• Rock, M. (1996) Designer as Author. [Online] 2×4. Available at: https://2×4.org/ideas/1996/designer-as-author/

The article critiques the idea of the “designer as author”, a concept that became popular in design discourse during the 1990s. Rock believes that over-emphasising authorship can turn the designer into a solitary genius figure, which risks ignoring collaboration, context, and criticality. For my project—where I visualise daily public consumption data to critique economic disparity—Rock’s idea meaningfully pushes me to reflect on my own role. This helps me stay critically aware of how my design choices actively mediate, and potentially distort, the information I present—especially in carefully visualising pricing hierarchies across different social classes.

• Laranjo, F., 2014. Critical Graphic Design: Critical of What?. [online] Modes of Criticism. Available at: https://modesofcriticism.org/critical-graphic-design/

In Critical Graphic Design: Critical of What?, Francisco Laranjo questions whether so-called “critical” design can truly resist the commercial systems it often operates within. This resonates with my investigation into how brand symbols shape consumer identity. As a graphic designer, I see how visual language constructs rather than reflects individuality. Laranjo’s critique makes me confront the complicity of design in reinforcing consumer culture.

 His argument urges me to rethink the role of design—not just as a tool for communication, but as a participant in larger social and economic structures. True criticality, I now believe, involves not just aesthetics, but exposing and intervening in the systems that give those aesthetics power.

• Crouwel, W. and van Toorn, J. (2015) The Debate: The Legendary Contest of Two Giants of Graphic Design. New York: Monacelli Press.

This text is more than a documentation of a past design debate—it is a performative manifestation of two fundamentally different ideologies regarding the role of design and writing. On one side, Wim Crouwel advocates for neutrality, clarity, and objectivity, reflecting a belief in design as a neutral transmitter of information. On the other side, Jan van Toorn insists on the importance of context, subjectivity, and political engagement, emphasizing that design is never ideologically innocent. These opposing views mirror my own internal debate as I compose this written response: should design-writing aim for transparent communication, or embrace its potential to challenge, provoke, and reveal hidden assumptions? As I experiment with tone, format, and structure, I lean toward van Toorn’s stance—recognizing that both writing and design are always embedded in context, always partial, and always shaping meaning, whether consciously or not.

• Foster, H., (2011) Design and Crime, London: Verso.

In Design and Crime, Hal Foster critiques the aestheticisation of everyday life under late capitalism, where design becomes a tool for branding, spectacle, and cultural distraction. This directly informs my inquiry into brand symbolism and consumer identity. Foster argues that design has shifted from problem-solving to surface styling—used to sell lifestyles rather than question systems. As a graphic designer, I find this critique unsettling yet urgent. My practice explores how visual branding constructs identities that feel personal but are manufactured. Foster pushes me to see design not as neutral, but as complicit in producing desire and identity through commodification. His analysis reframes my work: instead of just reworking brand symbols, I must interrogate the economic logic that empowers them. His text challenges me to embed critique deeper—not just in form, but in questioning design’s systemic role in consumer culture.

• Antrepo, 2010. Minimalist Effect in the Maximalist Market [Online Project]. Available at: https://www.antrepo4.com/

Antrepo’s Minimalist Effect in the Maximalist Market strips well-known consumer products of their excessive branding, revealing simplified, near-generic versions. This visual reduction exposes how heavily identity is constructed through graphic excess. In the context of my enquiry into branding and consumer identity, the project starkly illustrates how design manufactures emotional and cultural value. Inspired by Foster’s critique of design as a tool of spectacle, and Laranjo’s concern over design’s complicity, I see this project not just as aesthetic exercise but as a subtle critique of branding’s persuasive power. Yet, its gallery-like presentation risks aestheticising critique itself—designing dissent that still pleases the market. This tension reflects my own challenge: how to deconstruct branding while operating within its systems. Antrepo’s work motivates me to push further—beyond formal experimentation—to ask how visual strategies can meaningfully disrupt symbolic consumption.

• Baudrillard, J. (1998). The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. London: Sage.

In The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures, Jean Baudrillard presents a foundational critique of consumption within late capitalist societies. First published in 1970, the book explores how consumption has shifted from fulfilling basic material needs to becoming a system governed by signs, codes, and symbolic exchange. Baudrillard argues that objects are no longer valued merely for their utility; instead, they derive meaning from their position within a larger system of differences. Goods, under this framework, are consumed not only for their practical use but for what they signify socially. This semiotic turn in consumer theory marks a critical departure from classical economic models, introducing the idea that individuals purchase goods as a way to communicate identity, differentiate themselves from others, and navigate social hierarchies. In Baudrillard’s view, consumption is a language—a structured, coded process through which social meaning is both produced and consumed.

Baudrillard’s analysis has significantly shaped my own reflections on the role of consumption in everyday life, particularly regarding how branded goods function as tools of identity formation. In today’s global marketplace, brands no longer simply convey product information or denote quality. Instead, they construct elaborate symbolic universes, each carrying distinct values, lifestyles, and emotional appeals. Consumers, in turn, engage with these brand narratives as a way to signal their tastes, aspirations, and belonging within certain social groups. The relationship between consumers and brands thus becomes mutually reinforcing: brands create meaning, and consumers seek personal and social validation through their association with that meaning. This symbolic consumption fuels a continual cycle of desire and differentiation, sustaining the economic and cultural momentum of modern consumer society.

Building on Baudrillard’s theory and integrating my own observations, I have become increasingly interested in the ways this symbolic system of consumption plays out across different socio-economic groups. Specifically, I’ve noticed that the identity value constructed by brands does not always align with actual purchasing behavior when variables such as income levels, consumption capacity, and material needs are taken into account. For instance, lower-income consumers may still engage in aspirational consumption, acquiring branded goods not for their practical value but for the status they confer—often at significant personal cost. This phenomenon suggests a disconnect between symbolic consumption and material conditions, raising important questions about the limits of Baudrillard’s framework in explaining real-world economic behavior.

My current project aims to explore this tension more deeply. By examining specific case studies, conducting interviews, and analyzing consumer data, I seek to understand how symbolic value interacts with financial constraints and practical decision-making. Is Baudrillard’s model universally applicable, or are there significant deviations in contexts where economic necessity overrides symbolic desire? Furthermore, how do consumers reconcile the contradictions between the idealized brand narratives they consume and the realities of their lived economic circumstances? Through this interdisciplinary inquiry, I hope to contribute to a more grounded and context-sensitive understanding of consumption, one that accounts not only for the power of signs but also for the structural, economic, and psychological realities that shape consumer choices in a stratified and increasingly brand-saturated world.

• Aldi UK, 2011. Like Brands, Only Cheaper [TV campaign]. Available at: https://www.marketingweek.com/inside-ad-campaign-of-the-decade-aldi-like-brands-only-cheaper/

Aldi UK’s Like Brands, Only Cheaper (2011), a now-iconic advertising campaign that directly compares Aldi’s private label products to well-known branded goods, often in humorous and disarmingly simple side-by-side setups. The visual language of the campaign is minimal and confident—typically a clean, split-screen format with understated backgrounds, clear typography, and direct speech. The effectiveness of the campaign lies in its ability to challenge consumer assumptions around price, value, and quality through simple, relatable scenarios. By making the comparison visually and verbally obvious, the campaign invites viewers to question why they pay more for essentially similar products—suggesting that branding itself may be the only real difference.

This campaign resonates strongly with my own line of enquiry, which investigates how branding constructs perceived value and identity. Where projects like Antrepo’s Minimalist Effect in the Maximalist Market reveal branding’s aesthetic excess, Aldi’s campaign undermines its economic logic. By presenting two visually similar products—one branded, one not—the campaign exposes how much of a product’s added value is symbolic rather than material. It reframes price as a construct built through design and marketing, not intrinsic quality. This connects directly to my own interest in how graphic design can reveal or obscure truths about consumer goods.

From a design perspective, the clarity of Aldi’s visual strategy is central to its power. The campaign avoids design ornamentation, instead relying on contrast, juxtaposition, and wit. These principles are ones I aim to adopt in my own practice, particularly in data visualisation and infographics. Rather than relying on complex or abstract visual metaphors, Aldi’s campaign demonstrates that accessibility can itself be subversive. Its simplicity allows the message to cut through noise and consumer fatigue, presenting critique in a format that is digestible and engaging—something often lost in design work that becomes overly self-referential or academic.

Critically, the campaign also reveals the potential for humour to serve as a form of visual resistance. In contrast to more overtly critical or “anti-design” practices discussed by Francisco Laranjo, which often circulate in academic or niche design contexts, Aldi’s work speaks directly to a mass audience. While Laranjo critiques the tendency for critical design to remain within the design discourse itself, Aldi’s message enters the everyday—supermarket aisles, TV screens, and shopping decisions. This raises an important question for my practice: can critical design operate in public, commercial-facing spaces without compromising its intent? Aldi suggests that it can—through clarity, relatability, and tone.

Furthermore, the campaign can be read through the lens of Hal Foster’s Design and Crime, particularly his discussion of how surface design is often used to obscure or inflate value in consumer culture. Aldi flips this principle, using surface design to demystify. Its rejection of luxury branding aesthetics, and emphasis on basic visual honesty, becomes a kind of reverse-aesthetic—inviting a re-evaluation of what we are really buying when we buy brands.

This campaign ultimately informs my approach not only in terms of visual strategy, but in attitude. It demonstrates that critique can be playful, accessible, and populist—without sacrificing impact. As I continue to develop my studio responses, I will use this reference as a model for how visual clarity, humour, and contrast can be employed to meaningfully challenge the symbolic power of brands in consumer society.