From Voice ~ Topics: career, professional development

Myths of the Self-Taught Designer: The First Conversation between Ego and the Devil

Editor's Note: Starting with this issue, designer and author (design authorpeneur) David Barringer begins a multi-part series about the fallacies and truths of design practice in the 21st century. Read on and join the dialogue.

The self-taught are a varied bunch of ragtag amateurs, fakers, enthusiasts, wackos, quacks, thieves, simpletons, liars, rubes, chuckleheads, delusionaries, hobbyists, and geniuses. Beware. The self-taught arrive on a wave of American optimism that has a wee bit of historical undercurrent. Americans like to believe themselves to be quintessentially self-taught, self-made, self-liberated, self-reliant. We like to believe there is no such thing as social class in America. We like to believe anyone can be anything. We need only opportunity and will power. America provides the opportunity. The individual provides the will power. And bang! We are who we work hard to become.

The myth of the self-taught artisan comprises a subset of the legend of the self-made American. Rules and regulations, certificates and degrees: these replace royalty, title, class distinction. Free us from the arbitrary privileges of birth and aristocracy, and liberate us into the great open skies of meritocracy and democracy, capitalism and the competitive marketplace. Smash beyond the limitations erected by fearful and capricious authorities. Believe in yourself, work hard, and achieve your dreams. Invent a technological wonder. Create a miracle of efficiency. Discover not a new land but a new market. Behold! We are self-made! Only in America!

Bad-mouth the self-taught, the amateurs, the mavericks, the entrepreneurs of this great land of ours, and you’re criticizing the promise of America. What are you, unpatriotic? A traitor? You might as well burn the flag.

This is the myth, mind you. This is the opening chapter to the CEO’s ghostwritten autobiography. In reality, we live with restrictions, demand them, argue over whose responsibilities should expand, whose powers should constrict. Individuals have birth certificates, social-security numbers, high-school diplomas, driver’s licenses, passports, voter’s registration cards, college degrees, Ph.D.s, J.D.s, M.D.s, professional licenses, operating licenses, board certifications. We have laws, regulations, rules, codes, covenants, zones, and permits. Oh, boy, we got it all, from cradle to grave, from head to toe, from bedroom to board room. Let’s not belabor the point. Let’s only acknowledge the complex reality. America has learned the hard way what dangers await us at the mercy of the self-regulated: slavery, monopoly, corruption, the crash of the stock market and the loss of faith in commerce. Freedom, even market freedom, depends upon the enforcement of rules, or else we are not all of us free.

Has the American All-Star Marching Band of Grandly Sweeping Rhetoric left the building? Yes? Good. Let’s narrow the spotlight, dismantle the podium, and quiet the crowd. Let’s see who sits at the table. Ah, yes. It’s Ego and the Devil.

Ego
: Hi. I’m a professional designer. I have a degree and several years experience in the field as well as in academia.
Devil
: I’m the Devil.
Ego: The Devil? Sure. You mean you’re a self-taught designer with no degree and no teaching experience. You have a slipshod portfolio and a part-time job. To compensate for a lack of expertise, you have, Rand help us, enthusiasm. You are an amateur. You do not have the soul of a designer.
Devil: Well, actually, I have a couple—
Ego
: Please. You lack seriousness.
Devil
: I possess the artistic impulse, which depends, first, on a capacity to destroy and, second, on a desire to create. To create is to exercise power over oneself and over one’s environment. I wish to leave evidence that I existed, that I affected the world in some way. Even a doodle says, “I was,” and, “I made this.” You can choose to be a doctor, but you can’t choose to want to be a doctor. I could be a doctor and help people, but I would be miserable. I want to make things. I want the power to destroy and to create. I’m the Devil.
Ego
: I had to go through design school to get my degree. You’re trying to strike a pose without doing the work. You’re a fake. You don’t have the chops. You’re an imposter. You haven’t earned the name.
Devil
: Many design students skate by, too, without doing much work. That’s true of any student. Grades are the answer to this, but once you have a degree, you’ve got a degree. Success then depends on luck, networking, will power, and skill. Amateurs may indeed have the chops. What, after all, is the difference between independent work in a school setting and independent work in a home studio? You may be motivated by mentors (professors or online pundits), but in the end we all have to motivate ourselves.
Ego
: Maybe there should be a different name, then. You can’t be a real designer unless you have a design degree. Maybe those with degrees should make degrees more significant.
Devil
: You already do this to an extent by employment requirements. Academic posts require a degree. Larger firms require degrees, experience, a certain skill set for a certain job.
EGO
: Then where did these self-taught amateurs come from? How do they survive?
DEVIL
: Blame the desktop computer for enabling the amateur designer. Blame the small business for relying on the amateur designer. Blame the market, basically, for creating the technology and the incentives that give rise to the amateur designer.
Ego
: Exactly. Amateur designers take work that professionals should be doing, and we’d be doing it better.
Devil: Amateur designers often do work that professional designers don’t want to do because the work pays peanuts. And, let me tell you, one thing amateur designers struggle to do at this level is to educate these smaller clients about what design is and why they need it. This is thankless and unrewarding work. Hours, days, weeks later, the amateur designer may be left without even a measly business card to design. Quite frankly, you don’t want this heartache. A more interesting question is how many degreed designers you need at a particular design firm. Can you get away with hiring non-degreed designers for certain kinds of work? Web designers must perennially update their skills by attending the latest software seminars. It’s possible firms don’t need that many degreed designers.
Ego
: I shouldn’t have to compete against those who don’t have to pay off student loans.
Devil: Parents can subsidize design students as easily as design amateurs. Design students who graduate debt-free are as entitled to their degrees as anyone else.
Ego
: But amateurs haven’t committed to the craft like we have. They’re just dipping their toes. They’re not serious. They can walk away at any time. They haven’t suffered!
Devil
: You can walk away, too. Times are tough. Everyone’s fighting for jobs, especially in the world of graphic design, in which expensive print and collateral projects are first on the block for cost-cutting. A personal note: I went to law school, and I’m still paying off the loans. I have a degree and a state-bar membership, neither of which I use, which is like buying a very expensive holster for a gun you never intend to acquire, let alone fire. No one sympathizes with the devil. I understand that. Still, my desire does not depend on a degree. I wanted to learn design, and I have begun the long process of self-education (or maybe I should call it “self-motivated education”) and will continue to learn what I can. My legal education, on the other hand, stopped after I passed the bar exam. The degree is a proxy indicator of commitment, but not the thing itself. Desire, devotion, performance, production: look to the worker and to the work, not to the credentials on the door, for evidence of seriousness.

[To be continued ...]

About the Author: David Barringer is the author of American Mutt Barks in the Yard published in Emigre 68. His first novel, Johnny Red, will be published this July by Word Riot Press. Email: curious@davidbarringer.com. Site: http://www.davidbarringer.com.

  1. link to this comment by Susan Kirkland Wed May 11, 2005

    This is the age old chasm between fine art and commercial art. It takes training to apply your creativity to the discipline of design; but sometimes all it takes to be a successful entrepreneur is guts--not necessarily smarts. My particular favorite exchange with one CEO and COO was on the day I created a logo for SmartCart (a surgical kit that was all inclusive and procedure-smart), using the cliche "A+" in the word smart. After receiving unrestrained congrats on hitting the nail on the head, the CEO took me aside and said, "So, what's the significance of the red A plus?" (duh) I said, "Well, remember when you did something particularly smart in school and you got an A plus?" His answer was revealing and says much about what it takes to make a successful entrepreneur; "As you can see, we were mostly C students." Success is not always determined by talent nor the immensity of your gift; rather by how well and how quickly you pick yourself up after you fall. Personality fit, people skills and showing up on time seem to count more to the corporate world than pushing the envelope of great design. None of those characteristics contribute to the solitary experience of great art and design. Trained or untrained, it's about making a living in the end unless you decide to do whatever is necessary to reach your true potential--then you must train or spend most of your life in self-discovery finding lessons.

    Susan Kirkland
    author of "Start and Run a Creative Services Business" available May 30, 2005

  2. link to this comment by Karen Thu May 12, 2005

    I never believe that everything can be defined in black and white, no good designer or thinker should. To cast the “amateur” as the devil is a bit presumptuous at the get go. But then again, I’m an agnostic so the author may as well have cast Batman as the bad guy. It is an interesting though, yet it does push the propaganda the elite institutions have forced upon us, that you cannot be a professional anything unless you have that costly piece of paper - from their institution. I'm still scratching my head over the fact that I've met far too many MBAs who cannot put a simple sentence together. I am serious. But there may be few of us out here whose education does not start and stop in the classroom, who read every book on design they can get their hands on, who attend every art opening and every lecture, who practice, practice, practice on the computer or drawing board, and who look at everything as inspiration, yet because we haven't handed over our hard earned money to the elite institutions (I'm a student so I'm still handing it over), we are considered "amateur." Etymologically, the word amateur simply means to love something. To have such love and passion for something, you live and breath it night and day; your designer eye does not shut down with the office lights at the end of the day. Passion is a far greater educator than any institution could imagine on its own. Anyone who has ever met many amateur astronomers knows this without argument, that many of them can run circles around PhDs. I know; I meet both regularly. The fact is, if you love something, you’re a sponge. It becomes you, your life's mission. However, I do understand there are those out there who simply put a hat on and call themselves designers because they want to do it for the money and they like the “prestige” of calling themselves designers. That’s where the devil comes in - the minute this or any profession is done solely for the money, you’ve sold out - but that goes for the degreed individual as well. There are many great artists in history who had no formal training, great minds who were not accepted into college, or like Abraham Lincoln, just read a whole lot of law books and put on a hat and called himself a lawyer – then president. The college degree is relatively new in the history and “scheme” of mankind; let’s be careful not to put all our “eggspectations” into that one basket and assume all it takes is that college degree to call oneself a great anything.

  3. link to this comment by beauXjames Thu May 12, 2005

    As an amateur, and a friend of the devil. I find the article humorous. I relish in the 'inconspicuous' notion that the author is above natural talent and the innate gift that some artists may have without official 'training'. Yes, the idea of a degree is great, but have any of you been through school lately? The curriculums toooootally suck and you're competing with a bunch of monkeys in a lab. Every now and then, the boisterous artist steps up to defend his stance on why he/she chose to do something, and it turns into an intraspecitve argument to convince themselves that this particular approach was the 'right' one. Whether it be a white screen or a blank sheet of paper you gimp off your printer, the act of overcoming the emptiness...the vast plane held together by imagination and practicality...is overwhelming...and requires nothing more than confidence to overcome. As the media defines the perfect curves littering the big screen and prancing on the red carpets, they also taint the general ability of the public to be creative. Put a professional in charge of it. Ha...professional...he's just another self-concious monkey who's grown up in this obscene world full of options to gain the paper that says he has a purpose. Art is expressive...so should design. Illustrators fear that their work is no longer art, while artists fear that they can't draw. The devil knows better than that. Besides, if it were the devil that a designer were to go up against...the designer wouldn't have a chance.

  4. link to this comment by Leila Singleton Thu May 12, 2005

    It would seem to me that at the heart of this discussion is the idea of synthesizing extremes. On one end we have the self-taught, enthusiastic go-getter who ignorantly revels in the democratization of design through the widespread availability of graphics software and help manuals galore. On the other end we have the design literati, technical masters marching about obstinately with their titles, diplomas and a list of strict — but valid — design rules.

    I have seen both sides. In high school I started as the enthusiastic, self-taught youngster, dabbling in design with word processing programs and making bad logos in — dare I say it — PowerPoint. I was passionate, which was good for personal morale but ultimately just made my work passionately flawed. I acknowledged that my unbridled passion needed direction and discipline, so I went to art school for four years. There I met both students who were sloppily passionate and those who played by the rules, acquiring technical skills and executing projects with the neat, clean and informed passion of a dead fish.

    Ultimately, the key to masterful design is synthesis of these seemingly "opposing" sides. Anyone can read and memorize a rule, just as anyone can get wildly excited and expressive. But it takes effort and discipline to alter the steadfast anchor points of a rule so that it can comfortably embrace one's creative vision. It takes skill to tame a sporadic scribble so that it can still flail enthusiastically within the margins of an educated perspective. The question really is not about which extreme is "right" or "better," but rather how we can use the strengths of both to improve as designers. After all, it's easy to forget about taking sides when we choose to immerse ourselves in the best of both.

  5. link to this comment by K.O. Sat May 14, 2005

    All designers are self-taught.... degree or no degree, devil or just ego.... Those who are in love with design just work hard. It doesn't matter if they went to school and got "the training" ... The truth is that "the training" is more about people opening your mind to many more possibilities...they don’t give you passion or skills, those two things work together... no teacher can make you create a great design... You the artist, the dreamer you have to do it and prove to them that you have that kind fire? That is all that degree gives you :challenges and critics... That is all that separate an amateur from a "professional." We all learn quickly, that once you get that design degree in that senior year, you start all over; has a freshmen, an amateur and has the devil once again?.

  6. link to this comment by Rob Sun May 15, 2005

    Wow, I never knew I was the Devil. Neat! Even cooler, if I go to four years of art school and mange to graduate, I can be the Ego.

    On second thought, I'm fond of the pitchforks.

  7. link to this comment by Calvin Yu Mon May 16, 2005

    I haven't been to school and I have a job now and have had jobs. The same jobs as some friends with degrees.

  8. link to this comment by wael omar Mon May 16, 2005

    Just be a student of the game.... whatever you decide to do. Who cares about all the other jargon... your work speaks for itself, thats the bottom line. Besides, in this business, designers have to refresh there knowledge base every two or three months with the release of new applications and trends....plug-ins and processors, fashions, fonts, and news.....so essentially, if you're a working designer, you already ARE a student.

  9. link to this comment by Yutaka Takahashi Mon May 16, 2005

    Anybody who stays in university for 4 straight years can acquire a degree. The deciding factor is the quality of work itself.
    While I look forward to acquiring formal education in design, I have as much respect for the self-educated as I do for its counterpart.

  10. link to this comment by Anthony Mon May 16, 2005

    I am a design student.

    However I basically taught myself almost all of what I am now paying a design school to re-tech me just for a piece of paper that says I have graduated.

    My work before was just as good. I beleive with something like design, which is not right or wrong, black or white - you are either born with the skills or not. You cannot really be taught if the passion is not there.

    I think there are too many wankers out there who think they are god's just because they have a design degree. Some people are very passionate about design and their skills show it without needing to spend years studying it. Some of us can just self study and pick things up alot easier without having someone else try to teach us.

    To write all self taught designers off as "amateur" is not fair.

  11. link to this comment by Anton Tue May 17, 2005

    I am 100% self tought in more than one field (art and design especially). I had no more than 12 years of education all my life.

    As much as it is important to study and have degrees it is equally important to retain freedom of expression and choice.

    The education system is wrong (pay-per-degree), not people that study by themselves and learn for real.

    Moreover, I beleive that everybody, and I mean everybody has the potential to do anything, so the whole ego-devil conversation is a waste of time, both of them should go and do something rather than talk about it.

  12. link to this comment by Seth White Tue May 17, 2005

    I graduated from a lackluster state university and had to scramble my last years to raise my work to the quality of my peers. I think good design is possible whether formally trained or not, but an education is very important on a resume. I think nothing can replace mentorship by a good designer. By becoming an officer in my student AIGA club, I was able to develop relationships with great designers who offered terrific insight into the field. Those contacts and the independent projects that went with them, more than my formal education, helped me develop into a better designer.

  13. link to this comment by Jack Shedd Wed May 18, 2005

    That is most ridiculous, contrived, self-congratulating and pointless pontification I have read in a long time.

    Bravo!

  14. link to this comment by Andy Wed May 18, 2005

    This article is more or less a perfect representation of the elitist attitude that AIGA wraps around itself in all aspects. Whether that's a coincidence or not is anyone's guess.

    Perhaps that's why AIGA events are looking so thin these days. Why would I want to give money to an organization that encourages the kind of polarity that is shown here?

  15. link to this comment by Kemie G. Wed May 18, 2005

    While an educated argument for/against formal education for designers is always welcome, this article is just so full of biased generalizations that it's not even useful.
    Equating professionalism to a university degree and labeling all self-taught designers as amateurs is naive at best.

  16. link to this comment by bob Wed May 18, 2005

    The writer isn't exactly a spectacular designer either.
    http://www.davidbarringer.com/design/mag_design/mag_design.html

  17. link to this comment by FWMJ Wed May 18, 2005

    I can't help but laugh out loud at this bitter, below average, formally trained designer being uptight about self motivated and taught designers that surpass him in skill, professionalism, and work.

    This guy is very, very mad.

    Critics. www.fwmj.com/fu.mp3

  18. link to this comment by cp Wed May 18, 2005

    I think the point people are missing - both the author himself, and those that deny the necessity of a design education - is that schools aren't supposed to GIVE you all the information, but rather enable you to be more creative, to inspire you, and to know how to aquire the information you need for subsequent challenges.

    This is a semantic argument. Everyone take your bitterness and elitist attitudes (author included) and shove them in a deep dark hole and grow the fuck up.

  19. link to this comment by jayse Wed May 18, 2005

    Props for a controversy-attention-getting-whine piece. But...

    Check his site: some of the worst, most outdated, timid and typical design I've ever seen is displayed at this guy's site. But this is typical of schooled egotists, and it's why I often don't hire them.

    DESIGN EDUCATION IS A MUST - the best place to get it is what should be questioned.

    Often, the places handing out degrees in exchange for your 60k are the worst places.

    The lack-luster design and poor attitude of the author of this article should be enough to make anybody seriously question the merits of a degree.

    // jayse

  20. link to this comment by Andy Wed May 18, 2005

    Somebody had to be self-taught in the beginning, though.. They, in turn, taught someone else who did the same and the cycle went on untill there was some form of formal education.

    Not long after design schools started popping up, the self taught were scoffing the degreed students.

    This argument holds true for any creative field. A degree is no replacement for talent and some things cannot be taught by a prof.

  21. link to this comment by Leo Prendergast BA (hons) Wed May 18, 2005

    There is a great deal to be said for university educations. Imagine, if the author of this piece had spent three or four years studying journalism then you might not have had to read a bizarre, half-finished rant that makes little sense to read.

  22. link to this comment by kris Wed May 18, 2005

    this is a great article. In fact, shortly after I read it - my pants caught on FIRE ! On FIRE from my passion ! My passion for this article!


    Oh God it burns. Put out my passion!

  23. link to this comment by Clint F Wed May 18, 2005

    Obviously this guy has no experience trying to find and hire a college graduate who's learned more than how to smoke weed and blame everyone else for his shortcomings. At least one thing can be said for the self-taught: they've got ambition. That's a rare quality in today's job market.

    This rant is typical of the entitlement mentality. Nobody should try to improve themself above the others, we should all just troll along within the system and it'll take care of us...

    Cf

  24. link to this comment by steven heller Wed May 18, 2005

    That David Barringers essay has received such a flurry of response suggests this is a sensitive topic. Indeed I can relate to the emotionalism of those on either side because, at different times I've felt defiantly proud of not having a formal design education and incredibly frustrated that I really never learned the formal skills necessary to be the kind of designer I truly admire. I accept the limitations, but I've reached an age where I'm well aware that with more (read as any) education I could have accomplished so much more, rather than rely on others to do my designing for me.

    In the forthcoming EYE (#56) I've written a mea culpa on why self-education isn't all its cracked up to be. In fact, I've experienced a real wall that all the self-taught compensatory experience in the world does not help me breach.

    In his essay Barringer expresses the ambivalence inherent in the self-taught anything - pride and guilt, knowledge and ignorance. Whether one is the devil or ego or vice versa, there are two sides to the issue that are worth exploring.

    To the respondent who calls this essay divisive, I would argue that it actually rather honest and raises concerns that people grapple with in both substantive and superficial ways. And sometimes cynical and sarcastic ways too.

    Given the high costs of tuitions, and the increase in graduate school enrollments questioning the value of education is necessary. There are many trained and untrained (or self-taught) designers who want something more from their chosen line of work, while others are happy just the way they are.

  25. link to this comment by ME Wed May 18, 2005

    The author of this article should take note that lots of famed designers, I'm sure everyone posting comments here admire, have no formal design training, education or degrees.

    An education is a fantastic thing and everyone, if they can, should have some post-highschool education. But design, similaiar to
    illustration, filmmaking, printing and photography, experience will kick the ass of education anyday.

    I have no formal education except for some college classes in any thing that was related to art and I have faired so much better than people who have degrees in design. Why?

    1. Creative talent

    2. Willpower to succeed

  26. link to this comment by Richard Powell Wed May 18, 2005

    What a laughable straw man Barringer's created, conflating 'Americanism' with 'self-taught.' It's the kind of half-baked thinking that appeals to someone who is trying to sound like an essayist without applying the least bit of critical thought required to craft an actual essay. It begs the question, what impulse drives a self-taught Malaysian designer? What impulse drove self-taught craftspeople in eras before there was an America?

    Max Weber on a popsicle stick. Shoddy attempts at grand social theorizing should be penalized by being required to read everything Malcolm Gladwell has ever written, front-to-back. That'll learn him.

    It's entirely possible that being self-taught has nothing to do with any jingoism, but rather that, in one's other educational endeavors, one has learned how to learn. If you does that properly, you can teach yourself quite a few things. And to be completely frank, design simply isn't one of the more difficult subjects.

    In other words, it's not always an education vs. non-education argument. Sometimes it's a this-education vs. that-education argument, and like its bigger brother, it comes with a pre-wadded ball of lint that you can roll around in your navel as you ponder it.

  27. link to this comment by DB Wed May 18, 2005

    Because this is the first in a series of dialogs, I feel compelled to clarify its nature and my intent.

    (EGO: He's so serious.

    (DEVIL: I'm bored already.)

    The introductory paragraphs employ hyperbole, sarcasm, and self-deprecation. I use over-the-top language to express widely held but wrong-headed points of view.

    (EGO: Gosh, really? Say it ain't so.

    (DEVIL: I have a Soprano's DVD here somewhere. . . .)

    I then correct for that before introducing the dialog.

    In the dialog, characters speak to each other. It is a form as old as the novels of Denis Diderot (1713-84), whose dialogs were one of my sources of inspiration for this piece. Ego is the degreed designer, and the Devil is the self-taught designer. The names are not my authorial indictments of these two. They are, instead, playful evocations of the stereotypical regards in which each type of designer holds the other (pros view the self-taught as illegitimate devils; the self-taught view the degreed as egoistic, if not egotistical). I don't suggest that these regards are accurate and true, by any means. They are, again, stereotypes. I employ them precisely because they are provocative and comic. I never claim that professionals are better than amateurs, that the degreed are better than the self-taught. I never claim that a degreed pro's designs are de facto superior to an undegreed amateur's designs, or vice versa. These are precisely the myths this piece explores.

    (EGO: I don't get it.

    (DEVIL: I don't care.)

    The purpose of this series of dialogs is, through the use of my narrative voice and the voices of other characters, to tease out these myths, debunk them, and establish the complexities of any individual designer's status. The names, in other words, are not meant to be taken literally as judgments of either type of designer.

    (EGO: What? Can I be the Devil then?

    (DEVIL: No way. You be, like, Yoda.)

    The speakers, while they may take their sides of things, will, over the course of the dialogs, give up some of their preconceived notions, relinquish some of their prejudices, and come to some agreement. The form of the dialog dramatizes this process.

    (DEVIL: The Sopranos is a drama.

    (EGO: Would I like it?

    (DEVIL: No. It's good.)

    It is a misinterpretation to read the speakers' arguments and observations as my authorial conclusions. I am, in fact, of both minds. I argue as if I were on either side. I am not Ego, and I am not the Devil. I am a little of both. For that matter, depending on which post-article comment you read, I am apparently too much of both. And yet any particular designer is also going to be a little of both, to greater and lesser extents. The issue of a designer's status remains timely and urgent precisely because there are so many ways to become a designer today. Add cheap computers, increasingly advanced software chunking out design templates (designed by designers), and a free evening at home, and whamo: instant graphic designer. The class of designers is broad, diverse, of various levels of education and commitment, passion and talent (pretty much like writers, musicians, and other artists), and yet the very diversity of the class tends to breed skepticism, resentment, prejudice, competition, and tribal warfare. Consider how many reactions to this piece are ad hominem. If I needed additional confirmation that I am indeed an outsider, I now possess it. (And to ye graphic maligners, hang in there. The population of Grumpville may be growing, but the shun'll come out tomorrow.)

    (EGO: He just made an ad hominem wisecrack. He's contradicting himself.

    (DEVIL: Finally. It's the most entertaining thing he's said so far.)

    On that note, let me emphasize that I am not speaking on behalf of AIGA. I am not AIGA. I do not have a degree, yet I get paid for some of the admittedly modest design work I've done. I am both a self-taught amateur who learns on the job, an undegreed professional only by paycheck, not by affiliation, membership, or license. This dialog explores the very issues that underlie a designer's efforts at self-definition. In a few places in the upcoming dialogs, I describe my personal struggles with self-definition. I won't apologize in advance for boring you with my personally informed essays. Boring readers is what professional essayists do best.

    (EGO: No kidding.

    (DEVIL: This is so totally long.

    (EGO: We're here to preemptively defuse criticism.

    (DEVIL: Only a certain type. It's an old ploy. And anyway it won't work.

    (EGO: No kidding.)

    While the dramatic form of this dialog may be unusual fare for AIGA or other design publications, I do not intend it to be confounding, divisive, inflammatory, biased, or self-aggrandizing. On the contrary, I'd hoped it would be read, understood and enjoyed as quite the opposite.

    I expect it goes without saying that no writer has the power to tell you who you are. And I certainly don't claim that power for myself. Far from it. After all, who the hell do I think I am? In the subsequent dialogs, I will be myself, the Devil, Ego, and maybe, one can only hope, someone even more infuriating.

  28. link to this comment by Web Editors Thu May 19, 2005

    Editors' Note: In the interest of fair and civil discourse, the editors have removed a comment or two that did not live up to this standard. While we do not believe in censoring commentary, these were not only ad hominem attacks, but also anonymously signed.

  29. link to this comment by bren Thu May 19, 2005

    art is like religion. .. whatever title (in this case degree) you put on it, doesn't change the fact that some of it is just bullshit.

  30. link to this comment by dyabut Fri May 20, 2005

    The author (who is a "self-taught" designer...some of you missed that while you were railing against academia) highlights interesting sociological questions in a rather high-ball/backdoor way. That being said, these questions are nothing more than (forgive the crudeness) emotional masturbation.

    He gives those of us who are "self-taught" a pompous, self-important, elitist villain. He also gives those of us who are "institutional-taught" a holier than thou, self-important, Marxist villain. Everyone wins, because everyone is right, and creative and special and blah blah blah...

    No one is arguing about IF our elitist (and it is very much so) field should have a "caste-system" instead they are arguing over what should the rules be, and who has a bigger...imagination.

    Take a step back...breath...and realize that both sides are right and wrong. Academia basically sucks right now...and the "self-taught" take much too long to mature...or insert your own stereotypes here.

    If we want to devalue any "class" in our field, lets start with those who lack higher thought, weather they be "institutionally-taught" human Xerox machines, or "self-taught" bohemian hipsters.

    And then we can...oh oh...I'm done...I need a emotional towel and cigarette.

  31. link to this comment by jambo Fri May 20, 2005

    Ego,

    Having read your comments it did not take me long to realize that you are very foolish indeed.

    To think that just because you have a degree makes you a better than a non degree holder in graphic design is complete nonense and I really cannot believe you think like this...I know designers working for big name design firms who have no degrees and produce stunning work.

    You have a huge chip on your shoulder about this I feel, and judging by your comments your fairly academic which again makes your thoughts very surprising, you should either go and get laid or go see some head help because all these bad feelings are not going to help your creative streak unless your creating for a horror brief!!!

    I never usually comment on blogs but you have to be the most up your own arse brain lender I have had the pleasure of not meeting.

    Get a life and get away from the mac live life like a man and not a narrow minded aimless fool.

  32. link to this comment by Susan Kirkland Mon May 23, 2005

    Wow, this topic has grown. Trained or untrained, growth in a field comes from doing, not just from studying the work of your peers. Reading books, visiting museum, studying CommArts--these thing just show you what others are doing. What are you doing? Spend your time creating and the lessons are inherent in the act. Original art is the result of an individual path of personal development. Training just provides the map.
    These are just my opinions.

    To lighten the mood, there's a complimentary POD cartoon on my website called Melon at the Plaza NYC for everyone who needs a bit of respite.
    And good luck to you all, whether you're trained or untrained. Everybody is entitled to make a living--but not at the expense of a client.
    SDK
    author of Start and Run a Creative Services Business/available May 30

  33. link to this comment by Francisco G. Mon May 23, 2005

    I would like to ask all those people bashing the author's supposed "so-so" design skills to show me what good design is. You seem to know it all. By the way I'm also a design student.

  34. link to this comment by Beckie Tue May 24, 2005

    You are either creative or you aren't. Period. It's not something that you can teach someone in school ...
    You can enhance your talent by going to school or by learning on your own, but choosing school certainly doesn't make you any better ... and vice versa.

  35. link to this comment by Jim Thomas Mon May 30, 2005

    I apologize for coming into this debate a little late, but after reading through it, I felt the need to speak up. I don't think there is a right answer to this debate. The question is not which is better, self-taught or academic. No, that is not where the problem is; the problem is lazy versus motivated. The problem is the original versus the copier, the disciplined versus the wild, the educated (not in the tradition sense, but with a working knowledge of design theory and history) and the blind who design on a whim.
    Right now I am a student in Undergrad and i can say with great certainty, that there is a lot of crap coming out of academically trained portfolios. It is not because the program is bad, it is not because they spent more money than the self taught, it is because their heart isn't in their work. But there is also some great work being produced as well. Students that take what they are learning in the classroom then spending the night in the library learning as much as they can on their own. These are the students that will make the difference in the future. Whether self-taught or not, students must know the past, must know where design has been, before they can move forward. That is where the debate should be. American students and self taught designers are not spending enough time with theories, concepts, history, and are making "slick" or "trendy" graphics. If you don't know conceptually why you are doing what you are doing, if you are making something because you think it looks neat, then you are the problem with design. If you don't know what rules you are breaking, you are not doing a service to the field or yourself.

  36. link to this comment by Lorenzo Wed Jun 01, 2005

    The number of people who took this story so personaly fascinates me. I find all this to be rather comical ( and maybe is it that it points out how many people identify with the characters of the dialogue (think about it)).

    I think the whole thing is very well put together. The way I took at it, is that it's just something to think about and then to let go. I think the point of the dialogue is as merely suggestive (or subjective) as literature intends to be by nature.
    I think the whole work feels very real, and maybe that's makes certain aspects of it feel menacing to some people. So many of the responses in this blog seem to be made by people who were taking the dialogue as if it was supposed to be the truth about something. They allowed themselves to feel directly and personally targeted. But then, I think that they are missing the point of it.

    My comment to the author is:

    Well done!

  37. link to this comment by Design Guru Wed Jun 01, 2005

    Education builds a strong foundation of what design is all about. Schooling provides guidance of the how, what, when etc. of design.

    Passion and perseverance is what true designers should have. It makes design, a concept to reality. It is not just design talent that makes a good designer but also communication skills like selling, persuading, presenting and having inter personal skills that matters.

    If the graduates and self taught designers have all of the above, they can be just as good or better.

    The only thing that separates these two kinds of designers is the paper qualification. It shows a lot of discipline to get that degree. It also helps get recognized in job hunting.

    I’d say never put down anyone, as everyone has a special skill to offer. It is a matter of a need in any organization.

  38. link to this comment by leslie Mon Jun 06, 2005

    I am one of the B.C. graphic designers. (before computers) I have taught myself the software programs that are necessary to compete in the market place but I still feel my formal design training was invaluable in learning how to think conceptually and approach a design problem from many angles. I don't believe this is an either or proposition—continuing self-realization goes on for a lifetime not just during college. The process is more important than the product.

  39. link to this comment by Jessica Durboraw Fri Jun 10, 2005

    I think it's inessential to argue the points of whether or not an education is necessary. A college education, a technical course, or a new self-led study in design is an opportunity, and if given the opportunity to take the next step, learn a new medium or a little more about yourself, you should never turn it down.

    The success of one's work should not equate to how little you had to do to arrive at the solution, but how many different experiences were inspiration to how you arrived there.

    Mr. Heller, you are a major inspiration to my life and career as a permanant and ever progressing student of this industry.

  40. link to this comment by Misty Wed Jan 18, 2006

    I have read many things on this posting and it's all pretty much just a waste of time to disucss it. I've always felt you build your life up to what you want it to be. You can teach yourself and go all the way up or you can go to school work just as hard pay for the training and get to the same place in life. Bill Gates did it and so have many others. I'm more interested now after reading all of this to see if anyone can give me some advice. I am a single mother I cannot afford in any way not even with student loans at this point in my life to try to go to formal schooling though hopefully later I can. Later when time permits me I will try for grants etc to go to school. In the meaning time being an artistic person I wanted to explore computer programming and in the last 3 weeks I have read over 4 books the one I am readning now I absolutely love, Learn to program with visual basic.net by, John Smiley. I am learning what I consider to be a great deal of useful information from this book. Other books just jump right into the code part of programming but this book walks you through in baby steps. I have always loved writing and drawing and even played with web design slightly before. I find myself wanting to lose sleep over creating what feels like art to me with my programming. I am very peticular about my design and logic of the program and then use that to help me build code to make it all work properly and bug free. Being so new to learning this on my own I admit it is a big challenge and the problems I stumble through have me stumped and if I could go to school right now for this it would help some of that but I'm unfortunate not to be able to yet. I have an undying will to learn the art of programming although with the science. Two debatable subjects but to me I feel computer programming is both art and science. You must possess a desire for both to succeed. My motivation for learning programming is only growing and I'm trying to find the people and resources I can reach out to for help. I will learn on my own but others who have been where I am if you are here reading this and you can please offer me suggestions to get further. Anyone know of any job titles that I could try for when I have learned the propoer amount of knowledge and am able to apply it and acheive desired results? I am a hard worker, I love to learn and be creative and I am a people person. I am devoted and admittingly a little lost in the process of where to go from here now. I am going to for now continue to study the books create and experiment with different progam intefaces and designs on my own that I create but any thoughts would be appreciated. I'm from PA... fyi right now my biggest focus is on vb.net but I am lacking any information atm about databases and sql associated with vb.net. I am using visual basic express edition. Thanks good luck to all of you out there I hope the love you feel inside you for whatever you do works to your advantage so more people can smile about themselves and be truly happy in their lives. Just remember like me, a struggling young single parent if i can keep a positive attitude so can you. I lost a house to a fire, had cancer last year, and a toddler boy who had hearing disabilities for a while and that fire I used to be a beggining I used my cancer to help me devote more to myself and where I should work towards inside to be happy with myself and my future (I am doing well now thankfully :) ) and my little boy means the world to me Iw ould have done anything to help him with his disabilities but thanks to modern science and being an anal mother the doctors were able to make a difference before it was too late. If I can stay positive through the struggles so can you remember through your hard times in life someone else always has it worse there are starving people in other countries there are homeless people out there there are people who have lost all friends and family and there are m any who cannot hear smell speak see etc.... remember what your blessings are no matter how great or small and work your way up from there. My heart to all of you.

  41. link to this comment by ShellieZ Tue Jul 17, 2007

    See, this is the reason I want to join AIGA next year - to stand up for the self-taught designer. Give the Ego types a run for their creativity! I started out as an English major, working as an Admin. I dreamed of becoming a designer, so I challenged myself through self-training, purchased expensive software, computer, etc. and in 10 years I am now a Corportate Designer at Senior Level who mentors two designers below me. I make great money, been to real-training conferences and seminars and was recently nominated for an integrated campaign from the American Marketing Association. I also have a successful Freelance business that earned $10k last year. I think the Ego's way of thinking keeps the designers separated. Are art school graphic designers really that snobby? Some have no right to be. Have you seen some of their work? A lot of it just sits in an expensive portfolio in the dusty corner - and on the other hand, the "Graphic Artist's" work is phenomenal. I do envy those folks. But seriously, give me a break...some designers have real and natural talent and some don't....art school or not. We know who the fakers are! So respect for the self-taught would be appreciated.

  42. link to this comment by Victoria Tue Jul 24, 2007

    Art and Design Education provides resources, teach the un-disciplined...self-discipline..create easier routes of job opportunities, creates constant open thinking for creativity. Education essentially too, provides a nest of creativity for peers to engage and interact with each other. As the in-class experience creates preparation for callouses and tough hearts in the real world when achieved a level of intellect/communicating in critiques. Education very similiarily to Self-Education will only be successful if you practice practice practice!

    I envy those that are "self taught" in today's "america". I "admire" them as well. As they can pop out of bed every morning and say I will be a great designer. And then go on through out the day and say I am a great designer, I guess, I am to say that they have inherrited this great american work ethic from their up-bringing and undellusioned by their conditions when growing up in this country. Yet it is nice to know that some of the founding principles by this country's Benjamin Franklin quotes on education, is all about self education.

    I envy both that employ both educated, and self-education. Throw both in the mix, and you get a hybrid of new designers. I think with that and topped with a bit of humor will just work:)

  43. link to this comment by William Wed Aug 01, 2007

    Paper taught professional dilettantes who berate the self-taught have, unfortunately, fallen under the spell of a hubris infected academia that, for profiteering purposes, perpetuates the myth that increased education equates to enhanced intelligence.

    I would advise those who have been steeped in the cauldrons of collegiate mediocrity to use caution lest they find themselves also berating Abraham Lincoln, U.S. Grant, Henry Ford, Mr. Toyota, Mr. Packard, Orville and Wilbur Wright, Glenn Curtis, Bill Boeing, Thomas Edison, Bill Gates, Paul Allen……... The list continues for two entire pages, single spaced.

  44. link to this comment by Maco Thu Aug 02, 2007

    I guess for me the issue has more to do with the D.I.Y. crowd than the self taught designer. I went to shcool, but it wasn't until I got employed that I learned most of my technical skills. And yet, I know very (VERY) few self taught designers that learnt all these techinicalities on the run, while also being brilliant when it came to creativity. But I hardly meet this kind of people. Most self taught designers I know think all it's required is to be creative and have some knowledge in using Photoshop.

    As per the D.I.Y. person whose got Photoshop in their computer, it seems to me that they tend to think they can do as good a job as anybody who trained at a school or trained themeselves rigorously. These D.I.Y. peeps are the ones that would give the offset printer quite a bit of lip because the printer charged them designer fees to basically recreate their design using software that is compatible with plate makers and the like.

    These are also the people that would give you changes that you know are going to take you several solid hours to execute, and hang over your shoulder or stay on the phone 'while you do the changes' 'cuz they think they won't take that long (which in turn means won't cost that much).

    I just wish that people would equate going to a designer, self taught or not, for their design, like they go their doctors for their health issues. I mean, when was the last time you went to a D.I.Y. surgeon or self taught doctor for surgery? I know am drawing a ridiculous comparisson here, but the fact remains that design is not all fun and games, creativity and intuitiveness. There ARE some technichal requirements to making each job excellent quality, and having Photoshop in your computer, does not grant you this knowledge no matter how creative you are.

  45. link to this comment by Jack Fri Aug 17, 2007

    I found this article at best humorous. The author seems to have a bit of sanctimonious self back patting. I work in a creative field, I am a reasonably successful, and I dropped out of college at the end of my junior year. I was pursuing a degree in chemistry at the time.
    I think to call people "fakers and rubes," only goes to show how pompous some folk with a college ed-jam-mo-kation really can behave.
    Don't full yourself, talent, whether they studied at Parsons or on a WalMart sketch pad, will rise to the top.

  46. link to this comment by Keith Harper Mon Aug 20, 2007

    If you do good work, who the hell cares how you got there?

    I have a design degree, but having worked for a while in the real world, realize that it doesn't really matter what your background is, as long as you can produce solid work, communicate, and push yourself to be better.

  47. link to this comment by Roderick Grant Mon Aug 20, 2007

    What a design education offers can, and perhaps should be, quite prosaic - it should offer consistency - not aesthetic, not visual or verbal, but rather consistent humility. A desinger does not know, but rather, through a process of investigation and experimentation comes to know something, about a certain aspect of communication for a certain length of time.

    Unless the profession of graphic design (whatever that entails in contemporary practice) enters the arena of licensure, I'm not all too worried about being professional or amateur, or competing against one or the other. I'm only interested in giving those interested in a design education exactly that; an experience that engenders not suffering or late nights or a mythological love of X-ACTO blades, but does allow for experiences that emobdy the ethos that intelligence is manifested in action, in the doing of something, not the worrying about credentials or degrees or anything else.

    When engaged in the practice of design myself, I strive to consistently admit to myself that I know very little without dedicated research, process and external critique; and those critiques frequently and refreshingly come from those with little interest or need for the reassurance of a BGD, MFA or other acronym.

    Design, as a practice, is not concerned with the display of what one already knows, but the display of what one has discovered.

    Last I checked, "knowledge" and "discovery" could be easily defined by an individual and their experiences, regardless of professional status.

    Its just not an issue that needs such abrasive hand wringing, just some honest humilty, on both sides of the fence.

  48. link to this comment by brittany backus - ohio university Tue Aug 21, 2007

    As a design student I am obviously slightly biased towards believing that a proper education is important in becoming a designer. Though I agree that innate talent does exist, and that most of the work that you do is through your own motivation, I also believe that having the many mentors with different ideas that you get from being educated by experienced professors makes for a better designer. Though self-taught designers can be very successful I believe in my own experience that it is incredibly beneficial to learn all those "rules" and techniques of design. Being in the classroom and having a larger group of peers and professors to get feedback from on a regular basis makes for more improvement and a broader view on the field. Having the studio time and working with other students and professors has been far more helpful to me (and most I know) than simply working for hours on end on my own. There is something about having the critique of others that enables more improvement in one's own work.

  49. link to this comment by Keith Harper Wed Aug 22, 2007

    Brittany you are right that critiques are very important, and a "traditional" education certainly has its benefits, the biggest in my mind being the support network and amount of discussion / feedback that you get in a classroom.

    However, having sat thru dozens and dozens of critiques in school, my experience left me with a feeling of contempt for my fellow classmates who were completely apathetic about joining the discussion. It can be quite frustrating by the time you are ready to graduate, and your peers aren't putting the effort in.

    So I think the idea of school being a place where discourse and ideas will flourish is great, but it's certainly not all it's cracked up to be. If you want to be a successful designer, you can seek out criticism and community without being in a school environment. My point is that whether you are in school or not, it is up to YOU to push yourself. Just because you go to school to get a design degree, does not mean you automatically will become a good designer or even get a design job when you graduate.

  50. link to this comment by Lauren Webster Tue Oct 09, 2007

    I am a young, driven, self-taught designer. I attended an ivy league university and earned a degree in a completely unrelated field (my college did not offer a design program). After years of feeling insecure about my abilities, I have finally realized that it is your WORK that matters, not your degree. As long as your work is good, who cares where you came from? What it comes down to is a person either has natural ability or they don't. Anyone can learn how to use Photoshop or write html. Anyone can learn about grids and typesetting. What makes a designer good is their creativity...and that cannot be taught in school.

    I have worked with several different "educated" designers, and honestly, I think a design school education is overrated. I agree that there is a lot of bad design out there, but we need to look at where it is coming from. Trust me it isn't all coming from self-taught designers.

    Another thing that bothers me is that I am sure that I have had to work twice as hard as most design students to get where I am today. That is something I am proud of. Yes! I am proud to be self-taught!

  51. link to this comment by Dee Tue Oct 09, 2007

    Since I was a kid I've always enjoyed drawing and painting. I have always had a knack for things creative.

    I feel that being an art student, and ultimately getting my degree in art, has given me the solid foundation and directed and refined my natural gift.

    However, it is up to me to build upon that foundation. Design, like photography and other endeavors, is something you learn and become good at through practice and trial and error.

    Also, as a somewhat related aside, I think that the greatest designers realize there is a difference between art and design. Art is about self-expression and communication for the sake of one's self; design is about the audience and communicating in a way that the audience can understand, for their sake.

  52. link to this comment by Rochelle Wed Oct 10, 2007

    Dee wrote:

    "Also, as a somewhat related aside, I think that the greatest designers realize there is a difference between art and design. Art is about self-expression and communication for the sake of one's self; design is about the audience and communicating in a way that the audience can understand, for their sake."

    Although I am by no means one of the "great designers," Dee is absolutely correct: 5,000 years ago the melding of design with the writing system was, and still is today, about the audience and communicating in a way that they can relate to.

    My instructor in script design (back in 1954) was adamant that one must pay attention to the entire writing system (scripts and typefaces are a sub-system of a writing system), and to know the complete history of any script before attempting to create a new design. His insistence that the new script design had to meld with the entire writing system in order to communicate struck home and has been an integral part of my work ever since.

    Design requires talent... and not everybody has talent. Design also requires meticulous attention to detail.

    And that is the whole point about the untrained using computer applications and thinking of themselves as designers. Even Knuth realized that the computer has some very serious limitations... and by the time Knuth finally wrote his METAFONT, he had acquired a very solid base and understanding of script design.

    As far as the piece of paper goes, yes, I am a trained script designer and hold a Master's rank in pre-press -- which is essential to understanding writing systems and to graphic design -- but I am also a PhD in literature. So, I have an advanced piece of paper. Still, when people ask me about my work, I always answer "script designer and pre-press sepcialist -- oh, incidentally, a PhD." Because one other point that has been noted in this discussion: design requires a passionate love of what you are doing... and I love script design and writing systems.

  53. link to this comment by sarah Wed Oct 31, 2007

    it is often the self-taught who perform best and indeed for many of my clients, design has very little to do with creative visuals but rather strategic presentation of marketing and communications materials for their audience in the medium(s) they have nominated - it might look great but if the client's 'market' can't read the copy coz it's in a small point size and its targeting the over 40s, it becomes an instance of design overtaking rather than reinforcing the message. too many 'degree-ed' designers have egos that are too easily bruised and they are only interested in what they want to create and not what the client wants to achieve. how many designers design performance measurement indicators as a component of the creative design process? i think that ego designers are all about the 'image' and forget about the more important 'substance'.
    and suffer for their work!!??! - uni kids get it easy compared to those who have to work hard to be able to make a living from a job they love.

  54. link to this comment by Kirsten Thu Apr 03, 2008

    It's not about self-taught vs. degree. It's about your book and your work ethic.

    This is what my husband (also a working, self-taught designer) tells me everyday. My book and my work ethic are good - but I still worry about being a hack.

  55. link to this comment by tomasio Wed May 07, 2008

    I am in design business since 1994 by now. Well actually I am _really_ in business since 2006 (the years before I was revolving between studying communication sciences and working as typesetter for a newspaper, layouter for magazines, screendesigner for internet bubble companies (1997-2000), heck I even did visuals for a big museum in Vienna – long before anybody used the word).

    All this without ever having a serious education in graphic design. I still doubt if it was a mistake not to take P. D. course at the janvaneyck in Maastricht, NL in 1998, but I cannot change that now. I am reading books (just today I read about two hours about the correct type areas), talking with colleagues attending drawing courses (I am tending more towards Illustration nowadays), in short: I am constantly evolving.

    Although a fellow designer told me I do not need a design education I would advise every self-taught designer to attend courses where they experience shortcomings in certain abilities, e. g. cost controlling, project management, presentation techniques. just my 5 cent.

  56. link to this comment by Ted Erler Wed Jun 25, 2008

    You mean the writer was serious? I thought it was meant to be tongue-in-cheek... Maybe I missed something. Formal training has it's place, but I think that far too often, "good design" is just the latest stuff that the trained and the untrained, rip-off.

  57. link to this comment by martin akorhe Sun Mar 15, 2009

    Well, I have always and will continue to hold successful self-taught professionals in high esteem not only because I'm also a self taught fashion designer but because most of their creative discoveries are what continue to be part of educational curriculum and training content.

  58. link to this comment by Kahlil Angeles Thu Apr 16, 2009

    i think self taught people are more open to experiments or make the changes(paradigm shift maybe?)unlike the degree holders they just follow some rules and when some self taught person's work is being noticed or becomes popular they start to analyze how it was made etc. if you're a very good designer and can afford to go to a design school then there is nothing wrong with getting more help right?and if you're going to choose between two designers with equal skills,creativity but only one of them holds a degree then who are you going to choose..

  59. link to this comment by Rob Wed Aug 12, 2009

    I'm pretty sure that this guy's just pissed that he had to pay off thousands and thousands of dollars in order to afford that 'prestigious' design job. I can, thanks to high speed fiber Internet, attend the very same conferences that you do, free (thanks bittorrent!).

    I might not make as much money as you do, but that's because my land is paid for already, my car is paid for already, and my business -- gets business.

    Since I have been self-taught (I'm a 24 year old with a freakin GED!), I have developed critical thinking skills that can help me apply a solution to any problem in the field of desktop publishing.

    The whole composition is part of the picture; sure, but the main point in any type of communications is ones ability to write coherently.

    If you can make your point to a customer then it doesn't matter which school you went to and how much debt you had to pay off. You're the life sucker. =]

  60. link to this comment by Neil Thu Aug 13, 2009

    "Rand help us" - wasnt Rand largely self taught?. Of course knowledge, education is important... but how you get it, well not sure that really matters...

    in the end the work really does speak for itself and I would encourage anyone who sometimes feels like a fraud, insecure or undermined by this kind of editorial - and some of the truly best and most creative people I have worked with often do fit this profile - to take a look at the calibre of the work of the writer.

    This can often be very "reassuring".

    I wonder even if the kind of self-assured, dogmatic character traits that make for good editorial really are the same qualities that are to be found in a skilled designer; Im not saying that are mutually exclusive, but true renaissance men are rare indeed...

  61. link to this comment by Walter Tue Aug 18, 2009

    I am a graphic designer/design student with my first two commissions and an incomplete portfolio (always a work in progress) who believes everyone is self-taught, since teachers and academia are, along with textbooks, educational web sites, and computer hardware/software, resources which are totally useless if not applied consistantly and constantly. My education is garnered from a myriad of resources: the classroom (educational grants), the public library, local bookstores, WEB sites, various tutorials in magazines and their enclosed CD's pertaining to Photoshop, Blender, digital photography, to name a few. Oh, and practice. lots of practice. On and away from the computer.

    Additionally, my studies have taken me into the Techniques of the Old Masters (books by David Hockney, Sister Wendy Beckett, and Staffano Zuffi), propelled me into the stained glass techniques of Louis Comfort Tiffany,the unparalleled beauty of Mexican jewelry and the exquisite depth of fractals, and pulled me into orbit around the topsy-turvvy worlds of M.C. Escher. In spite of all of this research, I feel that I have just started out on what will be a life-long voyage of education and the realization of my passion for graphic design.

    My point is this: Good graphic designers will see their entire careers as a lifetime symbiotic dance between education, production, and happy clients. In one way or another, we are ALL self-taught.

Add a Comment

AIGA encourages thoughtful, responsible discourse. Please add comments judiciously, and refrain from maligning any individual, institution or body of work.
Read our policy on commenting.