The Reimann school, a private school of German origins, combining theory and practical design as “the first commercial art school in Britain”. Since the closure of Reimann London, homage schools have opened on the same Marxist premise, emancipated learning. Much like Paris May 68, the students are taking control of their own learning and actively contributing to society through the act of graphic design and display design. However, a sad irony is cast on the history of the Reimann as it emphasises the differences in class structure through the design community. Despite preaching socialism and emancipation, expensive tuition fee’s meant only the bourgeoisie could benefit from the wisdom of tuition. This does not bring design to the people, only further exacerbates the higher classes subtly controlling and manipulating the shoppers on the street.
Unlike the Bauhaus, the Reimann took less of an architectural stance, working at a more “interdisciplinary” view “based on a wider understanding of modernism in design”.
‘We live in a culture that thrives on ‘display’ and exhibitions and displays- part of the ‘exhibitionary complex’
‘The use of exhibitions and display, not only as a juxtaposition of objects but also as a newly discovered medium of communication, according to Herbert Bayer,
Latter half of 1920’s photomontage and ‘modern’ graphic effects were actively introduced to the three dimensional display techniques.
The Council for Art and Industry (CAI) “singled out one school as having good potential to solve the British problem. This was the Reimann School and Studios of Industrial Commercial Art, established in London 1937. If this kind of faith was placed in art schools, serving the commercial need then there was (and is) a possibility that this form of communication, in retail especially, will never turn to screen and move away from its core values.
Reimann could solve British problems through modernist ideologies, aims to locate them in the debate on design education and commercial art in inter-war Britain, through which it hopes to address the contemporary issue of modernism in design versus commercialism.
“Shop window displays and showrooms also rapidly developed both in quantity and quality; one observer at the Great Exhibition described the occasion as a ‘sort of collective of window displays’, suggesting the interchangeability of window displays and exhibitions.
“One of the core issues of the Gorell Report (1932) was ‘exhibitions of industrial art’. It stated the object of exhibitions as ‘the improvement of the taste if designers, manufacturers, distrubuttors and the general public by the display to the best advantage of beautiful modern manufactured goods, due regard being paid to the purchasing power of the householder of moderate means” (p.138). Strong links to Marketing
CAI Members include Edward McKnight (graphic designer), Sir William Crawford etc..
Started as multidisciplinary practically based art and design school, The Reimann introduced the first Window Display courses in 1924, pioneering a new vision of windows for the future. These designers would later become revolutionists of their own, contributing to
The Reimann differs from the Bauhaus due to the relaxed teaching style and ‘flipped classroom’ approach, Reimann wanted to actively contribute now through simpler forms of communication. The Bauhaus designed and built things to last and subtly influence society within an ‘order’ over time. The Reimann also took on more female students, unlike the Bauhaus which has a strong patriarchal history.
Herbert Bayer became head of the Printing and Advertising workshop of in 1928 after copying the success of Reimann.
“The characteristics of the Reimann School contrasted with those of another radical school in pursuit of modernist expressions, the Bauhaus (1919). The ciriculum was much stricter and longer at the Bauhaus.
Sculptor and typographer Joost Schmidt developed the teaching of exhibition design at the Bauhaus and “was appointed to the Reimann Schule in Germany 1935 but before starting to teach, he was asked to leave as he was considered a communist”. Shows the Reimann’s ethical stance was just as strong as the bauhaus but politically more left. (Communism is modernism on some levels?) However, without the differentiation in classes, luxury goods markets and the hirachy of society (aspirational theory), then creativity would be minimised as a modernist approach suggests universal globalisation of brands and standards. Bergdorfs and couture suggest the next level of day-dreaming luxury so need to stand out from the crowd
According to Sir Lawrence Weaver, he believed that ‘the gap between Art and Commerce was fatal to good exhibition design’
In review of the show window exhibition (Schaufensterschau) held in Leipzig in 1929, the Reimann School was praised for outstanding contributions to design.
Commercial Art posed a direct question, ‘are British window display standards good enough?’. Threatened by superstores and powerhouses in New York and Paris. They want to maintain a fashion capital/ major commercial city status they need to keep up. This perhaps pushed Harrods and Liberties and others to up their game.
Not enough modernist teaching- a school a head of its time.
Aim was to develop a well rounded student and found windows the best tool of communication to do this.
Tips on Window Displays (c.1931) recommended bright colours instead of “dull and dingy” to “please the eye” as well as “colour combinations and the use of backgrounds to increase visual attractiveness”.
The problem of a “Drury Lane effects would certainly not complement a modernist attitude”. Legibility and function was key, this removes the fantasy element which has proven to be successful through the fashion business, pioneered by establishments like Bergdorf Goodman. Formal design does not fir with fashion, so a more creative process is needed to best communicate this sector of design.
Bergdorfs are staying true to high-fashion values and effectively adopting a slightly postmodern approach in traditional design terms. Stores like Bergdorf’s really fought back in pioneering the way of creative design and execution as “the peoples picture gallery”. taking formal design “off the grid”.
In 1934 the London School of Modern Window Display opened. In 1935 a summer course on display was organized.. thought by a Swedish expert on display (still incorporating a modernist approach).
“Reimann schools policy would ‘not be to impose pure Germanic methods but to demonstrate in theory and practice ow proved technique may utilise to serve the demands of British tastes”.
The idea of “the combination of the [school and studio] under the same roof” is adapted by many leading institutions today, yet few are pursuing the route of ‘display’ as a subject with its own rights. Display for windows could fall under many subjects, graphic design, fine art or fashion- either way, a powerful tool in utilising a utopian ideal through a medium of communication. (p.144)
“Pragmatism and good employment possibilities were the biggest appeal”, so window displays were also a clever tool for students to expose a full design skill set communicating on one platform. If employment could be provided by this creative sector then further positive externalities are possible through something so simple’. (p.144)
‘the freedom the Reimann gave students largely helped enhance their creativity’ (p.144).
Classes were freely chosen according to each students needs and interests. Students ventured n their own initiative and where then subjected to expert criticism. If it is autonomous learning, really it should be F.O.C or Pay as you Feel, rather than targeting the bourgeoisie elite. Paying for no tuition, paying for emancipation and freedom.
Heinz Loew- the head of the Display department would let people ‘think for themsevles’ and not give them help at first.
‘Most English students at the time tended to be rather conventionally taught’ so the Reimann combined all international freedom-fighting ways back on home-turf. This raises the question, what was American (NY in particular) art-education like? Could this be the catalyst for the different ethical and design style?
Eutopia stems back to Plato’s Cave
The Times reported how art training was ‘going down to fundementals’ and “if this sort of training doesn’t produce the kind of designers we need, then nothing will” (p.145)- not possible without windows
Margaret Smith. 4 years tuition at Reimann and later taught. Unusual in design and unusual use of dummies, ‘minimal get effectively eye catching charm’.
Mischa Black “was a little critical pointing out style shown was popular in Germany around 1927-1928, visual tendency was now swinging away from it to ‘neue typography’ and ‘neue’ photo. Work started to be produced in a humorous style, iconically British ‘often seen in the works of Cooper himself, Gilroy and other contemporary designers” (p.146).
‘Modernism is just for the bourjoise’- this can’t be true as high end pioneering retailers take a much more post modernly creative approach and introduce theatre and apparitional theory. Perhaps a difference in ideology and values was not mutually shared with regards to fashion merchandise. Is couture the difference, or the emotive quality generally removed from modernist display, making stores like Bergdorfs stand out even further?
“Window dressing, figure draping, model making, exhibition work, display design, background, aerograph work and typography were all taught”. All subcategories of graphic design interlink, so are needed to complement each other and communicate the dominant message.
To achieve an excellent window display ‘unity of effect, not only practical but also contextual and historical understanding was necessary”.
“This difference reveals one aspect of contemporary British visual culture: modernism in design versus commercialism.”
“The tension between art and commerce has been challenged by people such as Walter Crane and Rodger Fry, particularly in advertising and posters (links to Kyle Bean)(p.147)
“rejection of commercialism in modern circles”
trends and fads such as ‘art deco/jazz moderne’ was “repeatedly critisizied by modernists as a commercialised and therefore degenerate version of highly acclaimed modernist forms.
“The view of ‘architectural design’ as ‘good display’ was apparent by the 1920’s.”
Natasha Kroll wrote a textbook on Shop Window Display (1954), acting as an informative how-to-guide for the student admirer, the “importance of ‘three-dimensional’ treatment was a priority, a alongside lighting and colour, yet architecture was never mentioned. Perhaps at this point in history has the Bauhaus movement filtered out, with a softer acceptance refund in other pieces of design. However, this was not the case. Modernism was not replaced, simply architecture in retail. The introduction of Helvetica in 195.. started the revolution of a new unified world, perpetuated in ‘sameness’ and globalisation. Helvetica was designed for everyone, not for fashion retailing exclusively. (p.148)
Graduates from the school went on to work in positions as designers throughout the country and even at Galleries LaFayette in Paris, one of the homes of chic alternative displays. (p.149)
“Another public organisation was the BBC, a very powerful patron of modern design and its periodical, The Listener’ often carried articles advocating modern design and architecture”, now considered gaudy and slightly abstract. TV and Print were other social influences pushing a modernist design style through Britain, however clothes are more theatrical in some case, pushing the emphasis towards a fine art influence, rather than the social normals of modernism. This different creative path may be a contributing factor to the unique quality the have the tendency to appeal to.
Display design filtered out as, looking back, it was too obvious. Window displays have the power of encapsulating all creative communication in one.
“in 1956 Natasha Kroll joined the BBC TV as the head of a design unit to originate TV set displays in a style specifically fort talks and factual programs. This encouraged the population of modern interior design amongst the general public”
The Reimann encouraged realistic aspects of modernism, whilst considering external market queries and social trends. It did not take a “fine art view of display design, nor afraid of relating to commercialism”.
“Its history is a telling example of a shift in British Modern design from the division of art and commerce that, consciously or unconsciously, persisted from the 19th century to the decline of an essentialist outlook on art and design.
No comments:
Post a Comment