Pixelgawker

CR: Explain the Detroit Miscellaneous Society (DMS) and why it doesn’t exist anymore?

NB: The Detroit Miscellaneous Society was comprised of several individuals. We formed sort of organically. Our goal was to come together to pool our conceptual and physical resources in order to work on projects that we wanted to create that didn’t really fit into any type of category. The group was composed of myself, Gina Reichert (architect, founder of Design 99), Shar McLeod, (designer for the Michigan Citizen Newspaper), and Corine Vermeulen-Smith, (photographer from Holland). In the beginning, graphic designer Danielle Aubert and architect Alexis Kim were also contributors. We first started getting together and just talking, talking for hours and developing idea lists that grew quite large. One of the early ideas discussed in the preliminary stages was Design 99; at that point Gina was just conceptualizing that project. After months of meeting and discussing potential projects (and strategies), we started getting wind of real-life projects, and we started working as a group on them. (Not to say that the array of our developing projects weren’t “real-life” because they were however, in this context, I’d say “real-life” would imply client-based.) As the collaborations progressed, we started seeing that collective, critical mass form that is lost when you’re working as a solitary ‘designer’ or independent. I enjoyed the level of autonomy we were able achieve in running our own projects. All of us were coming from different backgrounds—architecture, graphic design, photography, we worked on aspects of projects that pertained to our own discipline however often crossed over in ‘critique’… we also were doing a lot of our own writing, management, etc.. As we worked closely with one another in this sort of cross-disciplinary way, we were able to share both skills and the technology/tools associated with each area of practice. Why doesn’t the collective/group exist any more? Well, to a certain degree members still work together on projects. The group dissolved relatively as organically as it formed. I believe this group was a starting point and a necessary happening, it brought people together and through trial and error, perhaps fragments of what we were beginning to do will resurface in different ways in different scenarios.

CR: If the collective got together and created all of these lists, it’s safe to assume that the DMS started off slightly idealistic. Did any of your ideas manifest get realized? And you obviously had preconceived notions of what a good and bad client was, so how did that affect who you were working with or how clients approached you for your services?

NB: As all ‘ideas’ can be idealistic, some of the projects we were imagining were idealistic, but many of them did manifest themselves, even as wacky or bizarre, as they seemed. Often it came down to having a DMS meeting and then going directly home to work on a part of a project that was in discussion—embracing the urgency. As a group we coordinated and put on a talent show for the City of Hazel Park, ‘A Night of 18.963 Stars’ …we developed a newspaper, from concept to content to completion, for the Southwest Detroit Business Association. Design 99 and I are currently working on the second edition of “A People’s Guide to Detroit” which was an early DMS initiative. I think the projects that were easiest to push forward were the ones where we were working for ourselves—not clients. Producing the self-initiated projects at first helped us, as a group, begin to understand how we could work together before weighing in client needs and monetary value.

CR: Were your other collaborators working independently or full-time?

NB: Yes, definitely, there was a mixture of self-employed and full time employed.

CR: How did everyone find time? There is always that argument that a designer must do more commercial work to pay the bills and then go home and work on the projects that truly make them happy? Was there ever a cross over where your extra curricular work became the main work?

NB: Yes.

CR: How did that happen?

NB: I think as the ‘ideal’ work gained momentum it was easier for it to become the main work. For myself, being independent, it was easier for me to balance my time, but for others that had full-time jobs, it was spending extra time outside of that work and then building up enough work so that you can make that transition, but I don’t think you can ever perfectly transition, because there is always going to be that gap. By “gap” I mean uncertainty. Financial uncertainty, conceptual uncertainty… unless one is fortunate enough to have a some sort of financial security blanket, transitioning from a stable, structured position to ‘independent’ is rocky. You are no longer navigating within a preset system and the ‘gap’ between those worlds is a very real thing and not easy by any means.

CR: Some would say that working independently, even in a collective, is unrealistic this day and age because of the need for insurance and “security” that a bigger, corporate job offers. You’ve been working independently since you left school, so obviously that wasn’t a consideration for you. How did/do you balance the realistic expectation that in order to legitimize yourself you must have a “real” job?

NB: Well, myself personally, (this is outside of anything that happened with DMS), graduating from CCS, I never looked at that type of stable position. I feel that all the work I’ve done so far is very real despite that it doesn’t fall into clear design cut categories. As a student I had important work experiences in the archetypical ‘company’, ‘agency’ and ‘corporation’, however, I felt at that time there had to be another way to make a living as a designer in Detroit. From that point I set myself apart from anything that had to do with the auto industry. So, I’m accustomed to this kind of un-evenness.

CR: So… for better or worse, you really don’t know any better?

NB: I wasn’t born into the system of having the comfort and amazing benefits and retirement fund; I didn’t start there, so it’s not really a loss for me at this point. Trust me, I would like those things, it would make my life more comfortable but I’m not going through any type of withdrawal because I never began with the security.

CR: Does that mean you’re not living on the streets?

NB: (laughing) I am not living on the street, although a roving, mobile graphic designer might be an interesting concept. I have always been interested in getting a van or something with a loud speaker… friends used to send me craigslist postings of old ice cream trucks and ambulances.

CR: Let’s talk about the Detroit design community. What do you say to other designers, now coming out of school, who are realizing they need to navigate the waters of the anti-economy that is Detroit?  What advice do you have how about balancing the desire of being a design entrepreneurs vs getting a “real” job that somehow legitimizes the four years of education they just finished?  What has changed from when you were being a designer in an ok economy to now when the economy is in the tank?

NB: Well, I brought a quote. I always come back to this quote, because it’s really loaded as the filmmaker Werner Herzog is talking about post-war Germany:

“Everyone thinks that growing up in the ruins of the city was a terrible experience and to the parents that lost absolutely everything I have no doubt that it was. But to the children it truly was the most marvelous of times. Kids of the city took over whole bombed-out blocks and would declare remnants of buildings their own to play in where great adventures were acted out. You really do not have to commiserate with these kids. Everyone I know who spent their childhood in the ruins of post-war Germany raved about that time. It was anarchy in the best sense of the word. There were no ruling fathers and no rules to follow. We had to invent everything from scratch.”

Obviously, I’m not talking about kids here, or children, but the idea of the upcoming generations: craftsman, designers, doctors, civil servants, engineers, artists, whatever. I think that this city provides the opportunity for creating your own system. As I said the Herzog quote is very loaded, Detroit is not straight up anarchy—there is an existing system to respect and that makes the city complex. There is this expansive opportunity for Designers because the infrastructure is severely disjointed and needs tremendous repair. It’s a fine balance—Detroit does not need to be colonized and we, no matter who we are, shouldn’t further marginalize those who have been here for the long haul, however, there are many holes to fill.  Design can play a huge role in this.

CR: Having been raised and educated and now working in Detroit, from your perspective, do students coming out of school have the right mind set or are properly trained to create new opportunities in design?  Or is there something that can be done to foster that kind of entrepreneurial anarchy that Herzog is mentioning? It’s a great quote and a great idea, but are students prepared to take that burden on or do they know that that’s a burden that someone is going to have to overcome, tackle and push forward with this new Design economy?

NB: I think it depends on certain levels of experience, awareness and priorities. I’m still figuring out how to contend with the changing role of design, because I believe that Graphic Design is inextricably linked to the economy. So we’re all kind of thinking, ‘what are we going to do?’ and with students, I think that they do have a level of awareness, and they’re asking questions about it, and I think that together, those that have more experience and the students who are new designers, we should try to figure it out together, all the time, everywhere. The conversation should be open. When you think about it is really kind of exciting, redefining the role of design. And to connect back to education as it stands, I think more social interventions, more praxis situations—further exploration of ground level design action and how it relates to theory.

CR What are the responsibilities of the firms that are here? When I was a full-time practitioner, I learned to diversify my client base, because if one client is a majority of my payroll and I lost said client, then I was going to suffer. It’s important to be diverse to maintain longevity. Traditionally Detroit has relied on the auto industry, and now that it is has collapsed. The firms that ten or five years ago were busting at the seams with work, all the sudden are closing their doors because they can’t afford to pay the bills. Is it a challenge for the design directors and firms to step up and figure out where the new economy is, or do we look to the up-and-coming designers for ways to diversify?

NB: They’re faced with the issue that the bread and butter that they ate every day for 30 years is gone now, what do they do? Do you scavenge the lands, or do you start making your own bread and butter? I mean, there’s a lot of different ways, when all the sudden there’s nothing, how do you keep sustaining? I think evaluating comfort levels, looking at your lifestyle, how have you been living your life, making big, drastic moves – asking yourself how you define success?

So, perhaps, to start, it’s people getting together, talking openly, lowering the barriers and then just start ‘doing’ and stop being afraid of failure or the reality of not fitting into a prescribed category. To quote Megan from an earlier conversation posted on this blog, ‘what have we got to lose at this point?’

CR: In your estimation, what kind of business model is best suited for success in this current regional design economy? And who is making the best of the dire situation?

NB: I would have to say offhand designers who are setting up shop and making it happen, Design 99 being a pretty accessible example of this. They’re working with the community, community immersion, and becoming fully involved in the environment in which they’re actually operating. I think this approach is critical in that they are living in the environment, responding to the environment and beginning on a more microscopic level, grass roots so to speak — anything but top-down. There are also other Detroit businesses that have also been successful in this way. Goodwell’s is a current example of a small market (bodega style) starting small, providing a modest range of affordable, healthy and quality goods and, so far, is living longer and stronger than say, the higher end Zaccaro’s market that recently been forced to close it’s doors.

CR: Can you site more specifically what that model is? Is it the idea that they’re bringing design to a community that does not necessarily understand it’s value?

NB: I think that Design 99’s mission is to provide affordable design solutions, a range of services, sort of this over the counter, loosely modeled after a dollar store framework, relative to people’s financial position, perhaps you need advice on space planning … small steps and small things instead of pitching these gigantic projects where it’s incomprehensible conceptually and financially. Understanding the function of design, whether it’s interior or graphic and how someone can use ‘design’ to better their lives, is important so there’s a lot of education involved.

CR:  Do you see anyone else utilizing interesting models of design?

NB: Interesting design work, yes – unconventional models of working as a designer, no. In the immediate community there’s not enough action yet — not enough people committing to finding alternatives. There’s a lot of people coming in from overseas lately that are doing kind of investigative research projects that I believe will lead into other things, but again these are ideas coming in from the outside which is great however there is a significant difference when thinking of perspective’s from the people who live/work here on a daily basis. I know people that want to do it, I mean the heart is there and the energy, but there are connections that haven’t been made yet.

CR: I’ve noticed you spent time in Austin. Having spent time in another city, what have you noticed about Detroit’s design community?

NB: In Austin, I had a kind of unusual design experience in that I wasn’t working in a “designerly” environment, I worked for the City. It was a municipal design job, so I didn’t really have a huge crossover to the design community per say which limits my ability to compare the two communities. I worked as a Public Information Designer in the Solid Waste Services Department— I was really excited to be in the bowels of the society. They trusted me and gave me quite a lot of responsibility ranging from developing the infrastructure for “Austin’s Green District” to allowing me to explore little details like using “different” colors that you wouldn’t necessarily expect from the garbage department. I think this trust is a little bit different from what I experience in Detroit because I think it all comes back to money. Austin has money (it is Texas after all), the city functions, and they don’t have as many problems as the city of Detroit.

CR: When you returned to Detroit, what did you perceive as the biggest difference? Was it the fact that you have to work harder to make your clients understand the value of design?

NB: Yes, I do have to work harder to help the clients understand the value of design here. I would imagine that the ‘value of design’ is a bit easier to digest in many cities where you don’t have the poverty, unemployment and serious literacy issues bubbling directly on the surface (although design should be playing a role in solving these issues). When I was in Austin, perhaps I missed the challenges (like having to educate and design simultaneously) that Detroit presents as well as the stress of having to constantly repeat the ‘value of design’ to people that are three times my age.

CR: Why are you still here? There are a lot of challenges, there is also a lot of stress? Why did you decide to come back and brave this new world called Detroit?

NB: I am fortunate to be able to ask myself that daily. I am from this area originally, so this is my home. The other part is that it is outside and sometimes off the radar, outside of these traditional economic structures which can inherently lead to more unexpected experiences. It’s more meaningful to me. It’s stressful and taxing, but at the end of the day, it’s very meaningful.

CR: Define meaningful. Is it the fact that you’re, again, reaching out to an audience that doesn’t understand design and are able to create greater impact? Or because you are able to work and successfully manage a career in this economy?

NB: At the end of the day, I feel like I’m contributing to something bigger than what I can immediately comprehend. I think a big paradigm shift is happening and it is probable that Detroit is going to be one of the most pivotal places where change is going to occur. I think this is going to be one of the spots where people are working and producing for the new economy, whatever that may be. People are already inspired by what’s happening here and I think it’s just going to continue to increase.

CR: Whose going to lead the charge?

NB: I hope it’s going to be community based, I hope it’s a collaboration. These are extremely difficult questions. How do we keep people here? How do we continue to cultivate new communities and the existing community in Detroit without alienating people that are already marginalized? How do we create harmony? I mean, these are huge and very complex questions. I still feel like I’m in the research phase myself even though I’ve been here (Detroit proper) for nine years.

CR: I often hear students saying they wish there was something for them in Detroit. How do you respond to that statement?

NB: Well they have to ask themselves what do they want? Detroit is a very real place, not a lot is hidden. When you scrape down; you see what people are about, you see the hardships of life and when the most beautiful relationships emerge out of difficult situations some of the most wonderfully strong bonds are formed. But you can’t walk down two blocks and hit six little boutique shops and get fancy coffee, it’s not that type of city, it’s different. You look for different things. For example, instead of designing a identity for a high end consumer product, a designer may develop/design a solution that becomes a part of the city’s infrastructure … or be part of the mass transit that (hopefully) happens at some point soon … or build a community garden, things for the larger public good. It’s just different. I think that people need to think about what it is they want in their life.

CR: So what is the biggest asset that Detroit has?

NB: The idea of helping fill in the holes where communication is missing and using design to facilitate change. Also, going back to that Herzog quote, the idea of being able to develop a new system.

CR: Considering all we have discussed what are the particular pluses of living and working in Detroit? Is it the community? Is it the unpretentious, gritty, blue-collar environment?

NB: An action-based history, relative to production, people actually making things, objects, music, art, industry—and the community. The community here is very interesting, so many different types of people. Those who are bright eyed and optimistic to those that have survived (or surviving) the deepest folds of hardship to those who haven’t stepped foot in Detroit since 1967…  this is the reality. The people are very real, positive or negative.

CR: I like the idea of production and this assembly line mentality where you get your hands dirty and you make things. Michigan has always been a place that makes.

NB: Yes, Michigan is the heart of production. With that said, given our current socioeconomic circumstances, what now? What do we DO with the machinery that’s no longer working and those who operated it are cast off. What do we DO when we’re looking at tools that no longer make sense and vestiges of an already failing system? Are we going to retrofit —or reengineer?

To quote another filmmaker, Jack Smith, when posed the question “Have you ever thought of another type of society?” His response, in part, was:

“…Like in the middle of the city should be a repository of objects that people don’t want anymore, which they would take to this giant junkyard. That would form an organization, a way that the city would be organized…the city organized around that. I think this center of unused objects and unwanted objects would become a center of intellectual activity. Things would grow up around it.”

I think it’s a connection to production. Going back to the pluses of the city, we make things here. We produce action, real things, you know maybe they’re not all tied up with a fancy bow, but I believe they tend to initiate action and progress. We just all need to get together and start ‘doing.’

Nina Bianchi is currently an independent graphic designer practicing in Detroit. Since graduating from the College for Creative Studies, she has worked with various social, cultural, municipal and art-related groups, businesses and organizations in Detroit, Ann Arbor, New York, Windsor, ON, Vancouver, BC and Austin, TX. Over the years her projects have ranged from corporate communications to political flyers to organizing small town talent shows. Most recently, she has enjoyed developing installation-based design/production processes and teaching Typography courses at the College for Creative Studies. She thrives on research, reading, collectivity, systems and the proliferation of design as an agent for change.

This entry is filed under these . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.