Yes. Yes. Yes. You have expressed very well an important warning here. Imagine the army of politically motivated artists that this Uni might produce. It’s not a wholesome thought. I hope some balance will be provided in their curriculum.
Thanks Yasmin. Should say I have no issue with any individual artist choosing to get politically active (have been known to do it myself!) But the institutionalisation is a big problem. And the idea that corporations are a good channel for your activism is just setting a lot of students up for future disillusionment.
This is a very well-written and worthwhile post, Nick, but I disagree with your concluding argument. The 'why' can be a major driver of art, and is often worthy of careful examination before and during the process of creating. Sometimes something 'feels' right because it affirms lies or prejudices, or lets us off the hook -- which is why a great deal of what's made contains elements of regressive ideology that the creators didn't consciously intend. I think there's a happy medium between becoming overly enslaved to purpose and actively avoiding consideration of the politics of one's work.
Thanks for the thoughtful response, Jon. On one level, I can agree that there’s a happy medium between being enslaved to purpose and actively avoiding any consideration of politics at any time (nowhere do I suggest that). But the medium you describe doesn’t sound very happy to me – this dark fear that something that feels right might nevertheless ‘contain elements of regressive ideology’. Even the language you have to use to make the point feels so cold and bureaucratic. Why make any mark on the blank page or risk bursting into song if there’s a chance you might blurt out some element of regressive ideology?
But I also don't want to be too prescriptive in the other direction – if some artists find it helpful to write purpose statements or consciously map out their political intent before starting, then they should go for it. For my part, I’ve written politically motivated poetry before – but, looking back, I think the politics might be the least interesting thing about it. If anything lasts, it’s the craft and the things you didn't plan on saying. Most of the time, I feel like I write to find out what I think – if I could articulate why I was writing a poem, I'm not sure I'd need to write it.
Apr 12, 2023·edited Apr 12, 2023Liked by Nick Asbury
Another very enjoyable and thoughtful read Nick, thank you. I’ve noticed that ‘purpose’ is becoming a bigger and bigger driver of ideas within the cohorts I teach, but not exclusively. They tend to treat it as just another advertising technique for them to draw on, akin to say humour or slice-of-life “(Hey, now let’s try a purpose solution to the problem!”) Sometimes it works, most times it doesn’t. When it does work it’s nearly always because it emerges from an insight which allows them to make a connection between the product and audience, and this often turns out very well, but crucially because it’s a good idea, not because it’s a purpose-driven one. When it doesn’t work it’s usually because they’ve tried to force a purpose angle into the solution, either due to it being issue they’re personally invested in or they’re just trying to ape what they see in the real world (which is how we all learn anyway so no shame on them there).
It terms of any pressure to incorporate purpose or politics into the curriculum, I’ve personally had none, but as nearly every externally set student competition or agency brief these days has some kind of purpose proposition built in (to the point where even the students are sick of it I feel), it’s inevitably become a much bigger component of teaching.
Thanks Kevin, really interesting – great to hear from someone actively involved.
Your second para sounds exactly right to me – it's not so much an overt pressure from a single source, more something that's baked into the system. One thing I would love would be to have a better feedback system from students themselves. If many are feeling sick of it, then that feedback really needs to reach the people setting the briefs, and the businesses sponsoring them. Because they almost always justify it as 'this is what the students want', as though there was this monolithic desire from students.
On your first para, I can totally imagine how 'trying the purpose angle' could be a useful way to generate ideas on any given brief. And the creative challenge comes down to how deftly you can make the link between the purpose and the product – it's the equivalent of the dismount at the end of a gymnastics routine 😅 When I write about purpose, I'm thinking more about what happens when you multiply that approach by thousands of brands and agencies around the world. Soon every social issue is being exploited by countless brands – and I almost have a bigger problem with the ones who do it more skilfully. We know where we stand with an obviously stupid Pepsi ad, but the success of a Dove is more worrying – an ad industry applauding itself for being good, when really it's shifted plenty of product without making a dent in the social issue it claims to be fighting.
Agreed, the fact is it doesn't make a dent is the elephant in the room. Successful campaigns like Dove seemed to generate a huge sigh of relief from the ad makers ("Phew, look, we're not the bad guys after all"), and every Cannes Lion since then has been about maintaining that cognitive dissonance during a culture war era which polarises everything. I can understand why brands and their agencies want to be on the right side of that, and are scared to try anything else. I feel like it's a trend that's we're starting to emerge from and that's certainly how we engage with it in the classroom. It's actually helped in the respect teaching the history of advertising. We can introduce students to ads from different eras (50s expert driven 'lab coat' ads, cheeky 80s sex-sells ads, high concept Fallon-type 00s ads etc) and it shows them that they're just practicing their craft during a different social trend. Talks from yourself and Steve Harrison have helped to balance this perspective too. (Of course as ad students will see that perspective, the wider public perhaps less so).They are very switched on. I feel their boredom with purpose comes from a cynicism about the clumsy way it's used to entice them, both through competition briefs and in the wild, but they also genuinely have a more socially purposeful mindset than any group I've met, so they do want their work to try to "do good" too, even if all it does is shift product (something they're not opposed to as advertising students). The snake eats its own tail.
Yes, really interesting. Can definitely see how teaching the history helps – although I'd also want to include all the powerful political and non-profit stuff from decades gone by, to show that previous generations had some ‘do good' instincts of their own.
What is new is the purpose / do-well-by-doing-good stuff – they're right to be cynical about it being used in a shallow way to entice them. I guess my challenge to them would be to say – you’re not totally passive in this regard. It's used to entice you because people speaking on your behalf say it's what you want. And maybe what you're seeing is the natural result of expecting corporations to be something they're not. On a practical level – if it's Cadbury's setting the purposeful brief, find out who their charity partner is and ask if you can do an ad directly for them instead. Tell them you really want to do good, but you're not so bothered about the Cadbury's doing well part ;)
All that aside, I think/hope there’s a huge part of creativity that can be taught without getting mired in the political and culture wars stuff. In the very limited experience I’ve had of talking at a few colleges, I’ve been really impressed and inspired by the quality of tutors and students.
There certainly is. One thing that hasn’t changed is that the desire to problem solve, be creative and get into a job that will pay them to do that is the single biggest motivating factor for the students I know.
Yes. Yes. Yes. You have expressed very well an important warning here. Imagine the army of politically motivated artists that this Uni might produce. It’s not a wholesome thought. I hope some balance will be provided in their curriculum.
Thanks Yasmin. Should say I have no issue with any individual artist choosing to get politically active (have been known to do it myself!) But the institutionalisation is a big problem. And the idea that corporations are a good channel for your activism is just setting a lot of students up for future disillusionment.
Absolutely.
This is a very well-written and worthwhile post, Nick, but I disagree with your concluding argument. The 'why' can be a major driver of art, and is often worthy of careful examination before and during the process of creating. Sometimes something 'feels' right because it affirms lies or prejudices, or lets us off the hook -- which is why a great deal of what's made contains elements of regressive ideology that the creators didn't consciously intend. I think there's a happy medium between becoming overly enslaved to purpose and actively avoiding consideration of the politics of one's work.
Thanks for the thoughtful response, Jon. On one level, I can agree that there’s a happy medium between being enslaved to purpose and actively avoiding any consideration of politics at any time (nowhere do I suggest that). But the medium you describe doesn’t sound very happy to me – this dark fear that something that feels right might nevertheless ‘contain elements of regressive ideology’. Even the language you have to use to make the point feels so cold and bureaucratic. Why make any mark on the blank page or risk bursting into song if there’s a chance you might blurt out some element of regressive ideology?
But I also don't want to be too prescriptive in the other direction – if some artists find it helpful to write purpose statements or consciously map out their political intent before starting, then they should go for it. For my part, I’ve written politically motivated poetry before – but, looking back, I think the politics might be the least interesting thing about it. If anything lasts, it’s the craft and the things you didn't plan on saying. Most of the time, I feel like I write to find out what I think – if I could articulate why I was writing a poem, I'm not sure I'd need to write it.
Here is my take of the relationship beween art and politics.
https://andrescordova.substack.com/p/poema-politico-eef
Another very enjoyable and thoughtful read Nick, thank you. I’ve noticed that ‘purpose’ is becoming a bigger and bigger driver of ideas within the cohorts I teach, but not exclusively. They tend to treat it as just another advertising technique for them to draw on, akin to say humour or slice-of-life “(Hey, now let’s try a purpose solution to the problem!”) Sometimes it works, most times it doesn’t. When it does work it’s nearly always because it emerges from an insight which allows them to make a connection between the product and audience, and this often turns out very well, but crucially because it’s a good idea, not because it’s a purpose-driven one. When it doesn’t work it’s usually because they’ve tried to force a purpose angle into the solution, either due to it being issue they’re personally invested in or they’re just trying to ape what they see in the real world (which is how we all learn anyway so no shame on them there).
It terms of any pressure to incorporate purpose or politics into the curriculum, I’ve personally had none, but as nearly every externally set student competition or agency brief these days has some kind of purpose proposition built in (to the point where even the students are sick of it I feel), it’s inevitably become a much bigger component of teaching.
Thanks Kevin, really interesting – great to hear from someone actively involved.
Your second para sounds exactly right to me – it's not so much an overt pressure from a single source, more something that's baked into the system. One thing I would love would be to have a better feedback system from students themselves. If many are feeling sick of it, then that feedback really needs to reach the people setting the briefs, and the businesses sponsoring them. Because they almost always justify it as 'this is what the students want', as though there was this monolithic desire from students.
On your first para, I can totally imagine how 'trying the purpose angle' could be a useful way to generate ideas on any given brief. And the creative challenge comes down to how deftly you can make the link between the purpose and the product – it's the equivalent of the dismount at the end of a gymnastics routine 😅 When I write about purpose, I'm thinking more about what happens when you multiply that approach by thousands of brands and agencies around the world. Soon every social issue is being exploited by countless brands – and I almost have a bigger problem with the ones who do it more skilfully. We know where we stand with an obviously stupid Pepsi ad, but the success of a Dove is more worrying – an ad industry applauding itself for being good, when really it's shifted plenty of product without making a dent in the social issue it claims to be fighting.
Agreed, the fact is it doesn't make a dent is the elephant in the room. Successful campaigns like Dove seemed to generate a huge sigh of relief from the ad makers ("Phew, look, we're not the bad guys after all"), and every Cannes Lion since then has been about maintaining that cognitive dissonance during a culture war era which polarises everything. I can understand why brands and their agencies want to be on the right side of that, and are scared to try anything else. I feel like it's a trend that's we're starting to emerge from and that's certainly how we engage with it in the classroom. It's actually helped in the respect teaching the history of advertising. We can introduce students to ads from different eras (50s expert driven 'lab coat' ads, cheeky 80s sex-sells ads, high concept Fallon-type 00s ads etc) and it shows them that they're just practicing their craft during a different social trend. Talks from yourself and Steve Harrison have helped to balance this perspective too. (Of course as ad students will see that perspective, the wider public perhaps less so).They are very switched on. I feel their boredom with purpose comes from a cynicism about the clumsy way it's used to entice them, both through competition briefs and in the wild, but they also genuinely have a more socially purposeful mindset than any group I've met, so they do want their work to try to "do good" too, even if all it does is shift product (something they're not opposed to as advertising students). The snake eats its own tail.
Yes, really interesting. Can definitely see how teaching the history helps – although I'd also want to include all the powerful political and non-profit stuff from decades gone by, to show that previous generations had some ‘do good' instincts of their own.
What is new is the purpose / do-well-by-doing-good stuff – they're right to be cynical about it being used in a shallow way to entice them. I guess my challenge to them would be to say – you’re not totally passive in this regard. It's used to entice you because people speaking on your behalf say it's what you want. And maybe what you're seeing is the natural result of expecting corporations to be something they're not. On a practical level – if it's Cadbury's setting the purposeful brief, find out who their charity partner is and ask if you can do an ad directly for them instead. Tell them you really want to do good, but you're not so bothered about the Cadbury's doing well part ;)
All that aside, I think/hope there’s a huge part of creativity that can be taught without getting mired in the political and culture wars stuff. In the very limited experience I’ve had of talking at a few colleges, I’ve been really impressed and inspired by the quality of tutors and students.
There certainly is. One thing that hasn’t changed is that the desire to problem solve, be creative and get into a job that will pay them to do that is the single biggest motivating factor for the students I know.