Rethinking Design: Beyond Western Norms and Towards Inclusivity
As a student of visual communication, I embarked on my journey into the world of design armed with brilliant guidelines, best practices, and standards of good design—those universal principles that shape our understanding of what constitutes "great design." These fundamental rules were instilled in me from day one of design school, forming the bedrock of my education.
With each passing semester in the design program, these foundational principles began to crystallize my core understanding of what defines "good design." I, like many of my peers, believed that our education in design would empower us to change the world, to shape it through our creative vision. However, as I delved deeper into my own learning and exploration beyond the confines of the classroom, I came to a startling realization.
My definition of "good" or "universal" design had been deeply influenced by a Western, predominantly White, privileged cultural perspective. What I thought was a preparation to create a more diverse, inclusive, and expressive world was, in many ways, leading me down a path of homogeneity and exclusivity. It became evident that our design education was inadvertently shaping us to perpetuate a narrow worldview rather than fostering the diversity and inclusivity we thought we were championing.
This realization was far from easy to accept, and it continues to challenge me. However, it is an essential revelation. It has prompted me to critically examine the biases inherent in my design education and, by extension, the design industry as a whole. What I have uncovered is that many of our fundamental perspectives on inspiration, typography, imagery, diversity, and symbolism are limiting us from seeing the full spectrum of design and beauty.
Reevaluating Sources of Inspiration
When asked about my design heroes, names like Dieter Rams, Paul Rand, and Mies van der Rohe immediately come to mind. Their work has undoubtedly influenced my growth as a visual designer. However, a closer examination of my sources of inspiration reveals a glaring bias: the majority of my design heroes are White men. This bias is partly a result of my Scandinavian upbringing and partly due to the historical dominance of White men in influential design positions.
Only in recent years have I begun to question how my Whiteness shapes my perspective and how my design experience vastly differs from that of many Black designers. We are coming to terms with the fact that much of our history has been whitewashed, but we must also acknowledge that those who created this history—and much of our designed environment—have crafted a narrow narrative from a singular cultural viewpoint. When creators all share the same cultural perspective, their creations tend to reflect that singular perspective.
Typography: Beyond Language and Orientation
Typography, the art of designing and arranging text, carries with it a unique set of biases. English-speaking nations, often perceived as more influential, have played a significant role in shaping typographic norms. But what about languages like Arabic, Hebrew, or Urdu, which use right-to-left scripts and offer rich typographic challenges? Why are these languages rarely acknowledged in design education?
Throughout my design schooling, there was scant mention of the beauty and complexities of these languages from a typographic perspective. This omission raises important questions about the inherent biases in our design education. By neglecting to explore diverse script systems, we are inadvertently promoting a one-sided view of typography that limits our understanding of cultural communication.
The biases surrounding gender orientation are also a pressing issue in design, particularly in typography. We often assign gender attributes to typefaces, reinforcing stereotypes about how masculinity and femininity should be expressed. This practice not only perpetuates harmful stereotypes but also hinders our ability to create designs that are truly inclusive.
Marie Boulanger, a type designer, has delved into this issue, explaining that we often describe typefaces in human terms and, consciously or unconsciously, assign them gender attributes. This practice harms the very essence of design—problem-solving. When we assign gender to typefaces, we reinforce societal norms about how individuals should behave, look, and speak based on their gender.
The Interpretation of Images and Symbols
Images and symbols are universal in their own right, yet they are not immune to interpretation. Our backgrounds, experiences, and learned perspectives shape how we perceive and understand visual symbols. The saying "the truth is in the eye of the beholder" holds more weight than we might initially think.
A fascinating study highlights this point, where individuals from different climates interpreted a dark storm cloud differently. Those from colder regions saw it as a negative omen, while those from warmer climates perceived it as a source of relief. This study underscores how our backgrounds and cultural influences impact our visual interpretations, reminding us that our perception of images is never neutral.
The Complexity of Color and Symbolism
Color, a fundamental element of design, is often associated with universal meanings. However, these interpretations are deeply rooted in Western perspectives. Colors hold different meanings in various cultures, which can lead to misunderstandings and misinterpretations if we fail to consider these cultural nuances.
For instance, red is commonly associated with passion and action in Western cultures. Still, in some African nations, it symbolizes grief. These differences in interpretation demonstrate that colors are not universally understood, and as designers, we must broaden our perspectives to avoid unintentionally conveying messages that may be misunderstood or even offensive.
Reevaluating Symbolism
Symbols are prevalent in design, from app icons to road signs. However, these symbols are not inherently understood but are learned through cultural and societal exposure. Even seemingly straightforward symbols, like the floppy disk icon for saving, can be confusing to younger generations who have never used physical floppy disks.
Moreover, symbols can be fraught with geographical or culturally specific meanings that may not resonate universally. A symbol that holds a particular meaning in one culture might be entirely misunderstood or misinterpreted in another.
Conclusion: Designing for a Diverse and Inclusive World
In a rapidly globalizing world where diverse perspectives and cultural contexts intersect, designers have a profound responsibility to broaden their horizons and design with inclusivity in mind. Recognizing the biases that permeate our design education and the wider industry is the first step toward creating a more diverse, inclusive, and expressive world through design.
As designers, we must actively seek out diverse sources of inspiration, challenge conventional typographic norms, consider cultural interpretations of images and symbols, and embrace the richness of color symbolism across cultures. By doing so, we can break free from the limitations of a Western-centric design mindset and create designs that truly resonate with and respect the diversity of our global audience.
In the end, design should be a force for unity, understanding, and empowerment. Embracing diverse perspectives and challenging biases in design education and practice will enable us to harness the full potential of design as a tool for positive change in an ever-evolving, interconnected world.