Redesign and Retro Design as Methods of Creating Works of Modern Art and Design
Vladimir A. Krasnoshchyokov,Tatiana V. Belko
DOI: https://doi.org/10.25281/2072-3156-2020-17-6-594-605
2021-02-10
Observatory of Culture
Abstract:The article examines the trend, widespread in modern art and design, to draw inspiration from preceding styles and directions that have remained in one form or another as historical memory and as artifacts existing in the same cultural and information space. The design culture reached its highest level in the field of prototype design during the last phase of modernism in the middle of the 20th century. The postmodern era has broken this tradition. The rejection of modernism as an outdated artistic and creative approach and the search for new ways and methods of design were reflected in the alternative areas of design of the second half of the 1960s, such as radical design and anti-design, which later resulted in redesign and banal design. Rejecting the achievements of modernism with its cult of aesthetics and functionality, and relying on self-expression, designers of the new generation have abandoned attempts to form and develop universal models with a high degree of subordination to aesthetic norms and values, but nevertheless turned to modernism and earlier styles and eras as sources of inspiration. Therefore, it is no accident that a characteristic feature of the design of the turn of the 20th—21st centuries is the endless self-repetition, while redesign and retro design can be considered the key methods of modern design and creation of artworks. In the near future, this situation may, probably, lead to the fact that art and culture will no longer produce original products and ideas. In this regard, the attractiveness, especially for the younger generation, of forms, genres, and techniques that have existed for decades is a cause for concern. Appropriation, reference, and recursion have become typological features of design. Giving opposing opinions on this issue, this article suggests to reflect on the question: should the constant reversion of culture to its past and the related substitution of the novelty of genuine innovation be considered as a positive or negative phenomenon?.