MAGCULTURE.COM / BLOG

20 Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post. Trackback URL

‘Creative Director’? Sounds like an art-led power grab to me. However, I couldn’t help but notice the number of ex-art directors that Folio’s arrogant berk of an Editor was able to name. The answer, as usual, lies in communication, clear direction and mutual admiration. Or at least grudging, sullen respect…

in the magazine world as it is editors a lot of times have more power than the art director. This might be the reason why I see more crappy magazine because of the faults of the editor then the art direction. On the the other side I woudl argue that there are a lot of magazines with great art direction but without a clear editing concept – but they still work and sell and all.
The reason for this is the so often mentioned visual culture we live in.
For a lot of mags its quite absurd to have an editor more powerful then the AD. That is not so say that everything would be beter in the editorial world if we had more powerful art directors. I frankly do think we need better editors.
Editors who have also a understanding of design, visuals , attraction etc.
But I assume that most of them simply dont dont get training in that field (studying journalism or literature , culture science etc)

Positve examples of good editing are: the NYtimes, Casino (the finish indi mag), the New Yorker, French Vogue

Example of a magazine which is very strong visually and could use a better editing: Zoo, Liebling, well actually tons of lifestyle publications come to mind.

And if you follow the link, his magazine is terribly designed.

In my experience editors end up with the design they deserve.

I don’t know about them having “equal power” – at glossy fashion/lifestyle magazines maybe, there the visuals are more important than the words (I subscribe to W and I never read it, just look at the pretty photos)

But at magazines that people are actually meant to read the editor usually has more power. The editorial comes first, the visual concepts the AD come up with are to support that. If I come up with a cover idea I love but he hates I can argue my corner but I have to give in to his opinion in the end.

This whole idea that some magazines are about writing and others for looking is very old fashioned. If a magazine is JUST for reading – then it should cease wasting paper and go completely online.

This is the most important point, Mr McGinnis. Magazines are read in a completely different way to other media. The words, images and design are read together, decoded at different levels, and experienced both consciously and sub-consciously.

The challenge for today’s editors and art directors is to accept the deep relationship between these elements and make decisions for the magazine and the reader, not for the design or the words.

The old school editor vs designer debate is becoming redundant as the distinct roles of editor and art director break down. They are becoming a single discipline.

I’ve been making ‘People look before they read’ my mantra when having to explain the intricacies of magazine design to certain editorial bods. Most, I’ve worked with seem to understand this idea straight off the bat but there is always that ‘I only deal with words’ thing that comes up, usually around deadlines.

I’ve found if you’re goal is to be educate and be educated then you can smooth the way to working in a more integrated way… but then again maybe I’ve had it easy so far. :)

I didn’t say some magazines were only meant to be read and some were only meant to be looked at, but obviously in some the words have primacy over the images and vice versa. To pretend that designing The New Yorker is the same as designing W is silly.

The design is always important, that’s what a magazine is – a combination of words and images each supporting the other. But how you approach that is horses for courses.

The mag I art direct has very long, wordy articles on heavy subjects but it also has photo essays and I commission a lot of art, but I see my job as supporting and expressing the words and making people want to read them with interesting and compelling visuals. I always read the article I’m designing to figure out the best way of doing that, otherwise it’s just indulgent arty wanking and I’m not doing my job properly.

In the words of my editor, “I don’t know anything about design, I’m not an artist.” While each of us has opinions in each other’s specific areas, we don’t really interfere in each other’s area of expertise. Its as easy as that. In my world, publishers have always had their hand in the design and editorial pots equally, but editorial shouldn’t be directing design. That’s just silly.

“Magazines are read in a completely different way to other media. The words, images and design are read together, decoded at different levels, and experienced both consciously and sub-consciously.”

That’s such deep gobble it is easy to miss that deep down it is so shallow as to defy description.

Vanderlum, it s not “deep,” … its a matter of simple observation from someone interested in how to do their own job and figure out how it works. Obviously you don’t even know what he’s saying, so why bother judging?

Whoa there vanderleun… magazines are indeed ‘read’ completely differently than other mediums. A magazine is not listened to, watched without seeing words or flashed at us onscreen, etc. Good designers understand this. I call it the ‘visual hierarchy’ of editorial design. Exceptional designers can take the three elements of editorial design: word, image and colour (design) and create a legible and enticing story that communicates the essence of the ‘voice’ of the article. I won’t even get into the act of art direction… suffice to say that through ‘style’ the message is complete.

Jeremy… your description of magazines could actually apply to comics. Which makes sense, really.

LondonLee, W often has great writing.

Also, I looked up vanderleun, and he’s an extremely disturbing right-wing nut job.

Jandos Rothstein adds his thoughts here.

I also never said W doesn’t occasionally have good* writing. Jesus, stop taking what I say in such black and white terms. The New Yorker often has great photography and illustration too.

*”great” may be taking it too far.

This is an interesting issue, which I have of late been exploring in my company’s various global offices. For our London and New York offices, there is a synergy and partnership between Editor and Art Director. A game of give and take, and a true belief that everything is designed and written to flow together and for the sake of the reader, not the ego of the team creating the publication.

However, in our Asia offices, talking to the teams here, a different case emerges. One of total control from an Editor, not because the editor is wanting the power, but because the Art Director’s role in the East isn’t generally the same as it is in the west. They follow the editors word to the letter.

For myself to try and inject a sense of equality between the AD and editor is actually welcomed by the wordsmiths, and less heartedly embraced by the design teams.

In summary, through my personal experience, the synergy between the two in question is always going to be a gray area, but an area nonetheless that will always either show the connection or lack of connection between a team that should always work together as a single unit.

I’m just back from Hong Kong, more of which later, but I found a similar situation to the one you describe Jonny. The designer seems way down the foodchain, and partly because they hold themselves back in a way Western designers generally don’t.

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Jeremy Leslie and lara behnert, Tuomas Jääskeläinen. Tuomas Jääskeläinen said: Preparing a talk about art director-editor relationship. Thanks to @magculture and @printfetish for this old post: http://bit.ly/a1jI86 [...]

Interesting that the role no-one mentions is that of Editorial Director. Creative Director has become a purely visual job title, albeit one which causes a great deal of chagrin to Editors (who are, on the whole, extremely Creative!). However, the role of Editorial Director should be to achieve a balance (and occasionally resolve differences) between Editors and Art Directors. I can think of no better example than Mark Boxer, as Editorial Director at UK Conde Nast, and a role model to those like myself who carry that job title now.

Maybe I have a different perspective of this… my EoC and I work in tandem with most issues. We have a pretty rare relationship that neither of us tells the other what to do. We have a good relationship where we can talk through issues we may have on stories, but it is always a team effort between the both of us to do the best we can do. Every now and then, we’ll have our occasional “this HAS to change” but it is so rare… once or twice a year at the most.

Add your comment