lenyss

"Yes Oliver, I made this with Arwa. She explained me more the theoretical part of the conflict. You can find some pictures here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/arselectronica/6052226495/in/set-72157627330011775/lightbox/

I will put a video documentation later on vimeo. You can also check my facebook wall where I put all links, pictures and press about this project."

"Thank you, Jody! I totally agree with you. Until the masculine domination will be here we won't be able to realize a socially responsive communication. As I said during a workshop - first change yourself then the others..."

"To be honest, I didn't recognize for what company/institution is made until I read the description. At first sight it evoked me a spot on men's fragrance. I have read all the comments on this at the webpage. I would like to know if the competition for the design was open or not at all. Usually it is a fault of one person who has the last word because of his/her influential position. It is clearly a bad design and it talks more about the person who chose it instead of the person who made it. Also Freud's quote totally lost its meaning in this context. And maybe it is better to don't put any quote at all in the frame of any university concept. It is kind of mission statement but in this case it is really useless. On the other hand the well done presentation of everything is quite important. We should think about for whom we do design and what message we want to say. I like design and nice things which they have a meaning or concept otherwise they stay empty. If communication design should work it must apply a little persuasion. In a persuasion I see an important issue for a discussion. We must distinguish a good and a bad persuasion. Then we are able to change the communication strategy. We can start with the common issues and slowly go inside to the communication guerilla. Let's start with the basic questions: Is this communication gender equal? Is there any racist undertone? What kind of audience does it include and what exclude? Where is the political reason or source of the power? Which part of the message can we read? How can we deconstruct a hidden meaning (persuasion/manipulation/power)?"