Refining the Argument and Deepening the Theoretical Grounding
This week has been about tightening the concept behind the critical report and really working out the spine that will support it. I knew after last week that representation and identity were my anchor points, but I still felt I needed a clearer sense of what I was actually arguing. I did not want the report to become a list of ideas. It needed a strong, coherent thread running through it.
I returned to Hall again because his explanation of how meaning is actively produced rather than passively reflected continues to be central to this project. The more I work with this idea, the more I realise that dialect in design is not just about spelling or aesthetics. It is about who is allowed to be visible. Hall’s emphasis on cultural production (Hall, 1997) made me think more critically about the consequences of stripping dialect out of visual communication. When we lose dialect from design, we lose a lens through which identity is shaped and understood.
To deepen this, I revisited Tlostanova’s writing on decolonising design. Her argument that design systems reinforce existing hierarchies helped me frame dialect as something that sits outside dominant design structures (Tlostanova, 2017). Her notion of re existence was particularly relevant. She describes it as a process of reclaiming space for marginalised voices, which aligns closely with what I want this project to do. Representing dialect visually is not simply expressive. It is a refusal to let homogenised design remove cultural characteristics.
Alongside the theory, I needed design references that matched this energy. Hassan Rahim became useful this week. His work is not about dialect, but his approach to resisting clarity through tension and distortion connects to the expressive core of dialect. Rahim challenges the idea that visual communication must be smooth or neutral. This helped me connect his approach to the more experimental typographic possibilities I want to bring into the studio practice.
I also looked again at work by Jeremy Deller. Deller’s practice is centred around everyday British culture. He celebrates working class identity in a way that feels honest rather than romanticised. This helped me think seriously about Barnsley’s own cultural identity and how the dialect embodies shared memory. His work reminded me that communities deserve to be represented in their own voice.
By the end of the week, I started forming a clearer structure for my critical report. I have five developing sections: language identity and representation, decolonising design, sonic and phonetic typography, dialect and place and expressive typographic voice. Each of these already exists within my draft writing, but this week helped me understand how they connect. They are not separate ideas. They all contribute to the same central argument: that dialect must be seen as cultural heritage, not informal speech.
This week did not involve much writing, but it clarified what the writing needs to do. I now feel less scattered and far more certain about how the report will take shape.
LSJ DESIGNS 
Leave a comment