Introduction.

This essay is written upon the belief that Irish design is dead. It is also based upon the belief that maybe, today Irish design is beginning its resurrection. The term ‘Irish design’ means original design that has been created by someone inspired exclusively by Irish culture, history or persons that lie within her shores without the underlying influence of external forces, methods or theories. Design education in Ireland even today is still spreading the Dutch influence, passed down from one generation of student turned lecturer to the next. It will be nigh on impossible I would imagine for the Dutch link to completely disappear from design influence in this country. Will ‘Irish’ design always be diluted by the Dutch factor? Will we always depend on outsiders to decide what makes our design good? Are we independent enough to be proud of what we create and call it ‘ours’? The aim of this essay is to attempt to pin point the date that Irish design was dissolved. Examining three main culprits, beginning with the most recent offender and working backwards from there.  


The Scandinavian Report.

Any sign of original Irish design was pronounced dead on February 3rd 1962. This was the day on which a group of Scandinavian designers released a report detailing their findings from a survey of the state of design in Ireland. The report titled ‘Design in Ireland’ was released to much up roar from the Irish press. These ‘Godless Scandinavians’ (Turpin, 1986) had unfortunately revealed the truth about the state of Irish design.  According to the Design in Ireland report, Irish design was considered to be derivative and over decorated.

This report was not just exclusive to the graphics industry; it was also highly condemning of other major Irish design industries. Textiles, textile printing, linen, woollen and other woven cloths, glass, ceramics, metalwork, furniture and articles of wood and souvenirs were just some of the other industries criticised in the report. A common fault seems to appear throughout the report, that this design industry was deriving its ideas from abroad with little to no understanding of the materials they were working with. When they did derive their ideas from Irish history, they (the designers) ‘turned to the queerest and most complex motifs, the interlaced animals etc., which are apt to lose their proper character when reproduced in modern processes and will rarely harmonise with the surroundings of our time’ (An Córas Tráchtala, 1961, p. 6) The Design in Ireland report even suggested that ‘there is an unemployed treasure of Irish patterns fit for design usage;  the simple granite carvings and the small ornaments scattered over the pages of the illuminated manuscripts.’

The Design in Ireland report offered viable solutions to the state of design in Ireland. Ireland would need to seek foreign designers as a short term solution to the lack of qualified designers in the country.  It would also need to reorganise its schools and existing educational institutions, introducing young children to the importance of drawing and manipulation of materials.  ‘This training of the perception and awareness of a child to his surroundings seems to us as important as the teaching of the mother tongue.’ (An Córas Tráchtala, 1961, p. 49) Again and again the report lays blame upon the education system that seem to have ignored design in favour of literature, theatre, the spoken word and abstract thinking, the predominant feature of Irish culture in the 1960’s.


The Arrival of the Dutch.

Original Irish design was feeling quite ill in 1951. Guus Melai stepped off a plane at Dublin airport and along with his colleague Jan de Fouw who followed shortly behind him; they would start the process of influencing Irish design forever more. Guus Melai was recruited by Tim O’Neill of sun advertising who visited the Royal Dutch Airline in a search for a designer, as the talent and skill could simply not be found on Irish shores.  It was Jan de Fouw who brought with him the ‘Bauhaus principles and so introduced to the Irish commercial landscape the use of flat colours, sometimes bleeding off the edge of the page, rigorous  typographic grids and the use of sans-serif typography.’ (Clarke, 2002)

The Dutch also brought with them a different approach to design. The Dutch at home worked in a more relaxed environment, encouraged to properly develop their ideas and solutions as opposed to Irelands need it done yesterday mentality.  They brought with them a professional attitude never seen before by clients within the boundaries of the emerald isle.  They were also not afraid to push their clients to be more confident with their work and to stop thinking about offending their customers.

The Dutch connection didn’t just end with Sun Advertising.  It was only beginning as legions of Dutch Designers would travel to Ireland throughout the years, with an everlasting effect on how we are thought design. The methods, ideologies and principles are still being thought today by the students of the Dutch designers who came here.


Murder or Manslaughter ?

Irish design was never well. It was barely grasping to life when Éire became the Republic of Ireland in 1949. Jobs were few and far between, a general depression hung over the Irish economy. It would not be until 1959 when DeValera regained presidency and Sean Lemass would become Taoiseach that the tides would began to change for the Irish economy.  Concentrating on reorganising the agriculture industry and introducing subsidies for foreign companies who would set up business here, the design industry was neglected.

On the 21st July, 1960 the amount of funds dedicated to the Arts Council (drama, theatre literature, painting and the allied graphic arts) was questioned by Dr. John O’Donovan in Seanad Éireann. He spoke ‘We are spending £20,000 for this purpose. In the six counties they get approximately £34,000. In Great Britain expenditure is something in the region of £2,000,000. On the basis of the British expenditure we should spending something over £100,000 for this purpose.’(Donovan, 1960) In today’s terms this is a staggering amount of money in the difference. Based on today’s conversion rates (25th April 2007) the British Government would of spent €44,903,962 compared to Irelands € 449,161 a difference of €44,454,801 (Forty four million, four hundred and fifty four thousand and eight hundred and one euro) in the same year.

In July 4th of 1962, the Report of the Scandinavian Group was brought up at an oral questions and answers session in the Dáil. The issue of the Design in Ireland report was brought up again on November 7th 1962 and again November 22nd 1962. Within these debates a clear lack of communication can be seen between the Departments of Education and the Department Of Industry which contributed to the downfall of original Irish design. One member of the Dáil, Mr. Anthony Barry, a Fine Gael member and tea merchant  from Cork,  goes as far as to say ‘Is the minister aware that many people do not accept the Scandinavian standard in matters of design because of its austerity and because it is unsuitable to our people here?  Furthermore, the Scandinavians do assume a pompous kind of authority in matters of this sort which I think we should not imitate.’ (Barry, 1962) This is contradictory to an Córas Tráchtála’s foreword in the Design In Ireland report which believed it was ‘natural in the situation to turn to the Scandinavians. Their achievements in design are enviable and, interestingly, of fairly recent origin; the scale of their industry, their raw materials, the patterns of their society, are similar in many aspects to ours.’ (An Córas Tráchtala, 1961, p. xi)

Mr. Barry was on the cultural and educational panel between 1957 and 1961, he was deemed to have vacated his seat in the Seanad on election to Dáil Éireann 4 October 1961. He was defeated in the 1965 Dáil Election. His son, Peter Barry, was also to become a Fine Gael member. He would become a very powerful politician, being first elected as a Fine Gael TD in 1969, serving as Minister for Transport and Power in 1973, Minister for Education in 1976, Deputy Leader of Fine Gael in 1979, Minister for the Environment in 1981 and Minister for Foreign affairs in 1982.

Even for fear of being branded presumptuous, I believe that being of the same surroundings and political allegiance as his father, it would not be too much of a stretch to the imagination for Peter to have identical political beliefs to his father, Anthony. Would it be possible that as Minister for Education he was ignorant to the development of design in education in Ireland? With the obvious exception of the Kilkenny Design Workshops which had been running since 1963, no other developments or attempts to push design education forward occurred during his time as Minister for Education.
This in-action is evidence enough. As the saying goes; ‘Like Father, like Son.’  Maybe Peter was too busy counting the pounds at the successful business expansion of his grandfathers company, Barry’s Tea?

Conclusion.

Somewhere within the confines of this research may lay an answer to the question of ‘Irish’ Design being a reality. It is a topic that is subjective. Any of the former argument may be responsible for its demise. Was it collaboration of a series of events or was there one specific incident that has forced ‘Irish’ design to the books of ‘If only?’  It is worth consideration that the ‘death’ of ‘Irish’ design may not be a bad thing after all. Today, it is producing talented young designers who are more aware of the world than their 1950’s counterparts. Different styles from around the Globe can be adopted by the young Irish designer.

The Dutch have brought nothing but good to the table; their presence here will hopefully always be felt. They have nurtured us and brought us on a path towards the light.

If it was not for the Scandinavians, we would still be making cheap imitations of other countries work, we could of ending up the new ‘Made in Taiwan’.

Finally, the Government. Were they right to ignore design?  I think so. The Governments running this country throughout the last few decades have always made it a better place to live, even if they often didn’t agree on policy. In the grand scale of things, it can be argued that there are more important things to an economy than a design industry.  With thanks to the decisions they made, we now live in a wealthy country that is primed for a design revolution. We have the education, it is now just a matter of ‘when’ and not ‘if’ Irish design becomes a reality.

Bibliography.

An Córas Tráchtala. (1961). Design in Ireland, Report of the Scandinavian Design Group in Ireland.
Barry, M. A. (1962, July 04). Dáil Éireann. Cesiteanna - Questions. Oral Answers. Recommendations of Scandinavian Design Group. , 196 .
Caffrey, P. (n.d.). Design for Industry. CIRCA .
Clarke, C. (2002). Oranje et Green.
Donovan, D. J. (1960, July 21). Seanad Éireann. Appropriation Bill, 1960 (Certified Money Bill) - Second and Subsequent stages. , 52 .
Tea, B. (2007). Barry's Tea. Retrieved from http:// www.barrystea.ie
Turpin, J. (1995). History of NCAD. Dublin: Gill & McMillan Ltd.
Turpin, J. (1986). The Irish Design Reform Movement of the 1960's (Part 1 ed., Vol. 3).
Unknown. (2007, April 29). Peter Barry. Retrieved May 3, 2007, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Barry

back.