Research on posters cannot ignore the place\u00a0where they are seen: the street. Posters belong\u00a0to the large family of public signs that guide our\u00a0route through urban space. Not just their text\u00a0and image are important for an understanding\u00a0of what they mean, but also the nature of their\u00a0presence. They occupy a position somewhere\u00a0in between the permanent signs of power,\u00a0which it takes brute force to remove, and\u00a0the illegal traces of subculture that keep on\u00a0coming back.<\/p>\n
Officially the poster has had its day, as\u00a0Jouke Kleerebezem shows in this publication.\u00a0The omnipotence of the digital world seems\u00a0to have overshadowed it. How can the poster\u00a0still maintain visibility in an environment that\u00a0is filled by big illuminated signs and at a time\u00a0when the digital connection occupies a large\u00a0part of the passer-by\u2019s attention? The poster\u00a0is outdated, but remarkably enough still manages\u00a0to keep going. Apparently it still meets a\u00a0demand. Of course it is inexpensive, but economic\u00a0motives are not enough to explain its\u00a0continued presence in the street. Something\u00a0in how it addresses us, what it announces and\u00a0whom it represents appears to be essential\u00a0to our public domain.<\/p>\n
Posters belong definitively to the terrain\u00a0of transience. They announce actions, performances,\u00a0concerts, meetings, special offers \u2013 all\u00a0things that are connected with specific dates\u00a0that determine the duration of the life of the\u00a0poster. Their shelf-life is so short that in fact\u00a0they are already half-torn down before they\u00a0have been pasted to the wall. That sets this\u00a0form of advertising apart from other commercial\u00a0expressions in the public domain. Logos,\u00a0the names of shops and firms, neon signs are\u00a0firmly anchored to buildings. Like street signs\u00a0and other routing, they are the stable orientation\u00a0points of the public domain. Of course\u00a0businesses often disappear as quickly as they\u00a0pop up somewhere, but every time they will\u00a0announce their presence with a conspicuous\u00a0sign or a large neon display. However, these\u00a0clear identifying markers also mark boundaries.\u00a0Like traffic signs, they indicate whether something\u00a0is allowed or not. Every shop is open to\u00a0every customer, it is true, but at the same time\u00a0it must be clear that not everything is permitted\u00a0there. The customer is there for the shop\u00a0too and has to behave in accordance with the\u00a0rules that apply to this private property.<\/p>\n
Posters, however, do not signal a domain,\u00a0they announce an event. And precisely the fact\u00a0that that event, be it a demonstration, a performance\u00a0by a DJ or a special offer of bikinis,\u00a0is given a place in the urban space makes it\u00a0clear that it is a public event. What is more, if\u00a0we add these signs up, they reveal everything\u00a0that is going on in our public space. While the\u00a0big neon advertisements and the logos provide\u00a0the city with a map, the posters chart the\u00a0cultural life that takes place there. They are apart of the changing, unpredictable flow that is\u00a0the essential characteristic of the urban space.<\/p>\n
In the 1950s and 1960s the French artists\u00a0Raymond Hains and Jacques Villegl\u00e9 seized\u00a0on precisely this transient, cultural character\u00a0of the poster as the basis for their work. They\u00a0took down posters that had been pasted on\u00a0top of one another and half torn off from the\u00a0wall and put them in exhibitions with the title\u00a0D\u00e9collage<\/em>. As a part of Nouveau R\u00e9alisme,\u00a0these works mark a break with abstract art,\u00a0but do not mean a return to a coherent and\u00a0recognisable representation. What they show,\u00a0rather, is that no coherent picture is possible\u00a0and that our world of signs is constructed of\u00a0layers of images and meanings that in overlapping\u00a0and encroaching on one another\u00a0defy decipherment. But the work also shows\u00a0which forces are at work in the public domain.\u00a0Posters are more than neutral announcements.\u00a0They are expressions of power or resistance,\u00a0voices of highly diverse groups that at times\u00a0of unrest \u2013 like the 1950s and 1960s, when\u00a0France was involved with a revolt in Algeria\u00a0and a war in Indochina \u2013 are a part of a\u00a0struggle that takes place at the level of these\u00a0signs. When it is the rich and powerful who\u00a0can disseminate the images to advertise their\u00a0commercial or ideological wares, the poor\u00a0and impotent still have the power to deface\u00a0them, rip them or paste over them to express\u00a0their dissatisfaction.<\/p>\n Today posters still speak to and on behalf of\u00a0certain groups. More than anything else, they\u00a0show that the city is shared by theatre lovers,\u00a0free fight fanatics, rave partygoers and visitors\u00a0to ideal home exhibitions. They represent\u00a0all the dominant and less dominant groups that\u00a0coexist in the city and above all live side by\u00a0side there; these public, temporary signs reflect\u00a0their own preferences and thus provide a confirmation\u00a0of their right to exist. However, there\u00a0no longer seems to be any question of a power\u00a0struggle. Clashes of opinions have moved to\u00a0the internet by now, where anonymous tearing\u00a0has been replaced by anonymous cursing and\u00a0insulting. So the question is: What is at stake in\u00a0the poster, exactly what do posters do with us?<\/p>\n The voice of the absent spectator echoes\u00a0in the d\u00e9collage. But which voice is speaking\u00a0now, just what is it saying, how do you\u00a0make that intelligible? In their research on the\u00a0poster, Ren\u00e9 Put and Rianne Petter first made\u00a0an attempt to chart intersubjective standards.\u00a0On the basis of a matrix of possible reactions,\u00a0they wanted to find out which elements in\u00a0the design produced particular effects. This\u00a0attempt to reduce the pluriformity of posters\u00a0to regularities by means of a semi-scientific\u00a0approach was, however, bound to fail. No\u00a0matter how interesting the results were, they\u00a0remained arbitrary. Only a large-scale questionnaire\u00a0would be able to provide the solution, but\u00a0the question still remained of whether this was\u00a0the right way for designers to tackle this problem.\u00a0It was not until Put and Petter decided to\u00a0throw the weapons of the designer into the\u00a0battle and to analyse not innumerable viewers\u00a0but a clearly delimited number of posters\u00a0that spectacular results were achieved. Unlike\u00a0the d\u00e9collage, this research does not show\u00a0the anonymous mass that uses these signs\u00a0as weapons in the struggle, but by taking the\u00a0process of destruction into their own hands\u00a0the designers expose in detail the methods of\u00a0the often anonymous poster makers. Suddenly\u00a0the regularities of the genre become visible and\u00a0the uniformity that is hidden in that pluriformity\u00a0emerges undisguised.<\/p>\n The analysis indicates that the poster today\u00a0speaks with a single voice and actually has a\u00a0single message. It no longer expresses an opinion\u00a0or passes comment. It just brings something\u00a0to our attention as effectively as possible,\u00a0and that something is primarily something that\u00a0is for sale. Posters address and stimulate us\u00a0first and foremost as consumers. That is hardly\u00a0a surprising conclusion, but the research of\u00a0Petter and Put does show the possibilities that\u00a0the poster ignores and the potential that still\u00a0lies latent in this medium. For unlike the clamorous\u00a0demand for attention of neon lights and\u00a0LED screens, the poster \u2013 in spite of the transience\u00a0that is its characteristic \u2013 can convince\u00a0us without shouting. The fact that in principle\u00a0it does not address everyone, but just a limited\u00a0group, makes it extremely suitable as a graphic\u00a0marker of the multiformity of our society. Still,\u00a0that calls for a visual idiom that is made more\u00a0eloquent again by a design that dares to differ\u00a0from the commercial laws which, by probing\u00a0every layer, this research has brought to light.<\/p>\n