Practical Synthesis: Housing/ Estate Branding Research

https://www.behance.net/gallery/11917527/Red-Room

I like the branding of this work, its modern and simple, it's very clean and I think that this is something I would like to reflect in my own branding for LILAC. I also like the use of the house shape, however the houses of LILAC aren't traditional and so this would not be applicable.

https://www.behance.net/gallery/16592237/Nord-Domos

Again this branding is very minimal and clean, I especially like the top logo, with the trees they give a sense of connectivity and nature, the typeface works really well, as does the colour scheme with is black white and forest green. 

The icons are also really appealing they give visual clues and interest to the folder, which is also a format I could consider using for my piece. 

https://www.behance.net/gallery/3638127/Yasnaya-Polyana-residential-complex

From this work I really liked how the shape created another shape which created another etc, I felt that this looked really interesting, and I am wondering whether I could incorporate this idea into my own work, by creating a shape for the brand and then building on that shape for icons or something similar. However in this piece I felt that the designer didn't focus on this and they used the end shape for the logo- which is a little confusing as it was unclear as to what the final logo was. 

Although I can also see that they too have used a folder, and a letterhead and I think that these are things I should really consider for my branding and promotion of LILAC. 

https://www.behance.net/gallery/10137299/Garcia-Properties-LLC

Again more minimal branding, the colour scheme works well, and the logo can be just an image or type and image which I think is appropriate, they too have used icons to represent aspects of service and I think that they can be really helpful, and interesting. 

Practical Synthesis: LILAC Housing Cooperative

(Official website http://www.lilac.coop)

Our Mission

We are LILAC

LILAC stands for Low Impact Living Affordable Community. We are a pioneering, low-carbon, permanently affordable, sustainable mixed urban housing community of 20 homes in West Leeds. Whilst most British cohousing has been relatively sustainable, socially and ecologically, we also hope to set new standards for affordablilty.

Low Impact Living
Design features, some shared living and individual commitments will ensure we reduce energy and resource use – save money. In the main we are using natural building materials and harnessing renewable technologies as we work towards zero carbon design and energy use.

Affordable
We are a new and unique financial and legal entity called a Mutual Home Ownership Society (MHOS). This involves member residents paying 35% of their monthly income towards their equity share. On leaving residents get an out-payment linked to national wage changes rather than the housing market fluctuations. The cost of building has been reduced by using the cheap material of straw. Homes will not be quite so big as some necessities will be shared in the Common House. All of these measure will help make sure that moving to – and living in – LILAC should always be affordable.

Community
The design foster conviviality and community interaction by using the cohousing concept that mixes private dwelling space and shared facilities. The Common House includes shared cooking and eating facilities, meeting space and play area. The design creates a beautiful living space which maximises as appropriate green spaces, areas for food production and social interaction.

http://www.cohousing.org.uk/lilac-low-impact-living-affordable-community

35 adults and 10 children that has been up and running for 18 months after around six years of planning and construction. Its 20 individual, private housing units are grouped around a communal garden and courtyard, with shared facilities such as a laundry room, workshop, allotments and bike sheds. Central is a common house where residents meet, cook and eat together twice a week, hold parties, collect their mail, host local groups and collectively govern their little community

Co-housing originated in Denmark in the mid-1970s, and swiftly became established in Scandinavia, Germany and the US. A few co-housing communities have emerged in the UK over recent years, and the idea is now rapidly gaining momentum with more than 60 projects in the pipeline.

“The design principles encourage social interaction,” she says. Co-housing is attractive to single people, especially in older age groups, who want to live neither in isolation nor in conventional senior housing, and to families looking for supportive environments in which to raise children and juggle work commitments. All groups and communities have a strong desire to collectively reduce their environmental footprint.

According to Stephen Hill, director of C2O futureplanners, co-housing projects are part of the building blocks of cities of the future. “We’ve lost the plot of how people want to live and how to adapt to social and environmental change. The accepted thinking is that we don’t really live in neighbourhoods any more. But actually people are desperate to feel they live in a place where they can relate to others, in a naturally protective environment that enables people to be more active citizens.”

In Leeds, the community is founded on sustainability and affordability. Lilac (an acronym of low-impact living affordable community) is built on the site of a former school in an unfashionable area of the city. Its buildings, constructed from timber, straw insulation and lime, communal gardens and shared facilities are in stark contrast to the surrounding rows of terraces and semis, but Lilac is keen to extend the hand of friendship, offering its neighbours several allotments, a “pocket park” and a meeting space for community groups.

(Who?)

The age of Lilac’s members runs from early 20s to over 80, and the housing units range from one-bedroom flats to four-bedroom houses. The 20 households share five washing machines in a communal laundry room and dozens of bikes, and between them own 10 cars – much lower than the 2011 national average of 1.2 cars per household – which are parked on the site’s periphery.

All the homes face into the gardens, though each has a small area of private outside space. A large decked terrace overhangs a pond which acts as a drainage system. Solar panels keep power costs at a minimum and provide a modest income which is used to fund the common house. Members cook a communal meal there twice a week; attendance is voluntary.

Lilac has a complicated ownership structure. All members buy shares in a mutual company which owns the site and properties, initially paying the equivalent of 10% of the value of their property. Thereafter they contribute 35% of their income, accruing more shares. If they want to leave Lilac, they sell the shares they own. All members are required to have some income.

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/nov/21/how-to-create-happy-communities-through-co-housing

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/apr/18/top-10-eco-homes-lilac

The architects

http://www.white-design.com/architecture/all-projects/lilac/

Current Site Plan

Typical Floor Plan 1 and 2 Bed Flats

In total there are six 1-bed, six 2-bed, six 3-bed and two 4-bed houses. 

Main Sustainable Building Material 

http://www.modcell.com

ModCell^® is one of the first products to make large-scale, carbon-negative building a commercial reality.

The ModCell^® system utilises the excellent thermal insulation qualities of straw bale construction to form prefabricated panels, made in a local Flying Factory™.

ModCell^® allows super-insulated, high-performance, low energy ‘passive’ buildings to be built using renewable, locally sourced, carbon sequestering materials that include straw bale and hemp to create a less than zero carbon construction system.

This innovative, offsite-manufactured wall and roof cladding system can be quickly and efficiently installed, creating buildings with thermal performance up to three times higher than the current building regulations require. 

This super-insulated system, combined with our airtight details, means that buildings constructed using ModCell^® panels meet the demanding PassivHaus specification. As a result, ModCell^® buildings can have zero heat requirements, saving money and CO2 emissions.

Where is LILAC ?

Bramley, Leeds (Kirkstall Mount) (Lilac Grove)

http://www.lilac.coop/about-lilac/about-the-area.html

The area itself is quite local to me and so I know where about the cooperative is and what is around it as I have lived nearby for years. 

I think that as a prospective buyer, who isn't from the area, it is good to know what is near and I think that this is would make a good addition to any house information from LILAC.

LILAC is Award Winning- http://www.lilac.coop/other-info/awards.html

(Why?)

What is an Ecovillage?

Ecovillages are urban or rural communities of people, who strive to integrate a supportive social environment with a low-impact way of life. To achieve this, they integrate various aspects of ecological design, permaculture, ecological building, green production, alternative energy, community building practices, and much more.

What is Co housing?

Cohousing is a way of living which brings individuals and families together in groups to share common aims and activities while also enjoying their own self-contained accommodation and personal space. The main features are that they are run by their members, committed to living as a community, designed to encourage social contact and include common space. Co-housing balances people's need for privacy with their desire to live in a more community-focussed way.

What is an MHOS (Mutual Home Ownership Scheme)?

Instead of residents owning an individual property, the homes and land are owned by a Mutual Home Ownership Society (MHOS). 

The MHOS is registered as a co-operative controlled by its members. Its members are the residents who live in the homes it provides. Each member or group of members has  lease which gives the right to occupy a specified house or flat owned by the MHOS. 

Members of the MHOS have been involved in the build and design of their homes, and democratically control the housing community in which they live. 

The cost of building the homes owned by the MHOS, has been financed by a mortgage loan from Triodos, the charity bank.

Under the terms of their lease, each member makes monthly payments to the MHOS which pays the interest and capital to the bank, and covers a deduction for management, maintenance, insurance and service costs (such as cleaning, lighting of common parts, and grounds maintenance)

The cost of buying the land and building the homes owned by the MHOS and financed by the mortgage is divided into EQUITY SHARES. Each equity share, which has a face value of £1,000 on the date on which it is issued, is owned by a member and financed by the payments members make each month. 

The number of shares owned by each member depends on what they can afford and the build cost of their home. The more they earn the more equity shares they can afford to finance. 

As their income rises they can buy more equity shares. 

If their income falls, rather than lose their home, they can sell equity shares if there is a willing buyer or, in specified circumstances such as loss of employment or disability, convert to a standard rental tenancy. 

To ensure sustainability of the project the value of the equity shares owned by a household must not differ more then + or – 10% of the build cost. 

If affordable payments (set at around 35% of net income) are above the amount required to finance equity shares of the value of the build cost + 10% the remainder will go into the contingency and future fund called the Lilac Equity Fund. Contributions to the LEF are capped at 1.5% of the total share allocation.

The MHOS is controlled by its members who live in the homes it owns. They elect the Board of Directors which controls the day to day management of the MHOS within the remit set by members in general meeting.

If a member moves out and sell their shares before they have lived in the MHOS for three years they will only be able to sell them at their original value (or a lower value if their value, calculated in accordance with the valuation formula, has fallen). 

For members who leave after three years the value of the equity shares will principally be driven by references to increases (or decreases) in national average eearnings. Exiting members will get the value of their original shares plus interest at 75% of the increase (or decrease) in average income. The MHOS retains the other 25% of the increase (or decrease) to fund the replacement of kitchens, solar panels etc as and when required. 

Like any other person taking on a loan and repayment obligation the MHOS will need to carry out a credit check and personal financial assessment to ensure that potential members are able to repay the mortgage debt servicing obligations they are taking on. The MHOS also requires members to have advice from an independent financial advisor to ensure that they understand the financial obligations and risks they are taking on.

The initial lease is granted for a fixed term of 20 years. This gives members a legal interest in their home and the equity shares they own that can be registered with the Land Registry. Longer leases are not possible as a longer fixed term lease would mean members would be able to buy the home and the land it is built on outright (this is called leasehold enfranchisement). That would mean that it will go into the open market and not be affordable for future generations. This would defeat a key purpose of setting up this MHOS scheme which, as well as giving members an affordable investment in the housing market, is to ensure that the homes in it remain affordable for future generations.

The lease gives members the right to remain in their homes after the initial 20 year term for as long as they want to do so. The right of occupation granted by the lease is legally secure under the terms of the lease contract and cannot be ended other than through a breach of the lease by the member or by a failure of your Mutual Home Ownership Society to meet its obligations to pay its mortgage. Ultimately, if the Mutual Home Ownership Society fails to meet its financial obligations there is a risk that members may lose their home.

The finances of the MHOS are structured to maintain reserves to avoid any risk of repayment default. A financial intermediary, the Co-operative Housing Finance Society Ltd (CHFS), will provide the bank and any other long term investors with a 12 month interest guarantee as security against default. CHFS has been in operation since 1997 and has a track record of monitoring default risk. 

Members can move between properties in the scheme as they become available and as their housing needs change as long as all the equity shares can be financed by incoming members.

Under the terms of the lease members are responsible for all internal and non structural repairs including any heating appliances, kitchens, bathrooms and other services inside your home The MHOS will be responsible for structural repairs and for the maintenance of the exterior of the houses.

Members will need to pay a minimum deposit equal to 10% of the equity shares they can afford to finance through their monthly payments. It is important that members make a positive personal financial commitment to become a part of the MHOS.

It is affordable because: 

• ‘rental’ charges are geared to 35% of net household income 

• members secure a ‘foothold’ on the housing ladder at lower household incomes 

• members can buy more shares as their income rises 

• transaction costs on buying into and leaving are reduced because homes are not bought and sold 

• the linkage - to average earnings - helps reduce risk and retain affordability 

• it remains affordable from one generation of occupants to the next 

It is sustainable because: 

• the housing remains permanently affordable for the benefit of the local community 

• the benefits are recycled from one generation of occupants to the next 

• it is easier to finance environmentally sustainable housing 

• it encourages active citizenship and community engagement on multiple levels

What commitment do I need to give?

We ask all members to be an active participant in our community, joining a task team, participating in shared work days and meetings, and keeping up to date with emails and notices.  

Ethical Policy 

http://www.lilac.coop/home/72.html

The information provided on the ethical policy of the LILAC housing cooperative suggests that they will not accept benefit from any company deemed to be unethical, which links into what I have been researching in my own studies for my dissertation, my case studies where based upon some companies that would be deemed as unfit by LILAC and so it could be said that LILAC have a very ethical/moral stance upon business and money and it suggests that they don't operate under a consumer system that accepts any business. 

Practical Synthesis: LILAC Visit

Yesterday I went to see the LILAC cooperative housing, I wanted to see it for myself and see whether it looked like it worked or not. 

I found it strange to see buildings like this amongst usual brick housing, but it appears to fit in with the surroundings as the buildings are almost tucked away you only notice them when you are right outside, as well as this in my opinion they aren't ugly either.

As you walk in from one of the entrances you can see the centre of the cooperative already, you can see that there is a lot of space, and it looks quite natural. 

To the right of this photo you can see the communal decking area which is over a pond, I think that this is the focal and communities centre, it again appears very natural and green.

A bike shed as mentioned in the website, keeps the bikes neatly tucked away and safe. 

Although it was winter you could see that there was a lot of gardening and growth, you could also see the labels on the plants and this showed that they had been growing vegetables etc, it also meant that the system must be working. 

Entrance to a community area, with a noticeboard inside- in which I could see a rota for residents tasks.

The addresses, Lilac Grove 1-20, the whole complex is surrounded by a brick wall and iron fence, which remains from the previous building which was a primary school, I did feel that the iron should of been repainted as it is too contrasting against the green and brown of the buildings and land inside. 

It's also apparent that the houses, with their big windows get a lot of light when the sun shines, you can't see inside the houses from the road either, which is good for residents privacy.

Consumerism

Consumerism is a social and economic order and ideology that encourages the acquisition of goods and services in ever-greater amounts

The Industrial Revolution dramatically increased the availability of consumer goods, although it was still primarily focused on the capital goods sector and industrial infrastructure (i.e., mining, steel, oil, transportation networks, communications networks, industrial cities, financial centers, etc.). The advent of the department store represented a paradigm shift in the experience of shopping. For the first time, customers could buy an astonishing variety of goods, all in one place, and shopping became a popular leisure activity. While previously the norm had been the scarcity of resources, the Industrial era created an unprecedented economic situation. For the first time in history products were available in outstanding quantities, at outstandingly low prices, being thus available to virtually everyone in the industrialized West.

By the turn of the 20th century the average worker in Western Europe or the United States still spent approximately 80-90% of his income on food and other necessities. What was needed to propel consumerism proper, was a system of mass production and consumption, exemplified in Henry Ford, the American car manufacturer. After observing the assembly lines in the meat packing industry, Frederick Winslow Taylor brought his theory of scientific management to the organization of the assembly line in other industries; this unleashed incredible productivity and reduced the costs of all commodities produced on assembly lines.



Madeline Levine criticized what she saw as a large change in American culture – "a shift away from values of community, spirituality, and integrity, and toward competition, materialism and disconnection."
Levine, Madeline. "Challenging the Culture of Affluence". Independent School. 67.1 (2007): 28-36.

Businesses have realized that wealthy consumers are the most attractive targets of marketing. The upper class's tastes, lifestyles, and preferences trickle down to become the standard for all consumers. The not so wealthy consumers can "purchase something new that will speak of their place in the tradition of affluence". A consumer can have the instant gratification of purchasing an expensive item to improve social status.

Emulation is also a core component of 21st century consumerism. As a general trend, regular consumers seek to emulate those who are above them in the social hierarchy. The poor strive to imitate the wealthy and the wealthy imitate celebrities and other icons. The celebrity endorsement of products can be seen as evidence of the desire of modern consumers to purchase products partly or solely to emulate people of higher social status. This purchasing behavior may co-exist in the mind of a consumer with an image of oneself as being an individualist.


Capitalism is an economic system in which trade, industry, and the means of production are largely or entirely privately owned and operated for profit.

 Central characteristics of capitalism include capital accumulation, competitive markets and wage labour. In a capitalist economy, the parties to a transaction typically determine the prices at which assets, goods, and services are exchanged.

Capitalism was carried across the world by broader processes of globalization such as imperialism and, by the end of the nineteenth century, became the dominant global economic system, in turn intensifying processes of economic and other globalization. Later, in the 20th century, capitalism overcame a challenge by centrally-planned economies and is now the encompassing system worldwide, with the mixed economy being its dominant form in the industrialized Western world.

The Science of Gossip Ted Talks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFDWOXV6iEM

An interesting take upon gossip, 
how its shows what our society accepts and our norms, what implications it has for the future, where it originated (hieroglyphics the first written letters)

It is the search of answering questions of society- according to Elaine Lui

Tibor Kalman

Tibor Kalman
1949-1999

-http://www.aiga.org/medalist-tiborkalman/

In the mid-1980s two names changed graphic design: Macintosh and Tibor. The former needs no introduction. Nor, with various books and articles by and about him, does the latter. Tibor Kalman, who died on May 2, 1999, after a long, courageous battle with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, was one of the few graphic designers whose accomplishments were legend within the field and widely known outside as well. Tibor may not be as influential on the daily practice of graphic design as the Mac, but his sway over how designers think—indeed, how they define their roles in culture and society—is indisputable. For a decade he was the design profession's moral compass and its most fervent provocateur.

I first saw Tibor in the 1980s when, as master of ceremonies of the annual AIGA New York “Fresh Dialogues” evening, he transformed the navel-gazing event into a cultural circus. He assembled a cast of a dozen relative unknowns and a few prematurely forgottens to enlighten and entertain, each through five minute offerings about the overall visual culture, rather than their own design work. Though at times it was reminiscent of an elementary school show-and-tell, most of the presentations shed light on generally ignored issues of environmental waste, the virtues of unsophisticated design, and the divisions between Modernism and postmodernism. Some were funny, others serious—together they were truly fresh dialogues.

Tibor was a tough ringmaster. If any speaker went thirty seconds beyond his or her allotted time (or if Tibor felt that the talk was unbearably dull) the amplified sound of barking dogs would pierce the presenter's soliloquy, signaling the end of the segment. In addition, Tibor introduced quirky short films, an unexpected pizza delivery (by a nonplussed delivery boy), and souvenir handouts (designed by a job printer and reproduced at QuickCopy) that showed design at its most rudimentary, yet communicative. As a new twist on the old ventriloquist's dummy, Tibor's onstage straight man was a Mac Classic with a happy face that quipped at programmed intervals. This was the first of many public salvos against the status quo. It was also vintage Tibor.

Not since the height of American Modernism during the late 1940s and 1950s had one designer prodded other designers to take responsibility for their work as designer-citizens. With a keen instinct for public relations, a penchant for Barnum-like antics, and a radical consciousness from his days as an organizer for SDS (Students for a Democratic Society), Tibor had, by the late 1980s, become known as (or maybe he even dubbed himself) the “bad boy” of graphic design.

When the clothing company Esprit, which had prided itself as being socially liberal and environmentally friendly, was awarded the 1986 AlGA Design Leadership award, an irate Tibor anonymously distributed leaflets during the awards ceremony at the AlGA National Design Conference in San Francisco protesting the company's exploitation of Asian laborers. Tibor believed that award-winning design was not separate from the entire corporate ethic and argued that “many bad companies have great design.” In 1989, as co-chair with Milton Glaser of the AlGA's “Dangerous Ideas” conference in San Antonio, he urged designers to question the effects of their work on the environment and refuse to accept any client's product at face value. As an object lesson and act of hubris, he challenged designer Joe Duffy to an impromptu debate about a full-page advertisement that he and his then partner, British corporate designer Michael Peters, had placed in the Wall Street Journal promoting their services to Fortune 500 corporations. While most designers admired this self-promotional effort, Tibor insisted that the ad perpetuated mediocrity and was an example of selling out to corporate capitalism. This outburst was the first, but not the last, in which Tibor criticized another designer in public for perceived misdeeds. By the early 1990s, Tibor also had written (or collaborated with others in writing) numerous finger-wagging manifestos that exposed the pitfalls of what he sarcastically called “professional” design.

Tibor saw himself as a social activist for whom graphic design was a means of achieving two ends: good design and social responsibility. Good design, which he defined as “unexpected and untried,” added more interest, and was thus a benefit, to everyday life. Second, since graphic design is mass communication, Tibor believed it should be used to increase public awareness of a variety of social issues. His own design firm, M&Co (named after his wife and co-creator, Maira), which started in 1979 selling conventional “design by the pound” to banks and department stores, was transformed in the mid-1980s into a soapbox for his social mission.

He urged clients like Restaurant FIorent to use the advertising M&Co created for them to promote political or social messages. He devoted M&Co's seasonal self-promotional gifts to advocate support for the homeless. One Christmas he sent over 300 clients and colleagues a small cardboard box filled with the typical Spartan contents of a homeless-shelter meal (a sandwich, crackers, candy bar, etc.) and offered to match any donations that the recipients made to an agency for the homeless. The following year he sent a book peppered with facts about poverty along with twenty dollars and a stamped envelope addressed to another charity.

Tibor was criticized for using the issue of homelessness as a public relations ploy to garner attention for M&Co. And indeed he was a master at piquing public interest in just this way. But he was also sincere. Perhaps the impulse came from his childhood, when as a seven-year-old Hungarian immigrant fleeing the Communists in 1956, he and his family were displaced—virtually homeless—in a new land. Although he became more American than most natives, he never forgot the time when he was an “alien.”

He savored the nuances of type and had a fetish for vernacular design—the untutored or quotidian signs, marquees, billboards, and packages that compose mass culture—but understood that being a master of good design meant nothing unless it supported a message that led to action. Even most stylistic work must be viewed in the context of Tibor's persistence. Everything had to have meaning and resonance. A real estate brochure, like one for Red Square, an apartment building on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, had to be positioned in terms of how it would benefit the surrounding low-income community. One message was never enough. When Tibor sold a “design” to a client, he did not hype a particular typeface or color, but rather how the end result would simultaneously advance both client and culture.

Tibor did not, however, rebel against being a professional—M&Co was in business to be successful and he enjoyed the rewards of prosperity. But he questioned the conventions of success. “Everyone can hire a good photographer, choose a tasteful typeface and produce a perfect mechanical,” Tibor once railed. “So what? That means ninety-five percent of the work exists on the same professional level, which for me is the same as being mediocre.” Tibor ardently avoided any solution, or any client, that would perpetuate this bete noir. About clients, Tibor said: “We're not here to give them what's safe and expedient. We're not here to help eradicate everything of visual interest from the face of the earth. We're here to make them think about design that's dangerous and unpredictable. We're here to inject art into commerce.”

With little patience for mundane and insipid thinking, whether it came from clients, other designers, or M&Co, Tibor was intolerant of mindless consistency and was not reluctant to make people angry—including associates, friends, and allies. For example, in a speech before the Modernism and Eclecticism design history symposium, he accused two friends, Charles Spencer Anderson and Paula Scher, who revived historical styles at that time, of being graverobbers who abrogated their responsibility as creators. Curiously, M&Co had developed a house style of its own based on vernacularism, the “undesign” that Tibor celebrated for its unfettered expression, which also fed into the postmodern penchant for referring to the past. While Tibor's ire sometimes seemed inconsistent with his own practice, he rationalized M&Co's use of vernacular as a symbol of protest—a means of undermining the cold conformity of the corporate International Style.

M&Co left scores of design artifacts behind, but Tibor will be remembered more for his critiques on the nature of consumption and production than for his formal studio achievements, which were contributed to by many talented design associates. Despite numerous entries in design annuals, and the catalogue of objects in his own book, Tibor Kalman: Perverse Optimist(Princeton Architectural Press, 1998), the heart of Tibor's accomplishment was enlarging the parameters of design from service to cultural force. And this was no more apparent than in his later work. For when Tibor realized that stylish record albums, witty advertisements, and humorous watches and clocks had a limited cultural value, he turned to editing. First, he signed on as creative director of the magazines Artforum and Interview. But he mostly guided the look, not the content, of these publications. In fact, without total control he was frustrated by his inability to experiment with a new pictorial narrative theory that he was developing. As a teenager he was an avid fan of Life magazine, and believed that in the age of electronic media, photojournalism was still a more effective way to convey significant stories. While editing pictures for the photographer Oliviero Toscani, who had created the pictorial advertising identity for Benetton, the Italian clothing manufacturer, Tibor helped produce a series of controversial advertisements focusing on AIDS, racism, refugees, violence, and warfare that carried the Benetton logo but eschewed the fashions it sold. For him, this was sublimely subversive.

Productless commercial advertisements were not altogether new. In the 1980s Kenneth Cole and Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream companies devoted advertising and packaging space to promote social and environmental causes. But in the 1990s Benetton went a step further with what began as The United Colors of Benetton, a product-based series of multicultural kids promoting ethnic and racial harmony, which evolved into captionless double truck journalistic photographs. Ultimately the ads led to the creation of Benetton's own magazine, Colors, for which Tibor became editor-in-chief and where he continued to reject fashion magazine cliches in favor of sociopolitical issues. Colors quickly became the primary outlet for Tibor's most progressive ideas. And shortly after launching the magazine, he closed M&Co's doors and moved to Rome.

Colors was “the first magazine for the global village,” Tibor announced, “aimed at an audience of flexible minds, young people between fourteen and twenty, or curious people of any age.” It was also the outlet for Tibor's political activism. In his most audacious issue devoted to racism, a feature titled “How to Change Your Race” examined cosmetic means of altering hair, lips, noses, eyes, and, of course, skin color to achieve some kind of platonic ideal. Another feature in the same issue, “What If...” was a collection of full-page manipulated photographs showing famous people racially transformed: Queen Elizabeth and Arnold Schwarzenegger as black; Pope John Paul II as Asian; Spike Lee as white; and Michael Jackson given a Nordic cast. “Race is not the real issue here,” Kalman noted. “Power and sex are the dominant forces in the world.”

Through its vivid coverage of such themes as deadly weapons, street violence, and hate groups, Colors was a vivid contrast to Benetton's fashion products. Even the way it was printed, on pulp paper, which soaked up ink and muted the color reproductions, went counter to the brightly lighted Benetton shops with happy clothes in vibrant color. Yet Colors served to “contextualize,” as Tibor defined it, Toscani's advertising imagery. Indeed, the basis for criticism leveled at Benetton's advertising campaign had been the absence of context. Without a caption or explanatory text the images appeared gratuitous—shocking, yes, but uninformative. The campaign signaled that Benetton had some kind of a social conscience, but the ads themselves failed to explain what it was. With Colors the advertisements appeared as teasers for a magazine that critically addressed war and peace, love and hate, power and sex.

In 1997, cancer forced Tibor to return to New York, where despite grueling chemo and radiation therapy, he re-established M&Co with a mission to take a pro-active approach to design and art direction. Foreseeing his last chance to do meaningful work, Tibor accepted only projects that would have lasting impact. He began writing OpArt critiques for the OpEd Page of theNew York Times, attacking smoking and noise pollution, among other issues. He designed an outdoor installation of photographs of real people commenting on their relationship to Times Square, which hung on the scaffold around the Conde Nast tower in Times Square. He taught a weekly class in pictorial narrative in the MFA/Design program at the School of Visual Arts until a week before he died. And he continued to contribute articles on popular and vernacular culture to various magazines. As his last testament he designed “Tiborocity,” a retrospective exhibition at SFMoMA, constructed as thematic “neighborhoods” that integrated Tibor's work with his graphic influences from the '60s and '70s.

Of the two names that changed design in the '80s and '90s—Mac and Tibor—one changed the way we work, the other the way we think. The former is a tool, the latter was our conscience.