According to what many of us were taught at school the shape of graphic design is rather like a line, a series of ‘ages’ that conform to a process of maturity. Being reborn as ‘graphic design’ in the ferment of modernism allowed commercial or ‘applied’ art to finally break free from any lingering connection to the ‘dark arts’ and the feudal world of printing. And so western ‘graphic design’ moved on, through early professional conquests and a postmodern ‘identity crisis’ before finally arriving into the digital, globalised arena of Bourriaud’s ‘Altermodern’ where death, according to some, now lies in wait.

This paper begins by describing a series of student-led seminars that aimed to introduce both graphic design history and the professional and philosophical context it now operates within. The author reflects upon the difficulties of adopting a linear model in when considering contemporary practice, arguing that such a simplified, narrow summary is flawed and unable to fully represent the complex landscape of practice that graduates actually enter.

In comparison the author will propose an alternative ‘landscape’, a complex arrangement shaped by differing intentions and revealing differing forms of ‘intelligence’. Attempting to represent this complexity through cartography the author will propose an organic, complex arrangement of ‘regions’ that reveal the histories, habits, values and traits of the ‘peoples’ and ‘tribes’ that co-exist, sometimes peacefully within the wider graphic landscape. The author will argue that such an approach is necessary to accommodate professional and cultural diversity and help break free from the loop of outdated and meaningless arguments that so easily distract and confuse.

Accepting such a picture could demand a radical reconsideration of delivery, a shift from institution-centred, tool/task orientated timetables towards a pluralistic, culturally-sensitive and student-centred model that reflects the differing forms of intent and intelligence that operate in the design community. To be truly effective such a model would seek to identify and enhance individual learning styles and aim to connect these to appropriate forms of practice in the professional world. Yet for many institutions, any such move away from the monolithic roots of graphic design education would be hindered by the demands of modularisation and credit frameworks that only serve to confirm an obsession with structures built with units and boxes. The author will reflect upon a subsequent restructuring of delivery that has followed this thinking and propose that such a model is well suited to the needs of future reflective practitioners.