Interview with Stefan Sagmeister

What is the tendency of human development, what impact does technological or informational boom have on the world's perception and what does real statistics tell us about this? On these topics, designer, typographer, creator, and now best-selling author - Stephan Sagmeister, discusses in his new book 'Now Is Better', providing us with invaluable insights.

Stefan, your career has been marked by innovative design work and collaborations with influential figures. From your early days to now, how do you feel your approach to design has evolved, and what drives your creativity today?

I started out as a regular graphic designer. Over the years I figured out that design is a language that can be applied to non-commercial communications. While I don't hate commercial projects, I do feel I’ve done my share of them and wanted to try out new things. And: If design is a language: Now that I know how to talk it, it would be a pity to only speak commercial messages in it.

You mentioned spending time with Steven Pinker and Danny Hillis, which prompted you to start thinking about long-term perspectives. How did your experiences with Steven Pinker and Danny Hillis influence the concept and message of the book? What inspired you to create "Now is Better" and embark on a project that encourages long-term thinking?

I started to think about this subject when I was invited to be a designer in residence at the American Academy in Rome. I was working out of a gorgeous studio and participated in the fantastic lunches and dinners with artists, writers, architects and archeologists in the courtyard. These were quite salon-like meals with ever-changing pairings of table mates. One evening I wound up next to a very sharp lawyer, who worked at the European court: We got to talk politics and he told me that what we are now experiencing in Hungary, Poland and Turkey, but also in Brazil and the US is really the end of democracy. So after dinner I looked it up! When did modern democracy start? How did it do over the past two centuries? Where are we now?

Well, in 1823, arguably only a single democracy existed, the United States. In 1923, there were already 18 democratic counties, following the first World War. in 2023 we now have 96 democratic countries, for the first time in human history more than half of the world population lives in a democracy, so he COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MORE WRONG: Not only are we not seeing the end of democracy, we are living in the absolute golden age of democracy. This was interesting to me: A smart, highly educated person who clearly has no clue about the world he lives in.

In a world filled with short-term media and constant updates, you advocate for considering long-term trends and improvements. Your book encourages readers to look at the world from a long-term perspective. Why do you believe this shift in perspective is important, especially in today's short-term media landscape? How can "Now is Better" help readers adopt a more long-term outlook in their lives?

Short-term media like Twitter and hourly news create an impression of a world out of control, with democracy in peril and an overall outlook of doom. But if we look at developments concerning the world from a long-term perspective - the only sense-making way - almost any aspect concerning humanity seems to get better.

Fewer people go hungry, fewer people die in wars and natural disasters, more people live in democracies - and live much longer lives - than ever before. 200 years ago 9 out of 10 people could neither read nor write, now it is just 1 out of 10.

And: I do believe that all the negative news are necessary to kick us into action. But so is information about positive developments. If we want to achieve CHANGE, we will need both. If I look at research on how social change was achieved in the past couple of decades, say the incredibly effective change in our behavior about smoking: Many countries could cut the number of smokers in half.

This was accomplished by using positive and negative and incentives: There was the promise of saved money, and the shocking photos on the cigarette packs. The incredible results were created by the carrot and the stick. Right now the media is delivering plenty of the stick. My goal is to offer a small bite of the carrot.

Your book presents a positive outlook on human progress, but you also acknowledge the current challenges and suffering in the world. How do you balance presenting positive long-term trends with acknowledging the realities of the present, such as the impact of pandemics like COVID-19? How can this balanced perspective inspire people to take meaningful action for the future?

Great question. If you look at pandemics from a point of view of 100 years, you will see that the Spanish Flu killed at least 45 million people, the smallpox about 300 million, Aids/HIV about 30 million people. This of course does not mitigate the unbelievable 6.5 million humans (and counting) that lost their lives during Covid 19, but it does put the often-quoted view that we live in ‘unprecedented times’ into perspective.

You've expressed a belief that the pursuit of functionality alone can lead to work that does not function well. Could you elaborate on this and provide examples from your own work or observations? How do you define beauty in design, and why do you think it's important to prioritize beauty alongside functionality?

Many design centric professions, be it architecture, product or digital design don’t take beauty very seriously, with many practitioners seeing it as superfluous, while concentrating on function. I very strongly believe that the sole pursuit of functionality often leads to work that does not function at all, the public housing projects of the 50ies and 60ies being a prime example: The goal was to house as many people as effectively as possibly resulting in projects that were not fit for human habitation, - they needed to be torn down again 20 years later. Functionalism did not function.

When I was a young designer I believed that it's all about the idea and that form and style are secondary. I meet many young designers stating the same. After having been doing this for 30 years, I came to believe strongly this is wrong. Formal attributes including beauty are absolutely central when it comes to producing anything that should function well.

About 10 years ago I went to a design conference at the Memphis Convention Center, and at the time I was still smoking and so I spent a lot of time outside by myself smoking. I remember looking around and I could see literally nothing where I felt beauty had played any sort of role in the decision why it was there. It was completely, utterly utilitarian. Not utilitarian in a form follows function sort of way. Rather, it was like, “How can we make this the cheapest, the fastest?” And the reason it had such an impact was because I had literally just come from a conference in Lisbon that was in the castle overlooking the city. It is a medieval castle so it was a military building—a defensive building—but every single doorknob on that castle was covered in patterns and was designed for beauty. This struck me as so strange: What happened to us? Why would we do this as a species?

Your approach to design focuses on creating emotional connections with your audience. How do you ensure that your designs effectively communicate the intended emotions or messages? Can you share a project where you believe the emotional impact of the design was particularly strong?

I’d say the Happy Film and the Happy Show probably generated the mots emotional reactions from audiences. I know because I had received many, many letters saying so.A. Yes, now that it seems that our initial desire, to produce something that audiences can relate to, has proven true, I’m very happy with it. I do get dozens and dozens of letters stating this in a believable way. Here are some quick, random excerpts:

“Your openness and honesty amazed me. I strive to live an honest life, with myself and with others. I think, in general, I succeed more often than I fail. Lately I've been failing more. But seeing your journey reinvigorated me.”

“I went to the Happy Film in Tel Aviv. When the movie ended (even before the amazing subtitles screened) the whole audience stood up and applauded. First time I saw something like that happens in the movies.”

“I have suffered depression. I used to go to therapy and take drugs and recently as my situation got better I stopped. I enjoyed the graphics of this movie so much it made me envy them. I got touched so much by this movie I felt like I'm taking part of it.”

“The film was absolutely incredible. I've been crying every 30 minutes since it's ended.”

You've mentioned the importance of avoiding boredom in your work. How do you stay inspired and engaged in your projects, especially after years of experience in the field? Can you share any strategies or practices that have helped you maintain your passion for design?

My most successful strategy to avoid boredom comes from conducting a sabbatical every seven years. On sabbatical I don’t work on any client projects, but exclusively on things I find interesting and I want to try out. I also work almost double as many hours as I used to do in the New York studio before the sabbatical. During those years I make lists of things that I’m interested in. When the sabbatical approaches, I look at that list, weigh the items by importance, and divide them into hourly sessions into a weekly plan: Important things get up to 5 weekly hours, lesser ones 1 hour. This has worked very well and 3-4 months into the sabbatical I have so many projects humming that I can forget about the plan.

I am not in a position to determine what other people should do, but I can say this: I have now talked to dozens and dozens of people who took a sabbatical, rich and poor, singles and families. EVERY single one thought it was among the best things they had ever done in their lives.

You've worked on projects in various parts of the world. How does this geographical and cultural variety affect your design processes? How do you ensure that your designs resonate with diverse audiences while still maintaining your unique perspective as a designer?

I found that by and large people around the world find the same things fascinating and the same things boring, I was surprised again and again by the common denominator that does exist. Having said that, of course there are local sensibilities that are very different from place to place. When we took a bad step, so far there was always a local institution who caught that misstep before publication.

© Nini Papashvili