Q & A WITH GAIL ANDERSON

Step Inside Design, Nov/Dec 2004 by Heller, Steven

SH: Frankly, how do you feel the new Rolling Stone compares to what you and Woodward were doing?

GA: It's actually not on my radar anymore, though I did see the Ray Charles issue in the office and it looked nice. The front and back of the book are more chock-full of short stories and that seems like a good thing. Admittedly, it was painful to look at when I first left because I had no distance on it, but when I have a glance now, under the latest art director, it seems solid. I'm glad they're using the vocabulary that is a part of the magazine's foundation.

SH: All things must change [as George Harrison wrote]. Don't you think it was time for Rolling Stone to become something else?

GA: There was a brief attempt at short features and pages that had way too much stuff jammed onto them, and it seemed too visually chaotic for what that magazine is. It wasn't a book that was aching to be reinvented, and I'm glad to see it return to its roots.

SH: Back to you. After a very short time peddling your wares on the street, Drew Hodges, who started SpotCo, one of the largest entertainment design and advertising agencies in New York, hired you as senior art director. He offered you this job doubtless because of your typographic pyrotechnics. So, you landed safely and now you are creating posters and campaigns for SpotCo's entertainment clients. What is the difference between this and editorial?

GA: At first, I naïvely assumed that the biggest difference would be the format; you know, a poster versus a page. But there are so many differences-from the way you assign art, to the degree to which you have to consider the consumer's needs. I'm designing for a more mature market, but still one that has just a moment to look at the art before turning his or her attention elsewhere.

SM: I've heard that posters are critical at the outset of a Broadway show. Yet how much good design is wanted in theater advertising? And how do you balance aesthetics with commercial requisites?

GA: You approach each project searching for a dozen great ideas, not just one or two. What will make the average theatergoer buy a ticket? What are we selling? What makes this show different from the other choices out there? The whole gamut's covered. It's not unlike editorial, in that there are lots of bits and pieces that need to be addressed. Essentially, I'm still solving puzzles, though they have lots more pieces now. A good deal of information has to live on each design. My background has made being the sleuth second nature in many respects, but the dozen-great-ideas part was a big surprise. You think, "OK, this is it," after about the third one, but seven designs later, you realize there really are infinite ways to look at a problem. I now completely enjoy the process, though I'm keenly aware that all but one of those dozen great ideas will eventually be killed. It's strangely liberating.

SH: There must be a limit to how many good ideas you can go through. Don't you get discouraged when those gems are shot down? Don't you really just want to scream?