ABSTRACT In “Good History/Bad History” (1991), Tibor Kalman, J. Abbott Miller, and Karrie Jacobs identified critical issues in graphic design history while denouncing imitations of modernist works. At the time, modernists and postmodernists fiercely debated historiography and historical reference, but designers in both camps dismissed nostalgia. In this rewriting of “Good History/Bad History,” I use a historical argument to critique the persistence of canonical histories while drawing on critical theory and decolonial thought to argue that nostalgia can create space for historically marginalized actors. Kalman, Miller, and Jacobs rightfully found fault with design history’s exclusions as well as the indiscriminate copying of its forms, but they did not identify historical quotation as a strategy for rerouting narratives. By using their essay as the armature for mine, I attempt to create a palimpsest of thought that revisits their polemic with an examination of nostalgic impulses that continue to this day.

摘要在“好历史/坏历史”（1991 年）中，Tibor Kalman、J. Abbott Miller 和 Karrie Jacobs 在谴责对现代主义作品的模仿的同时指出了平面设计历史中的关键问题。当时，现代主义者和后现代主义者激烈争论史学和历史参考，但两个阵营的设计师都对怀旧不屑一顾。在对“好历史/坏历史”的改写中，我使用历史论据来批评经典历史的持久性，同时利用批判理论和非殖民主义思想来论证怀旧可以为历史上被边缘化的演员创造空间。卡尔曼、米勒和雅各布斯理所当然地发现了设计史的排除以及不加选择地复制其形式的错误，但他们没有将历史引用视为重新安排叙事的策略。