Most recent issue of CA

Eric_West's picture

I was at BN tonight, and I picked up the most recent issue of CA. Now I really like CA, so don't think I'm knocking it. See cover. I'd like to hear thoughts on the illlustration, whether it's implied meaning (commercialization/exploitation) could have been expressed with more clarity and sophistication. My thoughts after a few seconds were, the illustration was repeating itself multiple times over, given the audience (us) the point would be made immediately w/o the swoosh or 'pod buds. IMHO

andi emery's picture

Oh, Chris that is brilliant!

lore's picture

whoaaaaaaa.....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dezcom's picture

I'm a budding Typophile :-)

ChrisL

hrant's picture

Chris, nice!

Eric: the catashnikov (kalashnicat?) is entirely convincing.

hhp

grumpyoldbugger's picture

What a load of tripe. George Lois was the last designer to create a magazine cover worth shit. Communication Arts is just another grand excuse for "succesful" designers to congratulate each other for being so brilliant.

And Che Guevera was a commie and deserved his end. Cuba could sink into the sea and nobody would shed a tear. We should have blown the place to pieces when we had it surrounded.

paul d hunt's picture

grumpy, please refrain from making hateful remarks on these message boards. this is your second warning.

NigellaL's picture

Grumpy, there have been magazine designers since George Lois who have done some great work, like Neville Brody of course. the world doesn't end on your side of the "pond", as you like to call it. And as for your thoughts on Cuba... what on earth is your problem?

Paul D Hunt, it's nice to know you're trying to keep things well-mannered, but where were you when Fontplayer was spouting off his homophobic rubbish a few months ago? I'd hate to think you only apply the rules when you feel like it.

fontplayer's picture

Either you don't understand the meaning of the word homophobic, or, well, I guess that about sums it up. You read into it what you wanted to read, I guess.

But I know I helped use up everyone's patience, to Grumpy's detriment. When even I find him over the top, I think Paul is justified in his warnings.

ebensorkin's picture

Nigella, if you took the time to read the board a bit more more you would see that Paul has decided to be more active & that he thought about & talked to us before he did - which is bloody nice. And if I not mistaken Fontplayer repented. Your comments about Grumpy I will fail to be censorious about. It appears that Grummpy has no pond, location or a valid identity. So as far as I am concerned he has no valid point of view either. Paul, what's the policy on typophile? I thought that you couldn't anonymous like Grumps. Can we just toss him overboard?

paul d hunt's picture

Nigella, as Eben pointed out, those remarks you're referring to are exactly what prompted me to be more proactive. sorry i wasn't more so a month or two ago.
Eben, we're watching this one and we'll see if we can't come to a consensus on how to handle it soon.

bieler's picture

Grumpy

Get with the program. It is only politically correct to throw barbs at France.

Gerald

bieler's picture

Eric

I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this, but your cat with the machine gun is as surreal as is the appropriation of the Che image. Are they not in some manner of Post-Modernist thinking one and the same? And do either really deserve more than a passing comment?

Gerald

Eric_West's picture

YEEEEHAAA!!! Bring on the negativity!!! Cant we just stop!!! Holy Moley!!! Everytime I log in, were having a retread of the same old same old. It's really getting to the point… where I think people are LOOKING/TWISTING OTHER PEOPLES THOUGHTS for things to rag on them about, maliciously…seriously. We don't need it here. It doesn't foster anything positive, nor does it make me want to 'collaborate.'

Eric_West's picture

I’m sorry Yves, I was referring to the content of a post rather than any actual tech problem. Unless You’ve invented a stupidofilter, that is.
ƒ

Fredrik

Were you refering to something in this thread? Please share.

Gerald,

Well, i guess I must explain my actions. I have very little confidence in myself as a designer, and I was simply posting to see if any of my observations had validity. Ok? Thanks.

bieler's picture

Eric

Not sure what just happened here. Didn't intend to rankle you, thought it an innocent question actually. I do like the cat!!!

Yeah, observations always have validity. And there is no reason not to share them. But in a public forum no reason to expect just a pat on the back.

Maybe this forum should not be sub-titled "Anything goes." Reads like an invitation to head-bashing.

Gerald

Eric_West's picture

Gerald,

I apologize, I'm Just a little annoyed that this thread got hijacked, and turned into hate-stew. I wasn't expecting a pat on the back, I was looking for opinions.

I'm just out of school and most of the people i went with couldn't care less about design 'off the clock.' I, on the other hand, do. And this, Typophile, is the ONLY place at all I have to talk about type/design with anyone. And, you could be completely right, and I could've just ignored it. It didn't really turn into any deep discussion.,

Eric

ebensorkin's picture

Yeah, I like your cat too!

But to get back to the point of your post - the swoosh, the iconic earbuds & che are all now ubiquitous parts of pop culture no matter when where or why they came from to begin with. Don't like it? - too bad & too late. So really, they are a kind of pop trifecta. The superimposition of two white marks over che gives the impression of complete pop saturation - or corruption - depending on where you stand. Anything less would fail to beat us senseless.

timd's picture

I suppose the length of discussion* and readers of the dialogue validate the design to a degree.
*even cul-de-sacs and admonitions
Tim

fredo's picture

Eric,

I was referring to the post I quoted. Sorry, I thought it was obvious.
And yes, I like the cat too.

ƒ

Chris Rugen's picture

“Who wins the cliche contest for notable faces? Marylin Monroe, Che, Elvis, or Mona Lisa?”

This conversation reminds me of Ron English's 'Popaganda' painting (semi-NSFW if your bosses are uptight).

RN Lee's picture

Anybody else read this? I really like the quote about Che throwing Piñera's work on the floor. I can't decide whether to wear my Che shirt or my Jerry Falwell shirt today.

andi emery's picture

That's quite the article, Robert. Thanks for posting it.

I thought the synopsis couldn't have been written any better: The real lesson gained [...] is embedded in the final irony of the capitalist exploitation of a communist icon. In its capitalist incarnation, the image, ironically, becomes heroic, unassailable: the essence of idealism and socialist revolution. What gets lost is the real Che Guevera—the one behind the photograph.

And Eric, just for the record, that cat rocks!

dezcom's picture

Chris Rugan,
I got a big laugh out of the Ron English link! The symbolism of pop-culture juxtaposed on itself is truly surreal. It is great to see Walt Disney keeping abreast of other Hollywood giants :-)

ChrisL

andi emery's picture

Oh Chris......

RN Lee's picture

"What gets lost is the real Che Guevera—the one behind the photograph."

...and just to bring this all the way back around to brands and consumerism, did you know Che was wearing a Rolex when he died?

andi emery's picture

NO! Really?!

RN Lee's picture

Well, maybe not when he died, but when he was captured. A CIA officer who was helping the Bolvians find him took it as a trophy.

kristin's picture

One of our local non-profit stores got sued by "Fashion Victim" the new owners of the Che photographic image. I googled and found this article:

http://thefrontweekly.com/print/36

An excerpt:

Fashion Victim is suing Northern Sun Merchandising of Minneapolis, which has been peddling Guevara t-shirts for the past 25 years. Fashion Victim supposedly bought the rights to the famous image of Guevara from the photographer Alberto Korda in 2002, ignoring the fact that the image circulated freely in the public domain for decades and that the familiar two-toned stencil-like version of Korda's photograph wasn't created by Korda but instead by Irish artist Jim Fitzpatrick. The irony here, as a recent Utne Reader article points out, is that Fashion Victim manufactures its T-shirts in Honduras, a country that produces most of its exported clothing in sweatshops.

Si_Daniels's picture

>did you know Che was wearing a Rolex when he died?

I believe it's standard squadie practice to wear an expensive watch - it comes in handy for bartering or when captured by a farmer - "Rather than hand me over to the Germans, take my watch and let me go."

RN Lee's picture

"I believe it’s standard squadie practice to wear an expensive watch - it comes in handy for bartering or when captured by a farmer"

I think it has more to do with Guevera's upper bourgeoisie status and that he was a brand whore who probably *would* have his corpse stripped of an iPod and Bluetooth Razr and Airs today. I rather doubt that he doled out spendy branded watches to his cadres, just in case of capture.

RN Lee's picture

Oh, and plus, I'd have a lot more respect for him if he'd been wearing a Movado.

hrant's picture

> I’d have a lot more respect for him if ...

No you wouldn't.

hhp

Norbert Florendo's picture

Just saw Chris' portrait.

LOL! ;^)

Is that curl on your forehead a lonely white hair?

lore's picture

And where does the Rolex story come from anyway? Where is the source? I don't believe it for a second, not that I think it impossible but because spreading the rumour is (or was at the time) too bloody convenient. I can't believe people don't question things before taking them for granted, it's so easy to spread this sort of stuff.

Serious, Chris, I had to save the image because it's too brilliant.

RN Lee's picture

"And where does the Rolex story come from anyway? Where is the source?"

What, you want me to do your reading for you? You know, there's this thing called the Internet, and on it you can look things up in like two seconds, even if you're allergic to books.

For instance, if you typed "che" and "rolex" into one of the windows at the top of your browser, right now--or, better, maybe before you'd posted--you'd get about a zillion hits referencing the fact that Che was wearing one and that Felix Rodriguez, the CIA agent I referred to, took it and made a point of showing it off in years after. Several of the top hits at Google are from communist/socialist sources, just in case you find anything else ideologically suspect.

And you're welcome.

Eric_West's picture

And where does the Rolex story come from anyway? Where is the source? I don’t believe it for a second, not that I think it impossible but because spreading the rumour is (or was at the time) too bloody convenient. I can’t believe people don’t question things before taking them for granted, it’s so easy to spread this sort of stuff.

Is it too bloody convenient or are your just perturbed someone has an opposing view?
bloody hostile is where this is going

how does anyone know ANYTHING about Che? He is either deified or villified. None here was a guerella fighter with him. We can't really say what was and what wasnt. That said, i'm inclined to believe either story based on that. I guarantee there is misinformation on both sides.

RN Lee's picture

"No you wouldn’t."

Yes, I would, actually. Rolexes are what hicks buy when they win the Lotto.

Eric_West's picture

I can't stop laughing right now…

hrant's picture

You missed my point entirely.
It was too inconvenient.

hhp

Paul Cutler's picture

An aside:

My brothers life long friend in Phoenix was a Green Beret in Colombia and Bolivia in the 60s and was on the team that took Che down.

One time I complained to him about Rage Against the Machine having Che stenciled on their amps while playing a Free Tibet concert and he told me the story and then told me he loved Rage Against the Machine!

It's a strangely spherical world…

peace

grumpyoldbugger's picture

Even Marx knew that communism was a dumb idea, but that didn't stop Castro and Guevera and Stalin and Lenin from making it their system of dictatorship. Strong nations are built, like the United States, on a foundation of capitalism and military strength.

Its not surprising that Guevera would have a Rolex: it's always the pigs who find the truffles.

TBiddy's picture

Its not surprising that Guevera would have a Rolex: it’s always the pigs who find the truffles.

Mmmmmmm, truffles...

hrant's picture

A few decades of power, and the little people think they're god's gift
to mankind. In fact your descent has already started - but you're so
drunk on blood that you don't even realize it.

hhp

Miss Tiffany's picture

I think we need a general call for order. Let's get back on topic or kindly refrain from posting.

dave bailey's picture

*hands Tiffany a Moderator Gavel*

Rob O. Font's picture

Whew, Thanks Tiff.

Ironic though, we're talking about a time when the accuracy and dependability of a Rolex was far more useful to the left than the right. And now, we're talking about a time when earphones and running shoes are much more useful to the right than the left. A stencil for all seasons.

lore's picture

Eric: I think the topic was really interesting and I know how you feel about seeing your thread being hijacked. I remember how it felt when I asked for help regarding a book on gay parades and I had to read some really useless comments on how people felt about gays, which it wasn't really what I had asked. I didn't feel really bad because there were still loads of useful suggestions but still, it was a drag. I don't know but once you have start posted your thing, it's not something you can control so I hope you are not taking it too personal, I don't think anyone wanted to sabotage you. Also I don't really care about what people think about Che Guevara (it's not something I need or wish to control) and what I meant was exactly that there is misinformation on both sides (assuming there are only 2 sides).
I suspect that if I had answered "oh really? Che had a rolex??? Wow!" everyone would have been happier but hey, people don't always say what you want to hear... Well, I hope you feel better today. This was a particularly unfortunate thread that started going wrong the minute psycho-grumpy walked in. In fact I am inclined to think that grumpy and google-boy RNLee are the same person. Just a feeling...but yeah, I think the CA cover was interesting in a weird way...it looks almost like they did this as a joke and then found no use for it. Then they decided to publish an article on Cuban Design and they remembered they had something vaguely Cuban stashed in some drawer and the cover was ready. They forgot to add the rolex though...tsk...tsk...tsk...
Now, after all that I really need to go on a Typophile detox for a while.

fontplayer's picture

I know how you feel about seeing your thread being hijacked

In most cases, it isn't hijacking, it is just derailed. Sometimes a simple comment is blown out of proportion and becomes the focus.

hrant's picture

Not even derailed, but branching. Like a tree.

hhp

piccic's picture

Anyway, if you want my opinion, I'm tired of seeing cultural icons abused by designers.

It's not that I have no sense of humour, but I tend to be more and more annoyed to see people targeting a single individual. And I don't care if it's a publically perceived "evil" figure. I just dislike it.

In my opinion, Chris post was the most thoughtful and balanced, and of course it reflected the truth about the perception people tend to have. The Beatles, for example, as many people in the 1960s and 1970s, developed a fascination for eastern spirituality, which rarely led them to deepen their search. This is probably true of any generation. Any process of insight is costly. It seems the majority of people prefer to use things at a very superficial level, especially as we are tempted to spend a lot of idle hours on the web.

Syndicate content Syndicate content