For starters, you might consider the opinion of typographers Hoefler and Frere-Jones Frankly, when it comes to typography, it doesn’t get more expert than that.¹ They think that Obama is really the only one not hiding being false imagery with the use of Gotham, but rather embracing the image he has. Considering how little he has deviated from his message of hope and change in the last year, it’s not odd that his aesthetic and message line up nicely. He’s even inspired quite a few artists with his message. It’s instructive to let design critic Steven Heller walk you through an interesting history of campaign art to see what other candidates have inspired artists in the past. And while Heller doesn’t admit to being all that inspired by the poster that Sheppard Fairey created for Obama, I would personally have to disagree. Fairey’s image truly captures, in my mind, the fact that Obama stands for an America that is no longer willing to kowtow to the fear mongers. And another thing that is clear about Obama’s web site design is that designer’s John Slabyk and Scott Thomas didn’t get overrun by their client—their voice and design sensibility is clearly part of the mix. That, I think, is a good sign that Obama isn’t the kind of leader to run roughshod over his own advisor’s advice. Of course, even with a message as clear as hope, not everyone gets it.

McCain’s design isn’t terribly original, but I don’t think it disguises what he wants to portray himself as: a tough straight-shooter. And by shooter, I mean using a gun. You can’t get more obvious than including a military style star in you logo. And you can’t get more morbid that using black in most of your materials, including a desaturated gray American flag on your web site. Actually, the use of black is problematic, not because it’s inherently morbid, but as the absence of color, it often invites the viewer to fill in the blank. Black is just as easily chic as it is morbid. Given the yellow highlight, there’s a hint of hope—or support for the troops. But in a campaign that is seeming to shore up around the dichotomy of “hope” and “stay the course” McCain’s graphic style will re-enforce his message; namely, that this is a dark time for the country with horrible people out to get us. We need to fight!

And as for Hillary, I have to agree with Sam Berlow and Cyrus Highsmith’s article in Boston Globe that her design seems like an afterthought; staid. In a sense, a stereotypical aesthetic does re-enforce her message that she is the candidate with experience² but she is also saying that experience is dull and uninspired. Unfortunatly, that ignorance of design or lack of excitement about it isn’t all that different from out last commander-in-chief whose flagrant disregard for aesthetics is pretty horrific to the eyes. Oddly, a number of people have raised the question about the three stars in her logo being a subtle hint at the idea of a third term.

In short, Obama inspires, McCain stands firm, and Hillary stands for more of the same. I get a distinct feeling that the final results of this election will likely reflect the same order in terms of success.

> “Martin Luther King didn’t have experience to lead… > Kennedy didn’t have experience to lead… > Susan B. Anthony… > Nelson Mandela… > Rosa Parks… > Gandhi… > Anne Frank…”

America! Translate the word experience for what it means in politics: “I know the game. I can play the game. I will not change the game.” Experience brought us a war. Experience has us locked in a partisan game in which only the American people are the losers. The list of heroes above didn’t need experience. They needed courage and passion and ambition. Barack Obama has these qualities. And we need him. ((And despite what the media keeps repeating about Obama’s “vagueness,” you need only read his policies to alleviate yourself of that myth.))

This post is part of Banapana’s running bibliography.

From the Book Cover

The Culture of Contentment is a keen and striking appraisal of America’s current, far from happy state of affairs, written by possibly our wisest and certainly our most lucid and irreverent economist, John Kenneth Galbraith. This major new work goes far beyond Ronald Reagan and George Bush to ultimate and controlling causes–to the rise of a greatly self-satisfied elite that is now dominant in the electoral process. The result: today, a once strong and aspiring nation has lapsed into a self-serving economic and social stasis. Surveying this development with a detached and penetrating eye, Galbraith lives up to his reputation as “the voice and conscience of the economic profession”. Galbraith here scrutinizes the perilous by-products of complacency: a commitment to short-term action and inaction, restricted investment as a basic policy, government seen only as a burden, corporate sclerosis, and the dark side of financial speculation. He also considers the fate of the “functional underclass”, people who are stalled in poverty and denied the crucial support needed to change their situation. The larcenous savings-and-loan and junk-bond scandals are examined as major examples of the controlling principles of contentment. And from the clear-eyed global perspective for which he is celebrated, Galbraith regards key issues on the world scene: the emergence of the powerful new economies of Japan and Germany, the larger, often recreational nature of foreign policy, and self-controlling, self-enhancing military power. Making no concession to false optimism, Galbraith leaves no one in doubt as to what could be done, little as we may be disposed to do it. Here, in short, is an acute and powerfulassessment of where we are heading and not heading and what the consequences will be, from one of the sharpest and most original minds of our time.

• Amazon Link
• Google Link