I love it. Subtlety is pleasant when you get it, but for most people who are on the go, ya gotta hit 'em over the head.

So you're angry that it alludes to a sad, sickly truth about capitalism?

hhp

chéesh

I enjoy it. The Che symbolizing the used-to-be radical sixties folks now greying boomers with SUVs their iPods and sneakers :-) It is just plain fun, enjoy!

ChrisL

Except Che was neither a hippy nor a party-hopper.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4567474.stm

And what he fought and died for was not the right to party,
but something a little bit more important, in fact increasing
in importance every day.

hhp

The good news is that sneakers and electronic gagdets don't fool everybody:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4916270.stm

hhp

It isn't about what Che really was, it was about the perception 60s youth had of him as a rebel. The youth of the 60s also misunderstood Eastern religions and philosophies as well but knew how to chant Om as they toked up. As a member of 60s youth, I was as guilty as the rest in my misconceptions at the time.

ChrisL

Jorge Alderete draw this 3 years ago

And what he fought and died for was not the right to party,
but something a little bit more important, in fact increasing
in importance every day.

I loved Mortorcycle Diaries, I'm sure its the glamorized version of the story, but still very enlightening.

but regarding this design, i think Che Viva Banana says it better. >^p

> the perception 60s youth had of him as a rebel.

If that's true, and if Communication Arts is
limited to these people, that could make sense.

hhp

So, this is like the umpteenth 'clever' interpretation of the iconic Che Guevara picture. How utter, utter, utter unoriginal.

ƒ

Fredo, they could have used the Mona Lisa :-)

ChrisL

I recently saw a host of a show about gaming on G4, named Adam Sessler, wearing a shirt that had the Che image with a red circle slash* over it. Which made me, as a child of the '80s, think of the Ghostbusters' logo.

The only reason I don't roll my eyes completely at the CA cover is the similarity of the Che image's common appearance and the Apple iPod ad campaign. But it's hardly a sophisticated editorial image. Even they are cashing in on Che.

*Is there a name for that thing?

Che sera sera :-)

ChrisL

or else simply "Cliche sera"

ChrisL

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

ChrisL

And what he fought and died for...

And killed for. Don't forget killed for. Including over a thousand unarmed prisoners executed by firing squad under his orders.

Power, as Mao rightly observed, comes out of the barrel of a gun, not out of a poster no matter how charismatic the model.

Wow, this is a great thread. Thank you, Eric.

Let's hope it doesn't get ugly...

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

Regarding the design's execution, the metaphor IS redundant, but it's interesting that without both Swoosh and iPod Buds it looks like a commentary on that particular company/industry/product. Maybe avoiding this was the designer's intent. Just a thought...

Anyway, I agree that this is becoming a tired visual. Expected something more inspired from CA.

"Power, [...], comes out of the barrel of a gun [...]"

No, just intimidation, coercion, terror, insurgence and revenge.

Power lies in the resonant messages that typographies convey.

I think they are be purposefully redundant. In other words I read it as a statement about how over-materialistic we are today. So much so that even something which can stand for something more than simple marketing is now being reduced to another tool to market to the masses. If this makes any sense.

great thread. i think a lot of what feel about it has already been said, particularly around the redundancy. you could slice the cover in a number of ways, depending on how optimistic you want to be about the intellectual depth of it. i liked it, i think, because it wasn't about che at all but rather a juxtaposition of mostly meaningless symbols -- though symbols that people continually adopt as an expression of their values.

that said, the symbols used were the 'obvious' ones. maybe they're trying to attract attention from the adbusters crowd.

the cool thing is that it inspired a discussion like this, which would indicate that it was a success on some level.

It looks like the illustration on the cover was commisioned from illustrator Edel Rodriguez to coincide with his write-up on pg. 82, as well as the Cuba Si! feature on page 68, which is an interesting survey of post-revolution graphic design in Cuba.

Hrant
So you’re angry that it alludes to a sad, sickly truth about capitalism?

Was that even implied in my post? I meant what I said. This isn't about my personal views/politics. It's about the 'art of communication' in a first rate (I think) industry mag. I just felt a bit insulted that I would need to be hit over the head THREE TIMES.

Chris
Fredo, they could have used the Mona Lisa :-)

Narrowly avoided...

John/Tiffany

I agree with you on your observations Miss Tiffany, but I think... it's conceptual, but in a 'freshman just out of high school ' way. It just seems like a piece that should either be subdued, or blown to the extreme . ex. Che wearing Prada/Nike/Abercrombie, sitting on pile of fashionable corpse's, eating McDonalds, drinking Pepsi whilst the valet pulls up his H3 for the opening night of the new season of American Idol.

Peter
No, just intimidation, coercion, terror, insurgence and revenge.
Power lies in the resonant messages that typographies convey.

So your saying guns don't kill people, typography does?.

Anthony
Regarding the design’s execution, the metaphor IS redundant, but it’s interesting that without both Swoosh and iPod Buds it looks like a commentary on that particular company/industry/product. Maybe avoiding this was the designer’s intent.

Could you clarify "...looks like a commentary on...intent" ? thx

And yes, the iconography is tired. If they had run it like I first suggested. Someone may have posted something about tired iconography too. *shrugs

Without having read the article, the image suggests shifting trends in the use of graphic design, exposing an ideological clash between Cuba's political past and their impending future in the global marketplace. It's not about a Cuban relationship to Apple, or Nike per se, but the effects of consumerism as a whole on the present design culture. Using multiple corporate elements helps convey this meaning (if you accept that Apple and Nike represent consumerism as a whole). I dont think I would've made that connection as swiftly had it been just an image of Che without the other symbols.

I think your point about the treatment needing to be subdued or blown to the extreme is a good one. This piece falls somewhere in the middle, which is why it feels passé.

i didn't realize that apple and nike were really together untill i saw this today: http://www.apple.com/ipod/nike/

Well, I just finished the article.

Here is the title;

Cuba Si!
By Robert L. Peters, FGDC
Graphic design in post-revolution cuba.

In 13 pages of the feature, about a half a page near the end adressed post-revolution graphic design in Cuba. The rest was history of Cuba and US bashing. I was really hoping to learn something about Cuban graphic design.

Anthony, I wish the article would have addressed ANYTHING of design substance. But alas, it did not.

At least there's the Hoefler feature to look forward to. It's supposed to be about type. Let us hope for the best.

That might be a clicheed comment on misuse of icons but not nearly as patronising as Adobe's latest promotion. Guerilla marketing Pah.
http://www.adobe-live.com/

Tim

Some of you are too young for this one.

I think showing the Nike swoosh AND the earbuds hints at consumer excess as well as the perceived "need" to be trendy.

Reaganomics :-)

ChrisL

Wow Tim, that was weird....I really don't know which one is worse.
I saw a stencil graffiti of Che close to my sister's house ages ago then recently I noticed that someone had added two Mickey Mouse ears to it.

That sounds a little bit Banksy.
Tim

Extremely Banksy-esque...but it's not. In fact I don't think Banksy was even born when this stencil appeared. I went out yesterday to take a picture for you guys but the building wasn't there anymore! Typical.
Speaking of which....did you spot a Banksy on Woody Allen's Match Point?

"Who wins the cliche contest for notable faces? Marylin Monroe, Che, Elvis, or Mona Lisa?"
Did they design fonts too!?

>but the building wasn’t there anymore! Typical.
I had a similar experience with a station that I left a broken-down motorbike at :)

>Speaking of which….did you spot a Banksy on Woody Allen’s Match Point?
I don't really get Woody Allen.

>Marylin Monroe, Che, Elvis, or Mona Lisa
P22 will produce these faces eventually :)
Tim

"Did they design fonts too!?"

No, but they were often typecast :-)

ChrisL

Or this?

"There you go again"

ChrisL

"I don’t really get Woody Allen."

Perhaps you aren't screwed up enough. How someone could make me not care about watching Scarlet J. is quite an achievement, but he managed it.

PS, I wish the moderator could fix it when someone screws up the /cite.

I wish Scarlet J. wouldn't have gotten collagen injections in her lips.

I'd think the word injection would deter any right-thinking person
(Heroin addicts always baffled me).

Perhaps you aren’t screwed up enough. How someone could make me not care about watching Scarlet J. is quite an achievement, but he managed it.

I wish the moderator could fix it when someone screws up this site .

ƒ

Did someone call for a moderator? Whassup?

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

Can't the moderators fix it when someone screws up an /em or /cite?
Everything is in italic now.

I think that might be your browser, mine (Safari) shows Fredo's post as bold and yours as roman. Fredo what happened to Rorshach?
Tim

Can’t the moderators fix it when someone screws up an /em or /cite?
Everything is in italic now.

Yes, but we don't see everything, so you may have to alert us. I don't use IE, so you may see more problems than I do, depending on what browser you're using.

If it is only me seeing it, oh well, but here is the html from Graphic Fuzz's post that starts all the italic for me.

Ah, thanks for fixing it.

Oh, Chris that is brilliant!

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

I'm a budding Typophile :-)

ChrisL

Chris, nice!

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

hhp

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.

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

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.

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.

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?

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.

Grumpy

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

Gerald

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

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.'

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.

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

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

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.

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

Eric,

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

ƒ

“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).

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.

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!

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

Oh Chris......

"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?

NO! Really?!

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.

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.

>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."

"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.

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

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

No you wouldn't.

hhp

Just saw Chris' portrait.

LOL! ;^)

Is that curl on your forehead a lonely white hair?

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.

"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.

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.

"No you wouldn’t."

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

I can't stop laughing right now…

You missed my point entirely.
It was too inconvenient.

hhp

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