Sometimes Not
Was in B&N yesterday, purposely trying to get myself back into thinking about design and photography in my spare time — trying to put the difficult past few weeks behind me.
Perhaps it’s my still-snarly state of mind, but I didn’t see any titles in their new releases section that I liked; wandered the aisles for a while, perused a magazine or two (why is it British car mags have such better design than ours?), and eventually wound up flipping through this:
I’m sorry that the first book design post in a while is a negative one, but this is horrible. While it’s not a bad picture of President Carter, looking serious and concerned (though the mixed plaids are annoying), the use of type has serious shortcomings. Oh, to have time to host a redesign competition…!
TrackBacks: 0
Posted by Giles, Monday, December 12, 2005, at 8:03 AM.
Posted to Book design | Book sellers | Freedoms and rights | Personal
Comments:
Yes agreed on this one. Why do we need to see the bottom half of Carter’s body? Yikes, the design needs to be scrapped and started over.
May I ask my dumb question for the day?
What is the basis of the objection to Mr. Carter’s attire? It is my understanding that the menswear cognoscenti consider plaid on plaid acceptable—often, indeed, stylish—as long as the two plaids are not of the same scale. (For an account of this principle at work, see Alan Flussser’s Dressing the Man, Ch. 4.)
I would be grateful for the chance to learn the opinion of a design professional on this issue.
menswear cognoscenti
Well, I stand corrected…;)
Seriously, I’m just not a fan of the look, simple as that. I can understand why that look was chosen, and why it would work for some. Sorry I can’t explain it better.