What does that say about his campaign?
My feeling, in my own narrow sphere as a professional graphic designer, echoes a little bit what Frank Rich wrote
in his column on Sunday, where he was talking about Hillary Clinton's
argument that Obama doesn't have the experience to run the country
properly, and how you only needed to look at how her own campaign has
been managed to see the flaw in that argument. I sort of see the same
thing. I'm not sure that the commander-in-chief proves his mettle by
getting everyone at his rallies to set their signs in the same
typeface, but as someone who knows how hard that is, I'm very impressed.
The specific choices are also made in really good taste and I'd say to certain degree they also philosophically align with what his position is.
What do you see as the "philosophical implications," to use a highfalutin phrase, of Obama's design choices?
There
are a couple of levels. There's the close-in parlor game you can play
about what all these typefaces actually mean. Gotham was a typeface
designed originally for GQ magazine,
so it's a sleek, purposefully not fancy, very straightforward,
plainspoken font, but done with a great deal of elegance and taste--and
drawn from very American sources, by the way. Unlike other sans serif
typefaces, it's not German, it's not French, it's not Swiss. It's very
American. The serif font that he often uses to write Obama is delicate
and nuanced and almost, not feminine exactly, but it's very
literary-looking. It looks very conversational and pleasant, as opposed
to strident and yelling. It's a persuasive-looking font, I would say.
But that's putting these things on couches and pretending they have
personalities.
Right. It's sort of hard to imagine in a
voter in Cleveland (or a Newsweek political blogger from New York, for
that matter) interacting with Obama's design on that level. How does it
affect those of us who aren't graphic designers?
Well, I'm
teaching this class at the Yale School of Management, and we were just
talking about brand management and politics--exactly this thing before
we got on the phone. And one of the things that came up in the
conversation is, if you think about it, the challenge for someone named
Barack Hussein Obama is that he's such an unprecedented figure in
American politics--so much so that everything he's trying to do is, in
a way, trying to make him look smoother and more normal. Someone said,
"Well, why shouldn't he have revolutionary looking graphics--graphics
that make him look like grassroots, like an outsider? Things drawn by
hand, things that look forceful and avant-garde." But I think he's
using design in a way to make him look as normal, as comfortable, as
inevitable as a brand can look in American life. Those are really
deliberate, interesting choices. Whether or not a sans serif font like
Gotham looks more "American" than a Swiss font like Helvetica, that's
in our imaginations to a certain degree. I think it's much more
incontrovertible that he's actually using the seamlessness of this
branding to convey a candidacy that's not a dangerous, revolutionary,
risk-everything proposition--but as something that is well-managed and
has everything under control.
How much have brands like
Target or Apple or Volkswagen--these high-design, but essentially
accessible brands--paved the way Obama?
I think they're all
very much of a kind. I would name those three brands as ones that share
a lot with the way this candidate is presenting himself. They're meant
to look transparent, open, accessible and democratic to a certain
degree. Non-intimidating. You don't feel that this stuff is all being
hatched in corporate boardrooms with ad agencies and marketing experts
at the table. They all sort of look as if people like you are talking
to people like you. Of course, there's a lot of forethought put into
all this stuff. But in the end, being able to project an identity that
people are willing to credit with being authentic is a hard thing to
do. But those brands, and the Obama brand, are managing to do it.
With
all three of those brands, though, design has in some sense become a
form of content. I wonder if something like that is happening with
Obama--that people find the seamlessness of his brand compelling and
comforting, and they gravitate to him because of it, as opposed to any
specific policy differences with Clinton. I'm wondering if you see that
reflected in Obama the same way you do in, say, Target or Apple vs.
Wal-Mart or Dell?
Oh yeah. There is a difference in the way the
experience is delivered between Wal-Mart and Target. Target is gambling
on the proposition that people want something that's got more style,
that seems more accessible, that's less strident, that's less
one-dimensional, that offers a higher comfort level--and they're
willing to go with it. There are interesting policy distinctions that
you can make between the Democrats and the Republicans and even between
Hillary and Obama. But as has been said, the differences are not so
pronounced that you're going to be driven inexorably to one over the
other. So I think that the affiliation with a brand seems to be
transcending these other things. For good or for ill, that seems to be
the way the race is playing out this year.
【免费咨询报名电话:010-6801 7975】
咨询报名MSN:xueliedu@hotmail.com
试一试网上报名
咨询报名QQ:
1505847972 | 1256358232 | 1363884583 | 1902839745 | 800072298 | 754854002 |
中专升大专 | 中专升本科 | 高升专 | 高升本 | 专升本 | 自考 |