The folks at More in Common just released the results of a study that “explores how Americans tend to have a distorted understanding of people on the other side of the aisle, what causes it, and why it matters.” They call it the Perception Gap, and it’s…not encouraging.

On staying “informed”:

You might think that people who regularly read the news are more informed about their political opponents. In fact, the opposite is the case. We found that the more news people consumed, the larger their Perception Gap. People who said they read the news “most of the time” were nearly three times more distorted in their perceptions than those who said they read the news “only now and then.” We can’t prove that one causes the other, but these results suggest that rather than making Americans better informed, media coverage is now feeding our misperceptions.  

On education:

Education is intended to make us better informed about the world, so we’d expect that the more educated you become, the more you understand what other Americans think. In fact, the more educated a person is, the worse their Perception Gap – with one critical exception. This trend only holds true for Democrats, not Republicans. In other words, while Republicans’ misperceptions of Democrats do not improve with higher levels of education, Democrats’ understanding of Republicans actually gets worse with every additional degree they earn. This effect is so strong that Democrats without a high school diploma are three times more accurate than those with a postgraduate degree.

Youre gonna want to read the whole thing.

posted by: Aaron Bragg  |  category: random thoughts  |  make a comment

Though this is an interesting and welcome admission – inasmuch as writers have historically been the Dalits of this business of ours – I have a couple of nits I’d like to pick.

First, the author, Katharine Schwab, seems to think that writing is just another skill for designers to pick up on the side, as if all it takes is a couple of TED Talks to achieve expert wordsmithery. Writing is a craft, not a skill. “The difference,” wrote Twain, “between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter—’tis the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning.”

Second, the piece ignores the fact that writers and designers are very, very different types of people. If you’re fundamentally a designer who happens to know her way around sentence structure, swell – but you’re still a designer, which means you think like a designer. It’s not wrong, it’s just different. Think of it this way: Ever hear a classical musician attempt jazz? It’s dreadful. Sure, it’s all music, but just because you’re a Curtis grad doesn’t mean you can swing. (In fact, it probably means the opposite.)

If Schwab’s article leads to a greater appreciation of writing and writers, then, well…great. But on the subject of “writing as the next most important skill for designers,” color me dubious.

posted by: Aaron Bragg  |  category: the writing life  |  make a comment

As a follow-up to yesterday’s post, I’m sure that none of you will be shocked to learn that women rate 80 percent of men as “worse-looking than medium.” So, basically, four out of five of us are ugly. Meanwhile, men – the more statistically rigorous of the sexes, it would seem – rate only 50 percent of women as worse-looking than medium.

It’s all laid out in a fascinating article about what happens when you apply the Gini coefficient, a tool used by economists to study inequality, to the dating economy. It’s…not good. “Technology,” concludes Bradford Tuckfield, “has not enabled us to escape the brutal social inequalities dictated by our animal natures.”

This is not to say that we haven’t tried. The institution of monogamy is itself a “redistributive” type of policy: like capping the income of billionaires, it caps the total allowed romantic partners of the most attractive, so that unattractive people have much better chances to find a partner. The marriages that we read about in historical accounts that are based on prudence and family arrangement make more sense when we realize that basing marriage on mutual attraction leads so many—both men and women—to be unsatisfied with the outcome, since most women find most men unattractive.

Explains so much, doesn’t it?

posted by: Aaron Bragg  |  category: random thoughts  |  make a comment

When I was a kid, my stepdad kept a spinthariscope in his sock drawer.* And every once in a while he’d let me take it to bed – because the best way to actually see the radium atoms decaying was in the dark, once your eyes had grown accustomed to the low-light conditions.

But I got to wondering the other day whether letting an eight-year-old sleep with a radioactive toy was, you know, a good idea – never mind holding it up to your eye for hours on end. Granted, this was back when seat belts were optional and second-hand smoke was a feature rather than a bug, but still.

Thankfully, Randall Munroe put my mind at ease with this handy Radiation Dose Chart:

Here’s the full-sized PNG image. It appears I’ll be OK – for the time being, anyway. Oh, and here’s more information on spinthariscopes, including a link to purchase your very own – using thorium instead of radium bromide – for the low, low price of just $49! Sounds like the perfect Father’s Day gift to me.

*No, I don’t know why. I mean, I know why he owned a spinthariscope – because they’re awesome – but his sock drawer?

posted by: Aaron Bragg  |  category: random thoughts  |  make a comment

My friend Darrell Sullens passed away May 26. Darrell served in the Navy aboard the USS Pickerel, and was a well-known painter in the local art scene. He also opened an art supply store in 1978, the very year I started the design program at SFCC. When I wrote a blog post about his shop a couple of years ago, Darrell kindly commented. “We made many life long friends while running our little business,” he wrote. My wife Linda and I are grateful to be among them.

Last year helveticka celebrated its 30th anniversary. As part of the festivities, we designed an exhibit featuring 30 collaborators who helped us reach that milestone – individuals who made an impact both on my business and, in many cases, on me personally. Darrell was one of them. Here’s his story, along with my commentary, as shown in the exhibit:

posted by: CK Anderson  |  category: the design life  |  make a comment

After studying several instances of what we now call “spontaneous human combustion,” French agronomist Pierre-Aimé Lair (1769-1853) discovered that most of the cases involved “corpulent older women with a penchant for drink, thus combining fat and alcohol in a literally explosive mix.” His conclusion:

Thus there is no cause for surprise that old women, who are in general fatter and more given to drunkenness, and who are often motionless like inanimate masses, during the moment of intoxication, should experience the effects of combustion.

I’ve long suspected as much.

Anyway, it’s all there in Christopher E. Forth’s Fat: A Cultural History of the Stuff of Life, which hits bookshelves next month. Until then, you can read all about the black market in human fat over at The Atlantic.

posted by: Aaron Bragg  |  category: random thoughts  |  make a comment

Remember that post I wrote three years ago about Irv Teibel and his Environments records? Of course you do.

As usual, I was well ahead of the pop culture curve, because all 22 recordings have now been fully remastered and turned into an iPhone app. And it’s awesome.

For $3, you get all 11 albums with original artwork and liner notes and the ability to create your own playlist. Best of all, the recordings are part of the app – meaning you don’t need an Internet connection to enjoy what you’ve purchased. In an era in which streaming reigns supreme, this is a truly creative – and far superior – way of delivering music.

Makes me wonder why other record labels aren’t following suit.

posted by: Aaron Bragg  |  category: random thoughts  |  make a comment

One of my favorite books is The End of Print: The Graphic Design of David Carson.

The now-famous 1995 publication achieved its rarified status for two reasons: Carson’s emergence in the 90s as graphic design’s bad boy – doing groundbreaking work that defied every mainstream design convention – and the fact that it’s the best-selling graphic design book of all time. Its title is in part a response to a 1993 interview with Neville Brody, another graphic designer of note, who suggested that Carson’s work represented the “end of print.” Carson took it as a challenge.

Among his notable work is a three-year stint as art director (1992-95) for Ray Gun magazine. Note the full-page ad for subscribing – another dig at Brody:

I remember going to my local grocery store and thumbing through issues whose provocative pages were artfully illustrative and alluring. I discovered – much to my surprise – that if you’re interested in the content, you don’t mind working a little harder to read the text. (It’s a magazine, not a book.)

Carson’s surfer lifestyle and lack of formal training definitely informed his chaotic design solutions. Is it art or graphic design? Is it beautiful or just plain ugly? Is it communication or decoration? The answer to all of these is both – all at the same time. It’s like reading a puzzle or interpreting hieroglyphics. It sometimes takes a little longer to connect the dots, but it’s well worth the time.

Perhaps the most amazing aspect of Carson’s approach is that there are actually clients who continue to appreciate it – though his design sensibilities are about as far away from my own aesthetic as you can get. As he said himself, he would never be caught dead using Helvetica.

Today, David Carson continues to influence and shape the design landscape. His client list, industry accolades (including a 2014 AIGA Gold Medal), and constant demand on the global lecture circuit are all signs that both print and Carson are alive and well. And while he has his detractors, he’s pretty much considered the coolest graphic designer ever.

posted by: CK Anderson  |  category: the design life  |  comments(1)