The other day I heard someone utter “hone in on”—something we addressed here, by the way—and, for reasons still unclear to me, it got me to wondering: how many people mistakenly write shoe-in when they mean shoo-in?

It’s a common mistake, according to Professor Paul Brians, helped in no small part by sites like this. Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase & Fable (18th edition) sets the record straight:

Shoo-in  In American English, one who is certain to win, especially in a political election. The image, which originated in horseracing in the 1930s, is of a competitor in a rigged race who merely needs to be encouraged across the finishing line with a shout of ‘Shoo!’ in order to win. The phrase, despite the frequent misspelling ‘shoe-in’, has nothing to do with shoes.

So there you have it: a little English, a little history, and the ability to go forth and write with confidence. You’re welcome.

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

Sorry for the radio silence there, folks. I was gallivanting about the west side of our fair state, gathering intelligence for our upcoming MAC exhibit on Spokane’s Modern architecture scene. Then Thanksgiving happened, and, well…no blog posts.

The exhibit is coming along nicely, though—so much so that I can confidently predict that minds will, in fact, be blown. Want a taste? Here’s what Bauhaus founder, director of the Harvard Graduate School of Design, and Alma Mahler’s husband Walter Gropius had to say about architecture: “…whereas building is merely a matter of methods and materials, architecture implies the mastery of space.”

BAM.

There’s a lot more where that came from starting March 2 in the main gallery at the Northwest Museum of Arts & Culture.

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

An alert reader—and proud Shaw Middle School alum—sent us this photo today. Though we’ve recently talked about cutting folks some slack when it comes to typos, it’s awfully hard to look the other way when said typo is on a school reader board.

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

It finally transpired. Over the years, a number of clients have asked us what happens if we don’t create anything they like. It’s a question that typically comes up during logo projects, and my response has always been to tell ’em not to worry. It’s never happened. Ever.

Until now.

After an early discovery phase that included a Q&A session, a competitive review, a clear outline of our logo intent and focus, and two design reviews, we learned that a new client was going to take its business elsewhere (to the RFP runner-up, of course).

What’s even more perplexing, however, is that those two design reviews were successful. We provided a full range of logo ideas during the first meeting, from which five were selected for further development. In the second meeting, we reviewed the refined ideas along with some preliminary colors and applications. The choices were narrowed down to three because, according to our client, it was simply “too difficult” to choose only one or two.

Guess we shouldn’t have taken that as a positive sign. A couple of weeks later, we were told that we just hadn’t solved their design problem; that we needed to explore additional ideas. Now, I recognize that our country is in the throes of a political campaign in which flip-flopping on issues is the norm, but this was really a surprise—given that all involved were quite content with our solutions. (We ought to know, after all. We asked a time or two. Or three.)

No problem, I thought. We simply need to understand the client’s new concerns and continue to develop additional ideas—while not incurring any additional costs. What I didn’t fully grasp was that they were breaking up with us. The qualifications that made us win out over other firms had suddenly, and inexplicably, vanished. Goodbye, AMD.

So now when I’m asked what we do if we don’t create anything a client likes, I have a new response: “Well, that’s never happened in the 32 years I’ve been doing this. Except once. So we don’t expect it to happen again until around…2044.”

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

Starbucks coffee? Meh. At its worst, it tastes like burnt toast; at its best, it tastes like mostly burnt toast. Either way, it’s still better than Dutch Brothers. Call me ambivalent, then.

As for the company’s rather pretentious naming system—what with its “venti” this and “con panna” that—come on. We’re not in Italy. Know how I can tell? The coffee tastes like toast.

In response, British department store Debenhams, diplomatically citing “cappuccino confusion,” has launched a “plain English” menu at its Oxford Street location in London.

“We’re trialling a redesign of our coffee menu in Oxford Street,” said John Baker, director of food services at Debenhams, “so shoppers spend less time playing coffee Cluedo and more time enjoying their favourite drink.”

Hear, hear.

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

How did I miss this story? A guy on the loose with someone else’s groin in his pants?!?

“A suspect found inside a Les Schwab Tire store in Spokane Valley after an alarm went off told deputies it was neither his groin nor his meth found in his groin area they recovered after arresting him Wednesday.”

It was bad enough we had to worry about our kidneys getting stolen for the Chinese black market; now we have to guard our groins as well?

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

According to President Obama’s Twitter feed, even the executive branch is having to cut back:

RT if you agree: Mitt Romney’s severely conservative views are a disaster for women that we can’t afford in the White House.

— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) October 25, 2012

No word from the president yet as to whether his economic plan will lead to more affordable women.

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

With Halloween just around the corner, I got a little excited when I saw a link to “A Highbrow Halloween Reading List.” It’s a little disappointing, though, not least because there’s no Lovecraft. (Here‘s one of my favorites of his.)

But for a truly horrifying tale—the kind that gives you the heebie-jeebies from the very first word—you can’t go wrong with Algernon Blackwood’s The Willows. Several e-book versions are available (FREE!) at Project Gutenberg. Read it…if you dare.

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