It's Too Graphic

Carol A. Wells, founder and executive director of the Center for the Study of Political Graphics in Los Angeles, reviews The Design Of Dissent, a collection of protest graphics. Well, it's not really a review, it's closer to boosterism. Looking over the many examples in the book, she concludes it "shows the...continuing need for protest graphics." How? She discusses the material, and the LA Times Book Review reprints some of it, but has anyone proved a need, much less a continuing one?

Furthermore, she says "Some works are beautiful, others horrific. Some are clever, others manage to elicit humor in the midst of death and dying." The one thing she avoids saying is all these graphics are propaganda. (I'm guessing it's because she agrees with much of the propaganda, though that shouldn't matter). These pieces are designed to make quick, sharp statements that bypass complex thought and get you in the gut. They can be effective, of course, but that doesn't mean they lead toward the truth.

Wells claims the book "will challenge preconceptions and assumptions." Okay, but will it help us think more clearly, or will it help us believe lies and nonsense. To pick an example, there's a poster (reprinted in the Times--sorry I can't find a link) trying to spook you out over genetically modified foods (a strangely big deal in Europe) showing a hairy lemon. This intellectually amounts to pseudo-scientific hysteria which, if believed, could lead to millions starving--but hey, at least we've been challenged.

She believes the most challenging section is on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, at least for Americans, who "if they rely on the mainstream media, rarely hear about or read about Israelis opposed to their government's politicies--not unlike the lack of dissenting views presented in our own country."

I'm afraid this mixture of smugness and detachment from reality does not make for a reliable review or reviewer.