Speak UpA Former Division of UnderConsideration
The Archives, August 2002 – April 2009
advertise @ underconsideration
---Click here for full archive list or browse below
  
Visual Literacy and the International Male Image

I have an international last name, but I do not have long greasy hair that flows past my ears like Fabio. My abs are neither a six pack nor a washboard—more like cardboard covered in hair—but despite all of this, the International Male catalog stills manages to find me after five address changes in ten years.

As far back as 1993 when I was a college student living in the dorms, International Male wound up in my mailbox (in retrospect, it may have related to my GQ and Esquire subscriptions). Today, the catalog looks very similar to the way it did over ten years ago, although I have not been able to locate the fish-net, sleeveless shirts they used to sell, which I repeatedly laughed at. I did not archive my older issues because, yes, they were (and still are) hilarious, but for those of you interested in seeing what the catalogs used to look like consider this pitch that one eBay seller tauts for his 80s-90s International Male collection, “page after page of the hottest guys fashions, incredible looking models, excellent accessories and photography that is unequaled.”

International Male image Old International Male catalogs get sold on eBay.

Talk about exaggerating, but that’s what International Male offers the reader: exaggeration. The models’ physically exaggerated, broad shoulders and chiseled abs are enough to make anybody question what kind of workout regimen and diet goes into looking like a stripped down man of steel. And the clothing serves to exaggerate those parts of a male body that some guys feel insecure about (just consider International Male’s butt-lifting underwear). Few of the button-up shirts actually get buttoned up, and instead, reveal the male linea alba. On their website, International Male offers a description of what they want when searching for models to dress up in these outfits: “personality and attitude that comes across in the photos and makes our clothing look its very best.” Attitude? So that explains the Come Hither look that some of these men have. As the male version of the Victoria’s Secret catalog, International Male uses the model’s sensual gaze to lure customers into purchasing any one of their stylish items. Here are some great looking “personalities”:

International Male image Who needs buttons with these abs?

International Male image You talkin’ to me?

International Male image I’m a man in deep thought.

International Male image Did somebody say sassy?

International Male image With this shirt, you too could be the next American Idol.

International Male image Dude, you could be so money in this outfit too.

As a man, my first reaction when I look at International Male is, “I’ve got a long way to go in order to achieve this.” It’s a feeling plagued by insecurity until humor trumps those inadequacies, helping me come to the conclusion that this catalog appeals to single men, who are looking for a hot night on the town. Yes, that’s a presumption, but in any case, that’s not me. And no matter how hard I try and imagine who would look forward to this catalog or buy anything from it, Steve Martin and Dan Aykroyd’s Czech brothers keeps popping into my head along with Will Ferrell and Chris Kattan playing the Roxbury Guys, Steve and Doug Butabi. Initially, the laughs help me get past that feeling of inadequacy, and then I realize that clothing and abs do not make the man. False ideals like You too can be a stud in this shirt or these flesh-enhancing underpants are just that: ideals. First we see them in print, then on the television, and before long, we want a tummy tuck or face lift.

And that’s when the trouble starts. If the clothing isn’t enough (and it’s never enough) the next phase you may enter is physical transformation, a la the Swan. Instead of sexy clothing or shape-shifting surgery, what we really need is education that informs men, women, girls, and boys that the images assaulting them are neither ideal nor perfect. As a college student in the 90s, my BS detector sensed that International Male promoted over-sexualized clothing that was far from gentlemanly. Take the go softwear™ padded butt description for instance: “Get a fuller, rounder silhouette. Backside padding enhances your rear view.” Whether looking at the fishnet sleeveless shirt or the one-piece body suit, the images resonated as soft pornography. See for yourself.

I received ample eduction at a young age about body imagery thanks in large part to my mother, who got degrees in gender studies and communication theory. Grade school helped too: we had sex ed. as early as seventh grade, when our school nurse covered everything from how babies get made to why pornography is bad. Math, science, athletics, and art help children develop into well-rounded citizens, but shouldn’t they be armed with visual literacy? Catalogs that promote tightening undergarments or magazines like Men’s Fitness that champion sculpted abs and vein-ribbed biceps are aimed directly at young men, who should be prepared to encounter those images and maintain a positive self image. Buying the latest flesh-lifting product from International Male won’t make you comfortable with yourself, and it won’t guarantee you a date, but having a strong self-image does so much more by giving you confidence. That positive attitude should be enough to fight the war against your body, and a sense of humor doesn’t hurt either.

Maintained through our ADV @ UnderConsideration Program
ENTRY DETAILS
ARCHIVE ID 3516 FILED UNDER Critique
PUBLISHED ON Jun.12.2007 BY Jason A. Tselentis
WITH COMMENTS
Comments
Gunnar Swanson’s comment is:

Was my earlier comment censored or was there a technical problem?

On Jun.12.2007 at 12:18 PM
Pat Broderick’s comment is:

Radar magazine ran a pretty funny story about International Male that involved the author wearing some of the more outlandish ensembles available from the catalog. There are photos.

On Jun.12.2007 at 12:24 PM
Gunnar Swanson’s comment is:

I’ll try again:

Jason,

International last name? Who in the US has a domestic name?

I suspect it was your Blueboy subscription rather than Esquire that got you on their mailing list.

On Jun.12.2007 at 12:29 PM
Randy J. Hunt’s comment is:

Jason,
Those damn target="_blank">Womb chairs in the DWR catalog stare at me with that same gaze.

On Jun.12.2007 at 01:20 PM
Gunnar Swanson’s comment is:

Jason,

Single men looking for a hot night on the town, indeed. My snotty joke wasn’t enough. You could easily see it as my being a jerk rather than a real critique so I’ll elaborate:

I’m really quite mystified that someone could get eight or nine hundred words into a discussion of the International Male catalog, mention gender studies, and not give any real consideration to gender roles as depicted. I’m sure there are heterosexual people who buy from the catalog but every home where I’ve seen it also had Blueboy.

I suspect your mother or anyone else with a gender studies degree would ask you whether you see soft porn as ungendered or somehow universal. Are males in gay porn just like males in straight porn? Are males and females treated the same way in straight porn?

Have you thought about whether the level of aesthetic social pressure that girls are subjected to is similar to the pressure on boys? Note that I’m not dismissing the pressure on boys; I’m suggesting that your Dove Real Beauty Campaign for Everyone thing implies too much (all the while ignoring the gay elephant in the room.)

There are plenty of examples of unrealistic images for males. Why did you choose this one? How do gay depictions of masculine perfection compare to heterosexual depictions of masculine perfection and are these internalized similarly by their audiences? Are pressures to be their respective ideals different?

Do you think heterosexual males, homosexual males, and females internalize body image in gender roles similarly?

Females are certainly presented with contradictory role models. I suppose that males are, too. But are you claiming that this is really a significant aspect of self-image for heterosexual American males? Come on; these models aren’t a broad masculine ideal as presented by mainstream media. That’s why you laugh at them.

On Jun.12.2007 at 03:33 PM
Leila Singleton’s comment is:

From Gunnar: "…these models aren’t a broad masculine ideal as presented by mainstream media. That’s why you laugh at them."

And at least most people do, indeed, laugh. Unfortunately, much of the ridiculousness aimed at females is mainstream and taken far more seriously:

Worse still, there's an unspoken code that says females are not allowed to laugh at this or call it silly — unless, of course, they want others to assume they are petty and catty.

On Jun.12.2007 at 08:04 PM
Tselentis’s comment is:

Have you thought about whether the level of aesthetic social pressure that girls are subjected to is similar to the pressure on boys? Gunnar, I've most certainly thought of this.

But are you claiming that this is really a significant aspect of self-image for heterosexual American males? Nowhere do I taut this as a significant aspect of the male image, but, yes, it is laughable. To some observers, professional athletes represent the ideal male, to others its Blueboy magazine, and to others it's International Male.

Just because International Male (IM) is taboo and laughable (and lame) doesn't mean we can't examine it.

On Jun.12.2007 at 09:16 PM
Ricardo Cordoba’s comment is:

Great post, Jason... I was not even aware of International Male! You've given me a good laugh after a couple of long workdays.

Gunnar brings up good points, but I agree with your idea that we should all be armed with visual literacy (more and more necessary as civilzation "progresses") and massive doses of confidence... and humor, of course.

:-)

On Jun.13.2007 at 02:14 AM
marko savic’s comment is:

I think you missed a bit of the boat here, Jason. As a young, fit, gay man I find the models physical fit but not entirely attractive, and I find their sense of fashion outdated and beyond their years. I won't argue the merits of creating false images of masculinity for young men to aspire to, since this is across heterosexual and homosexual male models (sports figures anyone?) But International Male owns a younger "styled" company for whatever "market" I may represent, and that is undergear, which has a completely different aesthetic for their models, though there is some carry over.

International Male is targetted to a more middle-aged heterosexual or homosexual male. The overexageration of physicality plays into marketing to the mid-life crisis. Your gut (or cardboard, Jason) is not desirable and you couldn't wear it open in this shirt. However, how many beer bellied men do you see wearing pink paisley with their bellies out? It's a stereotypical image of the older gay man or the effiminate straight man. Take a look at Birdcage, these are Robin Williams outfits. And even the access to International Male images, just go to Amazon.com and you can shop from the non-threatening world of Books, DVDs and unbuttoned tees.

So while I agree with you that this is a negative image to portray, just like Victoria's secret is for women, International Male is not the mark to look at for a valid. You want softcore porn? Check out advertising for:

Arguably "Straight" brands (still gay imagery)
2(x)ist. Dolce & Gabanna.

Definitely Gay Brands (Penis revealing imagery! Sex sells.)
Cin2. N2N. Aussiebum.

For heaven's sake, Ginch Gonch has two porn stars acting as their celebrity spokesmodels!

There won't be a balance seen in creating a positive role model image for men anytime soon as the tough, rugged, manly masculine man is in charge of the world.

Generalizing stereotypes and critiquing patriarchal society here, please don't hurt me... I'm taking a feminism course right now: Physical strength (and thus, looks) is a practical asset for men to have. Women do not have any practical purpose to be fit, they are passive creatures in the home who do not need to show their power over others in the workplace, they have more passive-agressive behaviours for that (i.e. social exclusion). Everyone knows the Victoria's Secret image of women is a farce because it has nothing to do with the nature of femininity: skinny bodies aren't seen as "fertile." Losing the 6-pack changes the very essence of masculinity. When was the last time you saw a woman crush a beer can on her forehead (granted, I've never seen it done period... Do we have beer in cans in Canada?)

I actually wrote an essay on homosexuality and its acceptance in society as seen through underwear ads, 1950-present. I can e-mail it to you if you like. I wrote it in second year for my History of Design course... it's a bit shallow, but that's what two days of writing for a theory course in the midst of a studio dominant program allows.

Apologies for rambling.

On Jun.13.2007 at 03:38 AM
Mark A.’s comment is:

I must say, for the first time, having met the handsome devil himself - Armin Vit - that I can imagine him in those tight bun underpants. What an Aztec God! And that wavy black hair: He ought to be on the cover of IM. Vit has 6 pack abs...no, make that 24 pack abs! And to show you what a modern guy he is: he was breast feeding baby Maya in the How Conference bookstore when I came in. What a great guy! (I'm teasing, Vit.)

Is this the first time homosexuality and male images have been mentioned on Speakup? I hadn't noticed or looked it up in archives. Maybe I was timely putting an illustration of sodomy in Wordit's "wet"" category.

Gunnar, I know you're just trying to stimulate conversation with questions, but jeez, Louise...give the guy a chance..Jason brought this examination up in a humorous way.(I think.) The Fashion Industries' image to women seems far more pervasive and relentless but his topic is about men and the absurdity of those male images. Are you outing people or jesting?

I moved into a new condo where the previous owner was an older gay man. ( He committed suicide here: My new bedroom.) So I get his old mail still. Beefy cowboys aren't my thing, so I write back to the companies his status as a customer. It keeps pouring in. Haven't seen an International Male catalogue yet.

On Jun.13.2007 at 07:43 AM
Gunnar Swanson’s comment is:

Jason brought this examination up in a humorous way.(I think.) The Fashion Industries' image to women seems far more pervasive and relentless but his topic is about men and the absurdity of those male images. Are you outing people or jesting?

Neither. I was pointing out that if the topic is mainstream culture’s message to men about self-image then he chose the wrong example. (If the topic is current gay culture’s message to men about self-image then he would have needed to do some work to make it the right example.) If the topic is International Male then saying it is “laughable (and lame)” doesn’t begin to “examine it.”

There could have been many ways to approach these subjects.

1) Leila’s comments about how men are allowed to laugh at absurd “role models” and women are not is a great handle on an important part of this.

2) Noting that International Male revolutionized the gay clothing industry (and, to some extent, gay visual culture) thirty years ago then didn’t change and has pretty well gone broke as a result offers several interesting handles:

A) There is a current attempt top revive the brand. How does reviving this brand compare, as a project, to other mainstream and subculture brand revival problems?

B) How does the downfall of this look this represent changes in gay, straight, and overall cultures?

C) How is this like and unlike other aging brands (and brands with markets made up of an aging population group)?

3) How do we decode various displays of hypermasculinity to read “gay,” “mainstream macho,” “‘laughable (and lame)’,” “non-white macho,” etc.?

Is this laughable because it is queer, because it is queer and dated, because it is somehow weirdly simultaneously stridently homosexual and not really queer, or what?

Where are our assorted boundaries of notions of masculinity (i.e., signifiers of maleness) and masculine roles (i.e., dominant male roles in society)?

How do we regard overt sexuality by men and by women in various business and social situations?

4) Where does self-seriousness fit into sexiness (male, female, heterosexual, homosexual)?

5) Where does acknowledged unreality (Victoria’s Secret’s angel wings, International Male’s padded socks) fit with real aspirations in personal sexuality or in desired sexual partners? How does that compare to other sorts of heroes and objectives? (Damn, Gunnar. You missed the opportunity to do a real academic writing trope and write “object/objectives.”)

6) What’s up with “international”? What does that signify when Jason declared his name to be non-domestic? It probably evoked europeaness for the catalog thirty years ago. What does it mean now? What does that say about changes in culture and politics? (To some extent this folds us back into #3 and Jason’s comments about old Steve Martin routines. What context makes a pair of pants say “Sopranos” on one guy, and “Selma Avenue hooker” on another? What does it say about transgressions of social codes that we would make different assumptions about the sexuality of a young American white man, a young middle eastern man, a young Albanian, and an old American white man wearing a pair of double knit flared sansabelt pants? How could the young white man signal “hyper-aware ironic hipster” rather than “pathetically disconnected and self-serious”?)

I could go on but you get the idea. I don’t think we need Rick Poynor to point out that an editor might have said something like “This is an interesting subject. Now what do you want to say about it?”

So I’ll say it: Jason, this is an interesting subject. What do you want to say about it?

On Jun.13.2007 at 09:56 AM
Tselentis’s comment is:

Gunnar, let me digest your query above. I'm not off this summer, but would love to consider your points before replying. I must say, you pose a good argument.

On Jun.13.2007 at 12:24 PM
Leila Singleton’s comment is:

I must say, Marko, I was not sure how to take the section of your comment prepended "Please Don't Hurt Me." Was this meant in jest? Are you assuming the voice of the patriarchal male? Or do you, personally and seriously, ascribe to the points you made in that paragraph?

On Jun.13.2007 at 02:59 PM
Leila Singleton’s comment is:

I must say, Marko, I was not sure how to take the section of your comment prepended "Please Don't Hurt Me." Was this meant in jest? Are you assuming the voice of the patriarchal male? Or do you, personally and seriously, subscribe to the points you made in that paragraph?

On Jun.13.2007 at 03:05 PM
Leila Singleton’s comment is:

Sorry for the double post there.

Gunnar got the point of my Victoria's Secret example…just to be sure everyone is on the same page, it was not intended at all as a discussion of body image, but rather an example of how much cornier — yet widely accepted — the imagery aimed at women is than that of International Male. From a design perspective, I can't think of anything stupider than a photograph of a grown woman with windswept hair sitting on fake clouds, angel wings strapped to her back as she intensely gazes at the camera. To top it off, such graphical gems as script type and pastel colors are employed, boosting the tacky factor through the roof (or should I say clouds?).

This is but one example of the quite insulting aesthetics and concepts adopted to woo a female audience. Scrubbing Bubbles (complete with 2-D animated bubbles with eyes) and diaper commercials (come on, talking babies with adult voices??? That's so Look Who's Talking!) are other examples, but they did not seem as pertinent to the discussion since they do not peddle fashion and are not presented with the same degree of seriousness as a Victoria's Secret ad.

International Male may, to some, be lame, but I posit it is actually tame compared to what is marketed to females. I am not discounting Jason's article, but I am baffled at why "stupid" for women is so often far more stupid than "stupid" for men.

On Jun.13.2007 at 03:52 PM
Dean’s comment is:

Huh, quite funny. I use to jerk-off to the International Male catalog as a youngster, guess it was my Victoria's Secret. It didn't have any long term effect on me what so ever. I mean these dudes are pretty like Pamela Anderson. I find it quite funny that there is a discussion about Intertational Male, I thought it was just a gay thing, who else would bother looking at it, nobody every dressed like this. I'm so laughing right now!!!

On Jun.13.2007 at 05:17 PM
marko savic’s comment is:

Leila: It was in jest, yes. l didn't want it to come across as something I personally believe and defend that point of view. Like I said, I'm in the middle of a course right now, Concepts of Male and Female in the West, so I was taking a bit of attack-through-stereotype role, if that makes any sense.

Obviously the gendered (masculine/feminine) roles that the sexes (guy/girl) play in advertising are not current to how people are living their lives. "Masculine" women (not bearded, but powerful for physical or intellectual traits, rather than birthing and domestic) and "Feminine" men are not exactly portrayed in mainstream culture. I think in the examples of International Male and Victoria's Secret you can still see the patriarchal ideas of gender and sex as inseparable.

Even the Dove Campaign For Real Beauty ignores the distinction of Femininity and Women (Females, those with a vagina): all the women they feature are still in one way or another distinctly "feminine" looking. Embracing curves is another form of genderizing the female body in the image of fertility. Feminism made its greatest strides when women rejected the feminine image, look to the body shapes of the Flappers and the 70s versus early 20th century, the 50s housewife and Victoria's bust.

It's a hard discussion, even the semantics of it all becomes incredibly confusing. We don't have anything in our language to describe the idea of gender/sex differentiation, and perhaps that means we aren't ready to accept that in mainstream society.

On Jun.13.2007 at 08:25 PM
Gunnar Swanson’s comment is:

We don't have anything in our language to describe the idea of gender/sex differentiation

How about gender/sex differentiation? Seriously, the use of the term “gender” has changed greatly in the last thirty or so years. It used to be that the term referred almost exclusively to linguistic forms like tables being feminine and knives being masculine in Spanish. Then it allowed a distinction between sex as in bumping uglies as opposed to sex as boy or girl. Now it allows at least the start of this discussion without a lot of explanation. We’re not there but don’t let anyone tell you there hasn’t been progress.

On Jun.13.2007 at 09:55 PM
Joe Moran’s comment is:

To all concerned: If you are going to swing that way, please remember: Protection!

Blah, blah, blah …

VR/

On Jun.14.2007 at 01:05 AM
Tselentis’s comment is:

Gunnar,

After reading your comments and considering all of your points, I have come to this conclusion: (1) you'd make en excellent editor (actually, you are a good editor), (2) if you were an editor of any publication, magazine or book, I'd want to work with you supervising me, (3) I commend you for citing Rick Poynor and challenging the notion of examination versus my 'examination', and (4) my point (vague to some, shallow to others, invisible to you) is that International Male (and especially its undergarment section) is construed as soft pornography because of how I read the language and imagery and a good laugh. Those interpretations happen with me as the interpreter. I’ve shaped the context based on my experiences and education and that’s the context I wrote from, which is one of many ways to approach writing. Rick has provided us with other methods, objectives, and approaches as well, all of which I respect (as I respect yours). And from the comments above, we've seen many other contexts and interpretations to boot. But in the end, seeing these men with 'personality' as an ideal or achievable goal is not the best course of action. It’s fantasy to me because I do not look like the models, nor to I find the fashions appealing. I look forward to reading more of your comments, Gunnar, which always inform and inspire me. Seriously. I write here on Speak Up to read the comments, and even though I have no true editor (although I do run things past Armin), I take many of the comments to heart as editorial suggestions that may serve to (1) improve my craft, (2) educate me, and (3) deliver possible subjects to write about in the future. Who knows, Gunnar, you may see one of your suggestions above fleshed out in the next issue of Open Manifesto or Eye. Maybe I’ll write it because one thing I enjoy more than writing is research, and I’d have a field day digging through some of your suggestions, especially the brand’s history. Maybe you will write it, maybe not. Maybe another reader here will take the lead and do something at their blog or in a magazine they write for. It’s an open forum. Enjoy.

On Jun.14.2007 at 09:55 AM
Christina W’s comment is:

When was the last time you saw a woman crush a beer can on her forehead (granted, I've never seen it done period... Do we have beer in cans in Canada?)

Ha ha - come camping in Saskatchewan some time. You can see both.

30 bucks for six of those things??

Seriously though, perhaps this is a comment on why advertising's beauty ideals, while they may have worked to some extend on women, seem to fail miserably when applied to men. Why is this? Do (straight) men fail to identify with the picture of the male sex object, the way women do? It took the advent of magazines like Maxim to introduce an ideal that most average guys could relate to (ok, 'round here anyway). Maxim has a few scant fashion pages in the back but most if not all of the imagery that males are asked to identify with shows no pictures of sexy male human beings - there are close cropped objects (cool by association), situational depictions, a few male celebrities (carefully casual or po-mo ironic) and women (objectified and again, cool by implied association). All the objectified men are to be found where? In the ads.

And, sorry if this is off-topic but I thought the people who mentioned language might find it interesting. I recently read a book about one man's trip to Peru (Cut Stones and Crossroads by Ronald Wright) and he had an interesting comment about language - the native Runa tongue has no masculin/feminine modifiers. (Peru was colonized by Spain, hence the Spanish comparisons).

He says, "Languages describe the world; like art styles, they emphasize some facets of reality, ignore others, and create categories of their own for which there may be no 'objective' reason and no parallels in another tongue...

"Spanish culture and language are steeped in gender-consciousness... it is impossible to talk about someone without indicating his or her sex. Most European languages share this characteristic... In Runasimi there is no gratuitous gender: he, she and it are expressed by the single pronoun pay. An individual's sex is not conveyed in conversation unless there is some reason for mentioning it. There is no deliberate avoidance of the question - it is simply irrelevant. This is a cultural statement: people are persons; there is no impertinent fascination with their sex."

On Jun.15.2007 at 07:26 PM
Christina W’s comment is:

Sorry for the typo - that should be 'extent' not extend.

On Jun.17.2007 at 01:47 AM
KevinHopp’s comment is:

Jason I commend you on underlining/reminding us SpeakUp is essentially an informal forum for contributers and visitors to inspire discussion. In so much that you responded with a thirty-plus line paragraph... to acknowledge your perspective and keep the subject moving.

I'd like to take the time to comment on Gunnar's points, but I'm not sure where to start. I'm interested in focusing on one question to further the discussion if Gunnar is willing to start.

Back to the initial post though. Things got a little grey for me when Men's Health magazine was related to the International Male catalog.

Fill me in.

On Jun.18.2007 at 12:19 AM
Gunnar Swanson’s comment is:

I'm interested in focusing on one question to further the discussion if Gunnar is willing to start.

Go ahead. Or are you asking me to choose a particular topic?

I’d be glad to join a discussion but I don't claim any expertise regarding issues of gay men as a market. A short time working for a costume shop in West Hollywood thirty years ago is the only credential I have beyond living, being awake, and not choosing friends on the basis of their superficial demographic similarities to myself.

If I were choosing a topic related to this discussion that I thought might be interesting to a variety of Speakers Up, I’d consider the question of self-identity in product promotion: Leila and Christina have already made some interesting comments. What can we determine about self-image and projection? Do males see themselves in media images in a different manner than females do? Are homosexuals affected by targeted media images differently than heterosexuals are, perhaps more akin to their hetero opposite sex?

What shapes your view of yourself and your ideal of yourself (even if you don’t want it to)? What makes you think “It would be better if I were like that” or “I should be like that” even if part of you is screaming “No!”

On Jun.18.2007 at 07:41 AM
Loic’s comment is:

oh my, such an intellectual discussion about a trashy 80's gay mens underwear catalog. i didn't know such dialog about international male was possible. you lost me.

On Jun.18.2007 at 04:24 PM
Gunnar Swanson’s comment is:

didn't know such dialog. . . was possible.

This comment is a staple of Speak Up conversations: it’s all pseudo intellectual yammering; it’s just a picture/design/typeface; who can talk/think so much about that?

People saying this sort of thing include those who purport to be graphic designers. What’s up with that? How can someone work as a graphic designer without knowing something about the meaning of form and about connotation? Isn’t that the core of the job? How can someone expect to be respected as a visual communicator who doesn’t know or care about how things are understood?

What would you think of a writer who says “What’s this interpretation, communication, and understanding stuff? It’s just a damned story”?

On Jun.19.2007 at 07:11 AM
George Tselentis’s comment is:

Gunnar's really getting into this. I think the article's hilarious & as a matter of fact, a group of us were discussing IM a couple of months ago. Chaps came up a lot throughout the conversation. Great article J!

On Jul.01.2007 at 01:46 PM
George Tselentis’s comment is:

Gunnar's really getting into this. I think the article's hilarious & as a matter of fact, a group of us were discussing IM a couple of months ago. Chaps came up a lot throughout the conversation. Great article J!

On Jul.01.2007 at 01:46 PM