things I do like:
typography design
the window-frame view mimics the structural framing within the book (story within the story)
visual simplicity outside the frame, complexity inside the frame works well with the richness and the sparsness of the book itself
things I don't like:
drawing inside feels messy, and faux antiquated. the book exists outside of time. yes the characters are from history, yes it is a historical possibility, but the descriptions of cities are anachronisitic and take for granted inventions and conditions outside of the time period of the two men
too straightforward for a book that is not straightforward
things I do like:
includes a concept from the book (reflected city) in the actual design of the typography (and thus makes the type a thing, not a description of a thing)
attempts to be sparse
things I don't like:
ends up cluttered by too much text
lacks spark
repeats the title. the reflected design should have included enough information so as to not need repeated for clarity
things I do like:
this is the copy I have
like the first design, it includes both sparseness and visual complexity, in an interior/exterior composition
the simplicity of the type
things I don't like:
once again the interior is simply overcrowded. it is also a collage that features italy a little too prominently - it seems more about the author (or marco polo) than about what the book is saying. cover designs that simply slap a good-looking piece of art on the front, that is close enough to do just fine, always seem lazy.
that italo is in italics (seems like a dumb typography pun)
things I do like:
modern take on the overall look.
paper cutouts makes the letters feel like things instead of just letters, and thus the letters become stand-ins for the cities themselves
the building sitting on top of the I carries the look of many of the cities within the book without being too specific about which one it is representing
things I don't like:
it feels just ALMOST there. the building on top of the I is nice because it is whimisical, but because it is just one building it seems a little too cutesy for the book.
pictures from an exhibition at MassMoCA from an exhibition entitled after the book
things I like:
an understanding of space that it not strictly possible (these cities are all impossible)
use of negative space to suggest looking through buildings and space and into other buildings
things the first makes me think of:
vellum, possible transparency as way of getting at cities within cities within cities, possible use of vellum AND cutouts to have different levels of visibility (some cities should match up in places with others to represent that these are essentially one city repeated with changed aspects
Comments