Journal 7: The Politics of Design.

The chapter: "Decapitating Language" from The Politics of Design by Ruben Pater was very interesting, and made me think about some aspects of type I hadn’t before. I hadn’t previously considered how typographic choices reflect societal power structures, particularly in regards to upper and lower case. The discussion highlights how the use of uppercase and lowercase letters in Latin scripts has historically been employed to reinforce hierarchies. For example, during colonial periods, the term "White" was capitalized while "black" was lowercase, and titles such as King, Pope, or President were emphasized with capitalization, while words like "slave" or "peasant" were not. While I had heard of fonts being a possible enforcement of cultural stereotypes, I hadn’t considered how case itself could be a driving force in similar dynamics.

Additionally, the book explores how modernist designers from the Bauhaus movement aimed to eliminate capital letters entirely, believing uppercase letters symbolized outdated power, authority, and hierarchy. I previously viewed capitalization solely as a grammatical norm or aesthetic choice, but Pater’s perspective further showcased and reinforced the idea that design, type and case included, is political, embedding subtle yet significant social meanings into everyday communication. This surprised me because I had never thought to question something as fundamental as capitalization, nor had I realized how design choices at this granular level could perpetuate ideological and cultural biases. The use of capitalization and case directly in perpetuating class hierarchy was very interesting and not something I had considered before.

A topic that I was already familiar with are some topics in the section "The Data Face," which examines how visualizing data through infographics and charts can subtly shape public opinion. Pater emphasizes that data visualization isn't neutral; it inherently involves subjective choices that affect perception, such as color, layout, scale, and what information gets emphasized or omitted. My familiarity with this comes from my recent graduate studies at Iowa State, particularly in HCI and graphic design courses, where I’ve developed data visualizations and face tracking installations using Processing and TouchDesigner. In these projects, I learned that visualizing data involves subjective decision-making; making choices that influence how audiences interpret or interact with what is shown, possibly reinforcing specific narratives or biases depending on the context. This means there is ethical responsibility when visually communicating data, especially regarding accuracy and the framing of context.

Extending beyond traditional graphics, the concept of a "data face" resonates deeply with my recent exploration of facial tracking technologies in TouchDesigner. Face-tracking and surveillance technologies highlight how the human face itself has become a data point, measured, tracked, and interpreted by algorithms. My experience building interactive installations using facial recognition emphasized how easily personal information could be quantified, triggering specific interactions or responses based on facial data alone and a recent project by a Stanford student with face/identity tracking using Meta Glasses took this further, looking up people's personal information in real-time just from their face. These projects showcase the responsibility of designers not only to communicate data ethically but also to confront the power dynamics at play when designing systems that survey, categorize, and respond to human identities.