Blogcritics: Comments on In Your Heart, You Were Afraid They Were Right:

Comment by Mark Schannon

Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:52:00 EDT

David, Fascinating essay & too complicated to understand in one reading. For once I'm going to withold comment on the substance except to thank you for the bibliography. Re: the font, ironically, when you submit a book to an agent or publisher, they almost insist on courier, although there's now courier black--which looks as bad as courier to me. Regardless, excellent work.

Comment by Temple Stark

Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:39:37 EDT

Actually smaller paragraphs and no unjustified justified text would help much more than a change of font. I didn't read because of those two reasons alone. Sorry.

Comment by Eric Olsen

Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:13:30 EDT

I understand David, thanks

Comment by David Fiore

Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:06:52 EDT

"A very good question, which begs the further question of whether disengaging from the rest of the world might not be the only way to preserve the American Dream if continued association with Europe is only possible by sacrificing those values of independence, self-reliance, openness and hard work the way that the European nations are doing right now." disengaging from the world????????? what about all of those serfs that make your shoes mr. freedom??????? are you actually advocating a retreat from world hegemony? that's not "good for the economy" at all... Eric-- on the fonts--it's just that I often bring these posts from my own weblog, with the html intact... what's the default font? arial? verdana? I suppose I could switch to one of those... whatever people are most comfortable with is fine with me... I'm not trying to make a statement with the font, or anything like that...

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:48:32 EDT

>>A far more relevant question would be:- Is the United States going to retreat behind some "we are the best, who needs the rest?" barrier mentality like China or Japan in recent history or hold on to the original values of the "American Dream", self betterment and openness to the new, that have served it so well so far?<< A very good question, which begs the further question of whether disengaging from the rest of the world might not be the only way to preserve the American Dream if continued association with Europe is only possible by sacrificing those values of independence, self-reliance, openness and hard work the way that the European nations are doing right now. Dave

Comment by Eric Olsen

Fri, 22 Apr 2005 12:23:20 EDT

I guess the point is, unless there is a very compelling reason to do otherwise, just using the default font is likely best

Comment by alienboy

Fri, 22 Apr 2005 12:16:08 EDT

oh yeah, Courier IS foul! Please don't!!

Comment by alienboy

Fri, 22 Apr 2005 12:15:25 EDT

" The New Right's rise to political prominence, in the final third of the twentieth century, has occasioned a lively debate amongst historians." Mr Fiore's point is pretty obscure as this "phenomenon" is, more or less, solely an American thing, and the entire "argument" is somehow based on an assumption that AMERICA IS THE WORLD. A far more relevant question would be:- Is the United States going to retreat behind some "we are the best, who needs the rest?" barrier mentality like China or Japan in recent history or hold on to the original values of the "American Dream", self betterment and openness to the new, that have served it so well so far? The real danger here is that the USA risks marginalising itself through a dangerous and provocative mix of arrogance and temporary technological advantage... Incidentally, before any gung-ho Americans leap down the throat of this post, this is not an attack on American values but a reminder...

Comment by David Fiore

Thu, 21 Apr 2005 20:38:27 EDT

thanks for the correction Ernie--you are quite right! (I don't where I pulled the "Joseph" from!)

Comment by Ernie

Thu, 21 Apr 2005 19:45:38 EDT

The founder of the John Birch Society was ROBERT Welch, not "Joseph Welch" as stated in your article. For a better understanding of why Richard Hofstadter's description of "paranoid style" of politics is apt for groups like the Birch Society, see my 45-page report at: http://birchers.blogspot.com/ My Report is based, primarily, upon FBI files and documents.

Comment by Dave Nalle

Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:09:50 EDT

Courier is legible in print - which is what that study seems to be about - but not on a computer screen. This is particularly true of 'Courier New' which is what most computers now have. Older versions of Courier or screen customized versions do look better on a computer screen, but they aren't widely available. The main problem with Courier in general is that it's a monospaced font - which really doesn't work well for blocks of text. Almost any proportionally spaced font is better. Courier New has the additional problem of being extremely light which makes it hard for some of us to see. Oh, and back to something more topical - if you don't think a strong economy is about the nation's #1 priority then you've got a great deal to learn. Dave

Comment by David Fiore

Thu, 21 Apr 2005 14:45:10 EDT

according to this study-- http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/3S/font.htm courrier is perceived as one of the most legible fonts... although it does seem that people have to take their time reading it... what can I say to you about libertarianism? am I going to change your mind about "the importance of a strong economy"? of course I'm not... live it up dude--we'll just go on scuffling about whether to legalize drugs or not...

Comment by Dave Nalle

Thu, 21 Apr 2005 14:37:26 EDT

Courier is just damned hard to read, David. As a font designer I'm painfully aware of what works and what doesn't on the web, and Courier is a solid 'no-no'. You're also mistaken on the Libertarian vs. New Right issue. There are substantive points of disagreement. Yes, we all agree that inherited wealth is one of the mainstays of a strong economy, but only someone aggressively ignorant of economics would argue against that. But there are differences on other real issues as well. The problem is that real issues are so rarely what anyone chooses to discuss - not when there are sensationalistic causes like Terri Schiavo around to champion. Dave

Comment by David Fiore

Thu, 21 Apr 2005 09:45:51 EDT

sorry if I hurt your (and AuH2O's) feelings Dave--but I stand by my point: the libertarian/Moral Majority opposition isn't really an opposition at all...and, in fact, their tedious arguments over issues of "permissiveness" keep the nation's attention diverted from the real issues--the preservation of inherited wealth (and the left only plays into their hands by acting as if "family values" questions are real issues...) does everyone hate courrier? I guess I'll stop using it--but I don't understand why it bothers people... Dave

Comment by Eric Olsen

Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:10:27 EDT

interesting David, but is the font necessary? I tried taking it out but there are just too many instances of it

Comment by Dave Nalle

Thu, 21 Apr 2005 07:57:43 EDT

I really resent your title and the use of a Goldwater pin to illustrate this piece. Well, I guess I don't resent it so much as see it as a sign of pure ignorance. If you read this book and have any idea what the New Right is all about, then you should know that Goldwater would have despised their behavior and would have had nothing at all to do with them. Dave

Comment by RJ

Thu, 21 Apr 2005 03:39:15 EDT

Dude, your font is killing me...