“Rose Quartz” and “Serenity” present a far more nefarious situation.
March 3, 2016 10:39 AM   Subscribe

The Propaganda of Pantone: Colour and Subcultural Sublimation. Pantone’s choice of “Rose Quartz” and “Serenity” as the 2016 Colour of the Year is the most insidious move by this colour-industrial-complex since “Blue Iris” in 2008. As with “Blue Iris”, Pantone has once again mined the subcultural landscape and used their monopoly within the creative industries to propagate their colour properties to the world. Previously & more.
posted by apathy0o0 (75 comments total) 31 users marked this as a favorite
 
So this year's aesthetic is 80s bridesmaid dresses?
posted by wabbittwax at 10:44 AM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


no. this is not relevant
posted by mumimor at 10:46 AM on March 3, 2016


Someone needs to pull back the big color curtain, so the author can see the entirety of the color-forecasting industry. Pantone doesn't work in a vacuum. It's all a highly-coordinated effort involving myriad industries meeting multiple times a year to "forecast" color trends two-to-three years out, so manufacturers can better co-ordinate their wares and ramp-up production in a timely manner.
posted by Thorzdad at 10:48 AM on March 3, 2016 [13 favorites]


So...we're talking about Steven Universe characters, right? Because that world actually make sense.
posted by happyroach at 10:51 AM on March 3, 2016 [27 favorites]


Will Pearl ever be able to deal with her unrequited love for Rose Quartz in a healthy fashion?
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:55 AM on March 3, 2016 [22 favorites]


I think we're talking about a Steven Universe/Firefly crossover.
posted by baf at 10:55 AM on March 3, 2016 [27 favorites]


I feel too stupid for this article, and I'm a graphic designer.
posted by INFJ at 10:57 AM on March 3, 2016 [33 favorites]


Honest postmodernism deconstruction and anger, or the Poe's Law equivalent? This one is hard to tell.
posted by mephron at 10:57 AM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


The analysis of trends leading to and bubbling up from this and "radical softness as a weapon" is interesting, and ties into current , ongoing cultural trends (which Stephen Universe could totally be said to be a part of)
posted by The Whelk at 10:59 AM on March 3, 2016 [12 favorites]


(I mean I think it's far more likely we're just shifting between accepted and unacceptable colors and ideaforms, that's what trends and fads do, but also part of a largely moving away from grim masculinity as default.

of course these are all the opinions of people who , like me, spend the majority of their time online. Who knows whats going on 'out there'.)
posted by The Whelk at 11:01 AM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


where is "Pumpkin Spice"?
posted by thelonius at 11:04 AM on March 3, 2016


Sounds like Pantone got paid off by Frank JavCee.
posted by belarius at 11:06 AM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


I thought the last nail was hammered into the #seapunk coffin when L'Oreal put out faded pastel colors at Rite Aid? I thought there was a Mefi post about it.
posted by kittensofthenight at 11:10 AM on March 3, 2016


Steven Universe and Undertale are on the forefront of heroes that resolve conflict without violence, so yeah I think "Radical Softness" has a place in cultural trends.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 11:12 AM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


I feel too stupid for this article, and I'm a graphic designer.

oh thank god i thought it was only me
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:16 AM on March 3, 2016 [17 favorites]


Honest postmodernism deconstruction and anger, or the Poe's Law equivalent? This one is hard to tell.

I had this reaction at first but I think what this article is claiming is rather simple in the end, expressed in an overly convoluted way. Here's my take on the main claims as someone who sometimes studies meaning in commercial culture from a much more prosaic / science-based perspective, almost all of these premises are actually straightforward things that many people believe:
  1. Pantone has disproportionate power in deciding what colors get used. [yeah, I think thorzdad is right that pantone is only the tip of the iceberg here.]
  2. Colors have associative meanings. (e.g. can become associated with ideas/concepts -- not really what I'd describe as the same kind of meanings that things like words have, but meanings nonetheless.)
  3. When perceiving a color (or signifier with associative meaning), these ideas/concepts will be involuntarily brought to the mind (to some degree) by a perceiver who is aware of the associative meaning.
  4. Design and especially advertising play a substantial role in determining what associative meanings things have.
  5. Colors are more of a blank slate than most things that can have associative meanings so are particularly susceptible to coordinated strategies. [this is the premise I'm the most dubious of.]
  6. By signing on to the chosen colors a designer is signing on to a lot of extra baggage resulting from the above premises.
tldr by using the particular pink/blue shades that pantone picked for 2016, there's all sorts of extra associated meanings and history one is pulling in to a design. I should say that if this is the intended conclusion, it's not particularly controversial, and rather, is something that designers explicitly or implicitly exploit in advertising all the time.

Part of the article is also a (convoluted) attempt to explicate what these associations might be, but I think you can get the idea from just looking at the colors.
posted by advil at 11:17 AM on March 3, 2016 [21 favorites]


Sea Punk! Almost as fun as Health Goth!
posted by thivaia at 11:30 AM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


Surely vantablack should be color of the year. Controversial and truly "none more black".
posted by TedW at 11:32 AM on March 3, 2016 [11 favorites]


I suspect this of being a Sokal hoax.
posted by babelfish at 11:33 AM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


I found this pretty interesting, as someone who doesn't think about color theory much.

I thought the article was not warning that "By signing on to the chosen colors a designer is signing on to a lot of extra baggage resulting from the above premises." as advil states above.

Rather, I read it as Pantone is co-opting the colors from the sub-genres where they originated; and the article was arguing that removing them so thoroughly from their context is unethical. It's a form of appropriation, and while the article cites MTV as doing something similar, it argues that because MTV co-opted more than just colors they necessarily 1. refer back to the origin of the aesthetic (or really, make the act of appropriation blatant and obvious), and 2. are limited in how much they can really co-opt (e.g. the vaporwave aesthetic can't do much more for them than exist in bumpers and a few shows).

Pantone, by taking and promoting just the colors, makes it possible for rose quartz ottomans and serenity nail polish to exist in a way that does not acknowledge the creators; giving broader society more power to dilute/remove the meanings, sub-genres, and movements attached to them until they are decoupled completely.

I can't say whether this is true or not, or whether it's something to be concerned about if true. But I did find it interesting to think about.
posted by misskaz at 11:36 AM on March 3, 2016 [31 favorites]


Color me clueless.
posted by kozad at 11:37 AM on March 3, 2016


Pantone, by taking and promoting just the colors, makes it possible for rose quartz ottomans and serenity nail polish to exist in a way that does not acknowledge the creators


Permission culture has gotten out of hand.

Dibs on Pepsi Blue!
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:40 AM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


It's a form of appropriation,

Yeah, I think you are right that there's an issue about cultural appropriation that I didn't address in my breakdown.
posted by advil at 11:40 AM on March 3, 2016


Yes. This is how culture works. Small subcultures bubble up to the mainstream.

Relax. The mainstream will move on.
posted by Sys Rq at 11:41 AM on March 3, 2016 [5 favorites]


(To be more accurate: The superficial aesthetics of small subcultures bubble up into the mainstream.)
posted by Sys Rq at 11:42 AM on March 3, 2016 [12 favorites]


To be clear, I was merely summarizing the article to point out what I thought was being missed, not arguing on the author's behalf nor taking up his charge. I'm perfectly relaxed, and as a nearly 40-year-old who hasn't logged in to her tumblr in probably a year, I'm not the one to be giving or not giving or needing or not needing permission.
posted by misskaz at 11:48 AM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


I mean who wouldn't be relaxed, surrounded by such soothing Color(s) of the Year?
posted by misskaz at 11:49 AM on March 3, 2016


For 2016 I will look through Rose Quartz colored glasses and see only Serenity in the world around me.
posted by Kabanos at 11:52 AM on March 3, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh, ffs. Sometimes a color is just a fucking color. This takes itself so seriously I can't even
posted by Klaxon Aoooogah at 11:52 AM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


Might help me with that Marsala hangover from last year, anyway.
posted by Kabanos at 11:52 AM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


Pantone, by taking and promoting just the colors, makes it possible for rose quartz ottomans and serenity nail polish to exist in a way that does not acknowledge the creators

Will no one think of the Ottomans?
posted by octobersurprise at 11:55 AM on March 3, 2016 [1 favorite]


This article is much more enjoyable if you read it in the voice of Derek Zoolander.
posted by Mayor West at 12:02 PM on March 3, 2016 [7 favorites]


Will no one think of the Ottomans?

To say nothing of the volcanoes that vomited up all that rose quartz.
posted by Sys Rq at 12:06 PM on March 3, 2016


On reflection, here's an addition to my above list, based on misskaz's comment:

5.5 Because of premise 5, entities like pantone have the power to replace associative meanings established for colors by subcultures with their own meanings. (And so this is part of what designers who sign on to pantone's color choice are participating in.)

[obviously since I'm pretty skeptical of premise 5 I'm pretty skeptical of this too. But I can imagine that it could be true.]
posted by advil at 12:10 PM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


Pantone's standardized colors make it possible to get exactly what you want when sending designs to a factory for, say, the production of socks. Without standards it would be nearly impossible to achieve consistent results.

As a consumer, though, Pantone doesn't even register on my radar.
posted by grumpybear69 at 12:12 PM on March 3, 2016


The aim is to fully divorce the colours from their specific cultural context in order to generate a mass market commodity.

This sentence helped the article make more sense for me. But as noted, the mainstream commodifying subcultures is nothing new.
posted by Squeak Attack at 12:13 PM on March 3, 2016


GOD I love posts like this, the whole thing is fascinating. Thanks for the FPP apathy0o0.
posted by sidereal at 12:17 PM on March 3, 2016 [2 favorites]


Never attribute to "postmodernism deconstruction" anything that can be adequately explained by stupidity.

We can choose to contribute to a dynamic and chaotic culture that challenges the naturalization of neoliberal capitalism

LOL yeah good luck with that, unsigned editorial by marketing company
posted by RogerB at 12:17 PM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


I enjoyed the article, especially the tour of Internet/Tumblr-based web design movements, but don't really buy the connection with Pantone's color of the year selection. They don't even look like the same colors to me—one is intentionally garish and the other is soft and pastel-y.
posted by Pfardentrott at 12:26 PM on March 3, 2016 [1 favorite]


To answer the question, it is on Pumpkin Arrakis.
posted by Wolfdog at 12:28 PM on March 3, 2016 [9 favorites]


I just want you guys to know that I love you

I love you so much
posted by Made of Star Stuff at 12:30 PM on March 3, 2016 [2 favorites]


I feel like I've been trolled... Have I just been trolled? What the hell was that, literary dialectic analysis meets Adbusters?
posted by fiercekitten at 12:35 PM on March 3, 2016 [5 favorites]


Pantone didn't invent color, it just markets it and gives it marketing names. Who cares? Call it rose quartz or dynamo pink or rosé orgasmo if you want. Pantone is similar to any other industry which relies on constant change and trends: it sells fairy dust and dreams and must constantly change what is "trendy" so people keep spending. I don't think they're going to be the downfall of life as we know it.

Really, this should have been in the Onion.
posted by Klaxon Aoooogah at 12:52 PM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm not sure how they are ' insidious'. Its very clear Pantone and their partners are trendspotters not trendsetters. Culture is open-source. Corporations monetize subcultures to seem relevant so they can generate profit. To feign shock this far down the our current narrative is to come off as buffoon. You think you're being clever because you 'reverse engineered' the source but wasn't like they were hinting about it in the press release.
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 1:00 PM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


Dr. Neal Krawetz (The Hacker Factor, FotoForensics) in 2014, on predicting the Pantone color of the year for 2015 and 2016.
posted by telophase at 1:02 PM on March 3, 2016 [14 favorites]


Yeah, I really enjoyed the subculture tour also, I had heard the terms/seen that look but didn't really give them much thought. I would love to read about stuff like that regularly.

I am not really concerned at Pantone borrowing the softness aesthetic, or MTV using vaporwave animation/art, though. Yes, the original meanings/creators are lost, but to most of the people in the world, they were never known or seen in the first place.

I did also worry the author was trolling the readers, with such a straight-faced approach to such an extremely niche set of concerns. But their argument hangs together, and I learned something, so who cares.
posted by emjaybee at 1:17 PM on March 3, 2016 [1 favorite]


SEAPUNK'S NOT DEAD
posted by the uncomplicated soups of my childhood at 1:44 PM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


The Color Thesaurus
posted by robbyrobs at 1:48 PM on March 3, 2016 [2 favorites]


Okay, here's what I thought the article would be about before I started reading it and had only thus far gleaned that it was "something about culture/society and the color of the year thing".

correct me if I'm wrong - but isn't this the first time that Panetone has ever done two colors of the year? If so - why two colors, and why now? And especially whythose two colors - pastel-baby pink and pastel-baby blue - at a time when there's a lot of attention newly being paid to whether things are gendered when they shouldn't be?

I dunno, it was certainly what crossed my mind when I saw those colors as opposed to any of the seapunk stuff.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:56 PM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm not sure how they are ' insidious'. Its very clear Pantone and their partners are trendspotters not trendsetters.

Except, in this case, I think Pantone does have more influence that other trend forecasters. The palettes they create for Fashion Week get covered in mainstream news, and color of the year gets tons of news coverage, so the forecast becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Really, Pantone is marketing their subscription trend forecast service. If you make retail goods, you should have known what colors would be trending in 2016 at least a year before Pantone announces it to the general public.

I had a free month of access to that service, and it really was amazing. They covered fashion and decor trade shows for the entire world and released palettes and briefs for all of them. It's fascinating, but too expensive for my employer to subscribe.

I think there's appropriation of subcultures by designers, but ultimately, it's organizations like Pantone who strip away the meaning and actually perform the sublimation. Turning the radical softness palette into something toothless like Rose Quartz and Serenity.
posted by gladly at 1:57 PM on March 3, 2016 [6 favorites]


Pantone acknowledges a trend that's been going on for some years and despite the cries of "appropriation" it's already been the radar of goods manufacturers for some time and where do you think these Tumblr kids are buying their stuff? It's all about consumption and consumerism, but since it comes from a subculture on the Internet instead of Pantone it's sacrosanct and shouldn't be used by any company with more employees than can be counted on your hands?
posted by Electric Elf at 2:07 PM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


A little surprised that the bit on "radical softness" didn't mention what I found to be the most obvious association with these two colors — if you display them side-by-side, with a gradient thru white in the middle (as some of Pantone's own images do), you basically get the trans pride flag. The "girl culture" thing and vaporwave aren't trans-specific, obviously, but there's a decent number of trans women artists working in that aesthetic. There was actually a tiny bit of excitement on trans Twitter/Tumblr over it when they announced these colors, people either feeling like it was a hilarious coincidence or feeling like it was a very quiet and gentle nod in our direction.

I'm not sure I buy the "this is somehow problematic" thing from the article, but I found it super fascinating anyway, and aside from the trans flag thing it picks up most of the other associations that this choice of colors called up for me.
posted by nebulawindphone at 2:22 PM on March 3, 2016 [12 favorites]


So the article is basically: Pantone, in taking these colors, is doing the acoustic guitar cover of Formation.

I agree.
posted by special agent conrad uno at 2:28 PM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


You know how the Blue=Boy, Pink=Girl thing is totally inescapable now but basically didn't exist until marketers in the 20s decided it would help them sell more kids' clothes? And how that served to reinforce existing cultural ideas about how men are cool and rational while women are warm and emotional? But it's just colors, right?
posted by tobascodagama at 2:43 PM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


Pink was for boys in the 20s, according to this Smithsonian piece. LOKI's own graphics work seems pretty heavy on black/white.
posted by Ideefixe at 2:53 PM on March 3, 2016


...to "forecast" color trends two-to-three years out, so manufacturers can better co-ordinate their wares and ramp-up production in a timely manner

In a world of 'Just in Time' production and next day delivery this is starting to seem rather old fashioned.
posted by Lanark at 3:12 PM on March 3, 2016


seapunk, like electroclash, will never die.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 3:27 PM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


The "infantilization of the consumer" angle is still up for grabs! Who will go there first?
posted by clorox at 3:36 PM on March 3, 2016


The dye has been cast.
posted by Chitownfats at 3:38 PM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


tusomc: "SEAPUNK'S NOT DEAD"

It's just gone to bed,
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die…
posted by Pinback at 3:56 PM on March 3, 2016 [7 favorites]


I first became aware of all this about ten years ago, the summer my oldest boy Bill Junior died.
posted by Robin Kestrel at 4:09 PM on March 3, 2016 [2 favorites]


Pantone, by taking and promoting just the colors, makes it possible for rose quartz ottomans and serenity nail polish to exist in a way that does not acknowledge the creators; giving broader society more power to dilute/remove the meanings, sub-genres, and movements attached to them until they are decoupled completely.

I thought the part about how they are specifically doing this through removing the energy from it - that the origin includes a lot of joy and rage juxtaposed with the soft colors - particularly affecting. I've felt within myself a similar sort of drive, to embrace my love of the markers and colors of femininity but retain my rage and despair within that aesthetic instead of having to move to a different aesthetic to express those feelings. I can really see how rebranding softness as serenity, remaking these tones as a call to the suffocating lack-of-affect (except love) which women are traditionally expected to embody, a really interesting insight into how mainstream color appropriates and undermines radical movements.

A similar effect I watched was how Slut Walks were re-defined away from women objecting to the title and often wearing clothing similar to what they were wearing when they were raped (including night clothes) by focusing on women who were dressed scantily. There is a way in which the larger lens of influential cultural bodies choses what to focus on and that always reinforces the existing narrative (women should be gentle and serene; raped women had to be sluts).
posted by Deoridhe at 4:16 PM on March 3, 2016 [5 favorites]


The misuse of "la petite mort" is making me think this has to be a joke.
posted by queensissy at 4:42 PM on March 3, 2016 [5 favorites]


It's nice to see that, at times, we're living in a quality, aesthetic-theory-dense WIlliam Gibsonesque post-cyberpunk dystopia rather than the bargain bin, $0.99 mirrorshade knockoff we inhabit most of the time.
posted by signal at 4:55 PM on March 3, 2016 [11 favorites]


This article leaves one very important question unanswered: is Pantone the one on your left leg, or the one on your right leg?
posted by scruss at 5:29 PM on March 3, 2016 [9 favorites]


Oh, the irony, that geek subculturists are culturally appropriating the term "cultural appropriation" to bewail the pitiful plight of having a color co-opted by the Grand High Muckyamucks of Color. First world problems, anyone?
posted by tully_monster at 6:20 PM on March 3, 2016 [3 favorites]


"geek subculturists" aka lots of women, trans people, and youth who rally around an aesthetic. I mean, it's cool to just take that away from them, Idgaf cause it's not my aesthetic, but at the same this would be like Chick-fil-a going all rainbow flag and still hating gays.

I mean, the rainbow flag is just colors. Chick-fil-a should be able to use that without giving a fuck what it means, is what I am hearing you say.
posted by special agent conrad uno at 6:49 PM on March 3, 2016 [5 favorites]


ORIGINAL COLOR DO NOT STEAL
posted by Wolfdog at 6:58 PM on March 3, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, the rainbow flag is just colors. Chick-fil-a should be able to use that without giving a fuck what it means, is what I am hearing you say.

Oh, for pity's sake. Chick-fil-a can do whatever the hell it wants; it will just get lots of people pointing and laughing, no?

This just doesn't rise to the level of, say, co-opting the ceremonial garb of millions of American genocide victims for the catwalk. I thought the whole point of geek subculture was that you didn't give a damn what anybody thought. So why should you care, let alone rally round a pretentious pseudointellectual screed expressing inarticulate outrage in the most obfuscatory of academic jargon because some design industry hack named The Colour Out of Space after a couple of Cartoon Network characters? I'd think you'd be pleased at the shout-out.

Also, Pantone =/= Chick-fil-A. Can the hysterics.
posted by tully_monster at 10:02 PM on March 3, 2016 [4 favorites]


what tully said.
That article was word salad.
posted by Klaxon Aoooogah at 10:52 PM on March 3, 2016


""geek subculturists" aka lots of women, trans people, and youth who rally around an aesthetic. I mean, it's cool to just take that away from them, Idgaf cause it's not my aesthetic, but at the same this would be like Chick-fil-a going all rainbow flag and still hating gays. "

Except not really tho. At the most sympathetic read to the theory-drunk essay, this is like Visa or Old Navy going all rainbow flag and still actively participating in a capitalist economy that disproportionately harms LGBT people.

But the entire essay is caught up in a deterministic, late-stage capitalism model that despite name-checking "post-authenticity" and being steeped in pomo, ignores the entailments of those critical foundations.

I mean, claims like, "No signifier is truly arbitrary" ignore that the power of reclamation and appropriation (which are more multipolar than they present) come in large part because of the arbitrary nature of signifiers to signified — the most obvious example of this is that outside of a few onomatopoeic words, words (and even more so their written forms) are arbitrarily connected to the signified concepts. The argument then that the signifiers can't be truly arbitrary because they implicitly carry the associations of previous use is countered by the recognition of distributed subjectivity — the signifiers aren't necessarily arbitrary to any given creator or audience member, but they can't guarantee that the implicit signifiers are the same ones.

This works against the claims of the article and their positioning of color as more "nefarious" appropriation, because outside of a few physical properties (warmth, cold, near, far) the semantic connotations of color are largely undetermined (or so overdetermined as to be too noisy to draw clear conclusions from absent context).

This essay is also undermined by its lack of historical perspective on the shifting semantic content of colors (cf. pink/blue gender swap), even to the extent that it misses the recurrent reinventions of pastels and what's termed here "radical softness." I know that this is one of those things that I'm more attuned to because my mom went back to art school while I was in late middle school and high school, so I got to see a lot of the art that these aesthetics are referencing — the "radical softness" of femininity was a big part of riot grrl, for example.

And to step back for a second, the modernist notion of subcultural appropriation shares a lot with quasi-Darwinian evolutionary competition, when the flattening and diffusion of subcultures mean that the future is more likely to be better analogized as ring species and introgression.
posted by klangklangston at 11:24 PM on March 3, 2016 [5 favorites]


tumblr is so visual that people can participate in these aesthetics without ever talking about them in words, which is nice. like occasionally posting bad 3D renders of classical busts next to palm trees isn't how anyone defines their identity. this stuff has been taken up by various marginalized groups more than average but it's not a group in itself.

however it must be confusing to be MTV or a design firm trying to figure out what's going on. the ads on metafilter all seem to be half pink and half blue now for no clear reason.
posted by vogon_poet at 4:52 AM on March 4, 2016


> occasionally posting bad 3D renders of classical busts next to palm trees isn't how anyone defines their identity
  1. Speak for yourself, bucko.
  2. You forgot the dolphins you have to have dolphins.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 12:38 PM on March 4, 2016 [2 favorites]


"This article leaves one very important question unanswered: is Pantone the one on your left leg, or the one on your right leg?"

It took me five days and a consult with my smarter half, but I finally got there.
posted by iamkimiam at 2:14 PM on March 8, 2016 [1 favorite]


I've been mulling this article over in my head for days now, trying to decide if I understand it and whether I think it's genius or bullshit. Then I went to Yo! Sushi last night.

They've rolled out a new menu, an updated aesthetic*, and an entirely redesigned website. When you step into their rebranded restaurant, you are handed Issue 1 of their 2016 magazine, containing all the elements of the new look — the new menu, illustrated in flat web design, plus additional pages showcasing art, fashion and commentary. It is done with black ink (for words, lines, and halftones) and splashes of colour (for abstracted iconography of the dishes and fashion photo art) on rough newspaper like a zine. It is post-seapunk, post-vaporwave and strongly retro throwback to Lichtenstein and Raushenberg.

There are a thousand other little design details that will probably have me deconstructing this thing like a Rubik's Cube for the next week, but the point I'm trying to make here is that the Rose Quartz + Serenity Pantone article (still with its impenetrable prose) clicks in a way it didn't before. This and the pseudo-counterculture Yo! Sushi menu are speaking to each other so forcefully I can't tell if they're in cahoots or love with each other (or that I am, now with them).

I need somebody to witness this and tell me I'm not going crazy.

*Here is a link to their previous aesthetic, up until Tuesday 8 March 2016. It too has it's clear place in what the Pantone article is saying I think.

As of typing this, the entire Yo! Sushi website is down due to a whitespace error.

Part of me is wondering if that's an intentional post-modern joke.

posted by iamkimiam at 12:21 AM on March 9, 2016 [1 favorite]


« Older The right to die   |   Men's College Basketball Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments