This is a wonderful example of how not to do parody. The writing is essentially what a child might come up with. Here's a guideline for future writers who wish to replicate such an inane blog post:
1. Take every element from the post you are parodying and go
full retard.
2. Don't bother including any subtlety; just be crass.
3. Don't tie the points together into any sort of cohesive
statement based on an overall theme.
4. Whatever you do, do not structure your parody in such a way
that demonstrates insight into the topic of discussion.
That last point is the really important thing if you want the weakest parody you can imagine. Just substitute each sentence with a dumbass version. Unleash your inner bully and taunt others by parroting back exactly what they say, only dumb down and twist the words to sound as stupid as possible. Under no circumstances should there be a "read between the lines" subtext.
I'm not sure I quite agree with you here. I nearly died laughing when I read this parody. Mostly because I was reading Marissa's post in my head and this parody perfectly highlighted the pretentiousness of that post. (I'm still not sure what the point of replacing serifs with 'scallops' was)
I think that you're missing that this embodies the Big Dogs brand perfectly. They don't care about the intricacies of logo design, or anything else related.
It's a dog. It's big. There shouldn't be lines to read between.
The OP took the elements of the original announcement—the pretentiousness, the naïve pomposity, the buddy-buddy informality—and turned them up to eleven. The result is an effective send-up of a post that richly deserved to be mocked.
> The OP took the elements of the original announcement—the
> pretentiousness, the naïve pomposity, the buddy-buddy
> informality—and turned them up to eleven.
That's an interesting choice of words you used. How can something be both pretentious and buddy-buddy informal?
Pretentious: "Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed."
Greater important and talent than possessed? Meyer conveys an informal team of three people and an intern. She also admits to just having enough knowledge of Adobe Illustrator to be dangerous. You even admit that it's buddy-buddy and informal, which downplays the importance. What if you got the impression that the design session was buddy-buddy because that's what it authentically was? Should she have lied and said that it was a rigorous exercise that was formally structured as a meeting of non-equals rather than a collaboration of colleagues?
Pompous: "Exaggeratedly or ostentatiously dignified or self-important."
Perhaps I'm not seeing the "naïve pomposity" in the post. Selecting what to convey in a logo is by definition subjective. The same applies for conveying what kind of food or clothing you like. I submit that any sufficiently detailed description of the rationale behind your food and clothing choices could be similarly mocked, unless you disregard taste by eating the cheapest food possible, or disregard color and style by wearing the cheapest clothing possible.
As obvious of a joke as it is, the logo is pretty good. It completely correctly conveys the BIG and the DOGS. The only thing it needs is a discrete subtitle, like BIG DOGS care centre, or BIG DOGS rescue squad, maybe BIG DOGS lawnmowers, BIG DOGS truck mechanics, BIG DOGS earthmoving equipment, BIG DOGS baby sitting, BIG DOGS tea and coffee shop with the option of also purchasing one of our many tasty fresh-baked goods. I'm not actually joking, I'd like a tea shop named BIG DOGS run by a few large buff people. One that also sells baked goods.
"Then Max started saying some shit about something called 'serifs'. Yeah ok, like that’s a real word."
This is a perfect parody. I have nothing against Yahoo or Mayer, but man was that blog post snobby.
I mean, seriously, who cares? The whole "Let's post a blog post about the creative process of a fucking logo" is kind of ridiculous. Especially with the (admittedly impressive) video that used all kinds of graphics and cool music.
It's easy to mock the Yahoo logo redesign process because Yahoo is being very open and transparent about it.
Are we so sure that everyone else's design process is so much better? Or are we just assuming that, because we don't actually know how they came to be.
If we want companies to be more friendly and open, maybe we shouldn't mercilessly mock the ones that try.
When designers make a new font, there are often rough edges and little nubs where the letter was attached to the type sheet. If you pay extra, the designer will file down the edges until the letters are mostly smooth. You may have heard of these finished letters called "Sanded Serifs."
