Hugh Burkitt called it a ’barmy’ decision. Barmy? It was total and utter
madness. Had the editor and his merry band spent the night in the toilet
celebrating the national charms of Columbia? Surely the only
Let me clarify my objections and contempt for the decision taken by your
usually sound organ.
My rancour has not come to the fore because the work happens to be for
the Conservative Party. Not at all. The ’Labour isn’t working’ and
’Labour’s policy on arms’ posters remain some of the most outstanding
work of recent times.
The point is that the ’demon eyes’ work is the ultimate in negative
Creatively it is also crap, not to mention offensive and pernicious, and
it is because of this that it became notorious - and for this you give
it an award?
You try to justify your decision by arguing that this image exploited
the public’s prime underlying concern about Tony Blair, that he smiles
too much to be sincere.
Maybe he does. He’s ugly as well and supports Newcastle United, but how
that equates with Lucifer is not immediately clear (although I am
positive the devil is not big on sincerity). It seems that Campaign
rewarded ’demon eyes’ for all the wrong reasons, and it suffers because
Send your rants to Belinda Archer, Campaign, 174 Hammersmith Road,
London W6 7JP.