A Roller Coaster of Emotions: A Formal Critique of The New Yorker’s August 26, 2024, Cover Art
The New Yorker Can't Meme
The August 26, 2024, cover of The New Yorker is a visually compelling piece that immediately draws the viewer in with its dynamic imagery and political symbolism. The cover, illustrated by Barry Blitt, utilizes the familiar motif of a roller coaster to represent the volatile nature of the 2024 U.S. presidential election. The illustration is meticulously crafted, with careful attention to the expressions and body language of the figures depicted. The composition effectively captures the tension and drama of the race, while also evoking a sense of motion and momentum, key elements in both the literal and metaphorical roller coaster ride.
At the heart of this illustration is a powerful metaphor that contrasts the upward and downward movements of the roller coaster with the respective fortunes of the two leading political campaigns. In the front car, former President Donald Trump and his Vice Presidential candidate, J.D. Vance, are depicted on a steep downward trajectory. Their somber and tense expressions suggest a campaign in distress, facing declining poll numbers and mounting challenges. This descent symbolizes the troubles and setbacks Trump’s campaign has encountered, indicating a loss of momentum as the election draws closer.
In stark contrast, the back car features Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, as they ascend the roller coaster’s track with gleeful expressions. Their upward journey symbolizes the rising fortunes of Harris’s campaign, buoyed by recent successes and a surge in voter support following Biden's withdrawal from the race. This imagery of ascent conveys optimism and confidence, suggesting that Harris is on a path toward potentially securing the presidency.
Indeed, this depiction of Harris's moment is accurate. With the Democratic Party coalescing around her candidacy and polls reflecting a resurgence in key voter demographics, Harris's rise is portrayed as a climb toward the climax of the election—perhaps even toward a historic victory. If everything goes according to plan for her campaign, this is the moment where her upward momentum propels her to the peak of the roller coaster, representing the height of her campaign's success.
However, upon closer examination, there is an intriguing dissonance between the intended reading of the artwork and the actual experience of riding a roller coaster. Typically, the upward climb of a roller coaster is associated with a buildup of tension and anticipation, a moment of suspense as riders brace themselves for the thrill of the coming descent. The downhill plunge, in contrast, is the exhilarating, adrenaline-pumping part of the ride, often met with cheers and excitement.
In this illustration, the metaphor is inverted. The uphill climb, which should be the tense and anticipatory part of the ride, is portrayed as a moment of triumph and joy for Harris and Walz. Meanwhile, the downhill descent, which typically represents the fun and thrilling part of a roller coaster, is depicted as a negative and ominous experience for Trump and Vance. This inversion challenges the viewer's intuitive understanding of the metaphor, as the emotional responses depicted do not align with the expected experiences of a roller coaster ride.
While this inversion might seem to contradict the traditional roller coaster experience, it accurately frames the vibe of the Trump campaign at this moment. Faced with declining poll numbers and an increasingly challenging path to victory, Trump and Vance's apparent discomfort and unease are reflective of a campaign that is struggling to regain its footing as it hurtles toward an uncertain outcome.
Interestingly, this illustration may also highlight a deeper critique of the Harris campaign itself—a campaign that projects a joyful, confident image while advocating for policies that are, in reality, deeply unpopular with many voters. Harris has focused her campaign on maintaining positive vibes and momentum, yet the policies she supports, such as wealth redistribution, increased business costs, and substantial deficit spending on green energy initiatives, have faced considerable backlash.
For example, Harris has proudly championed projects like electric school buses as a symbol of her commitment to green energy. However, the program has been plagued by issues, with many of the buses now broken down and out of service. This disparity between the optimistic image the campaign projects and the practical failures of its policies could be seen as emblematic of a broader disconnect within the Democratic Party.
Critics argue that the Harris campaign’s cheerful exterior masks the potential pitfalls and unpopularity of her platform. This two-faced nature—publicly embracing positivity while privately grappling with controversial policies—might suggest that the campaign is more focused on maintaining a favorable image than addressing substantive issues. The illustration captures this duality, showing a campaign that, while currently on an upward trajectory, might be heading toward a collision with the harsh realities of its policy choices.
As the Democratic Party prepares to unveil its official platform at the DNC, the contrast between the Harris campaign’s public persona and the underlying challenges of her policy proposals may become even more pronounced. This dynamic could introduce new tensions as voters begin to scrutinize whether the campaign’s optimistic image can hold up under the weight of its policy implications.