Donnchadh;63062 wrote:
So, at least Obama’s ‘logo on a shield’ is more creative than simply placing the two names (McCain & Palin) with a fleur-de-lis in the middle on an oval and calling it a coat of arms on an oval, which is equally, if not more so, absurd. I am sure this was done by the vendor and not the campaign…still it is childish.
"If not more so"? The McCain/Palin "coat of arms" is orders of magnitude worse that Obama’s shield. Obama’s shield may be stretching the limits of heraldry, but I’d put McCain’s version in the category of "simply dumb".
That "oval" barely qualifies as a "logo". It’s not much more than plain text.
By now, most of you know that my personal attitude to what is good and what is bad will not always accord with the majority. Obama’s "logo-on-a-shield" ci not bad heraldry, in my view. It has potential for improvement so that it might BECOME better heraldry.
The same cannot be said of that "oval logo thingy".
Since I’m the one with the problem, I’m not going to take action myself, but would someone with moderator privileges please move this thread to the "corporate & nonprofit" area? Maybe with 30 years of federal service under my belt I’m hypersensitive, but a political campaign, even one for the presidency, is not "government," and its logo, even when placed on a shield, is not "government heraldry."
As per justified request this thread was moved to this section of the forum.
Darren and Douglas, I have no love for this logo, really more of a sign, that cafĂ© press, or someone else, has made up either. Both a logo on a shield and this sign are anything but heraldry. For a logo Obama’s is nice. For a political sign McCain’s is nice. Neither are heraldry IMO.
Look, I could put a logo on a shield and call it heraldry, but that does not make it heraldry…even if it is as nice as I would make it. The same with this sign, which by the way I can not find anywhere associated with McCain officially, as the logo above is for Obama, so my guess is that this “McCain” arms listed at the vendor above is from the vendor or someone not officially associated with the McCain group.
Either way neither is heraldry, but neither is ugly either.
Nothing on CafePress is created by candidates or designed by CafePress.
Are you sure that your problem with the Obama image is that you knew it first as a logo and can’t get that out of your mind when you see the similar design on a shield? I ask because the logo design translated onto a shield is really not a bad design and it is not un-heraldic. But, it did start out as a logo and I agree that you can’t simply put a logo onto a shield and call it heraldry. I’m wondering if you had seen an Obama "coat of arms" first and then seen it turned into a simple logo later if you’d hold the same opinion of it?
gselvester;63081 wrote:
Are you sure that your problem with the Obama image is that you knew it first as a logo and can’t get that out of your mind when you see the similar design on a shield? I ask because the logo design translated onto a shield is really not a bad design and it is not un-heraldic. But, it did start out as a logo and I agree that you can’t simply put a logo onto a shield and call it heraldry. I’m wondering if you had seen an Obama "coat of arms" first and then seen it turned into a simple logo later if you’d hold the same opinion of it?
I was wondering the same thing. I think Obama’s logo - in shield form - makes perfectly acceptable heraldry. It’s an attractive design, simple, easy to recognize and doesn’t break any heraldic rules that I know of. Sure, his use of the logo when he mimicked the President’s seal was a bit presumptuous, but other than that, what is wrong with it?
If Barack Obama decided to adopt/assume arms later in life, why couldn’t he use a logo that played a large role in his life as the inspiration? No one seemed to have a problem when I suggested the design on my grandfather’s lobster buoy (another very personal mark) would make a good shield.
Kenneth Mansfield;63049 wrote:
Or if you’d like to be the envy of all at your squash club….
http://images.cafepress.com/product/301162481v9_240x240_Front_Color-Navy.jpg
I’m not in a squash club, but I find this quite charming! Even though I have no plans to vote for Obama in this lifetime.
Maybe one for the wife…
gselvester;63081 wrote:
Are you sure that your problem with the Obama image is that you knew it first as a logo and can’t get that out of your mind when you see the similar design on a shield? I ask because the logo design translated onto a shield is really not a bad design and it is not un-heraldic. But, it did start out as a logo and I agree that you can’t simply put a logo onto a shield and call it heraldry. I’m wondering if you had seen an Obama "coat of arms" first and then seen it turned into a simple logo later if you’d hold the same opinion of it?
Well, that could be the case. I did not think that was it—I just thought it looked like a logo on a shield, but that may well be it because I had seen the logo before.
Give me some more time to think on it and I will give an honest, accurate answer.
Jeremy Hammond;63159 wrote:
I was wondering the same thing. I think Obama’s logo - in shield form - makes perfectly acceptable heraldry. It’s an attractive design, simple, easy to recognize and doesn’t break any heraldic rules that I know of. Sure, his use of the logo when he mimicked the President’s seal was a bit presumptuous, but other than that, what is wrong with it?
If Barack Obama decided to adopt/assume arms later in life, why couldn’t he use a logo that played a large role in his life as the inspiration? No one seemed to have a problem when I suggested the design on my grandfather’s lobster buoy (another very personal mark) would make a good shield.
As I remember, which might not be accurate, some did have a problem with using his logo as inspiration for a coat of arms. Though I don’t recall being one of them.
Now, let me be clear, I’m not opposed to one using a logo as a "source" for one’s arms, like your Granddad’s, or the ‘housemarks’ that some use, or even a cattle-brand for people like mine out here in Colorado.
However, I do have a problem with simply placing the ‘actual’ logo on a shield and calling it heraldry, which as Fr. Selvester asks might be the reason I have a problem with this one because I seen it as a logo first etc. That is where I have the problem Jeremy. Certainly not with one using such a momentous occasion as he has in his life now no matter where it ends up as an inspiration for his future life adoption of a coat of arms.
I hope my position is clearer now. 
A little off topic but,
Am I correct in stating that Canadian Prime Ministers and/or Governors-General carry a canton on their arms of four maple leaves?
I wonder what (in theory) would be a good canton for President of the US.
I believe one or two did, but I think the more current practice is to use St. Edward’s Crown as a charge on the shield.
Mark Olivo;63243 wrote:
A little off topic but,
Am I correct in stating that Canadian Prime Ministers and/or Governors-General carry a canton on their arms of four maple leaves?
Just the Prime Ministers. Or at least the five that were granted arms by the CHA. http://heraldry.ca/top_en/top_arms_primeMinisters.htm
Yes, sorry, I was referring to GGs, and I believe the former canton was a canton of the Canadian crest.
