Despite the fact that Michael Rock’s essay was very influential (and has quite the provocative title), in terms of its analysis of how graphic design actually produces meaning for its viewers, the essay leaves something to be desired. After listening to the lectures and reading the essays by Andrew Blauvelt, Mr. Keedy, and Daniel Van der Velden, what questions would you ask Michael Rock about his essay? Where are the theoretical gaps in his analysis? (feel free to draw on other readings as well, like the Good History Bad History piece). Does Michael Rock’s essay present some internal contradictions or inconsistencies? What might those be?