>>461194
That's clever once you focus on it anon

>>461217
what does "focus" on it mean? put more effort? focus on refining the idea?

>>461194
It's not terrible and the ideas from the book it conveys are clear enough...my only critique would be that it might be better with more attention given to balance ie the type sizes could be larger, the 1984 offset to the right doesn't match the rest of the poster that is overpowered by the symmetry of the searchlight beam, even as the type there is offset to the left.

I'd consider skewing the light beam slightly to make its form less stable and rigid, in keeping with the unsettling, sweeping vibe of authoritarian searchlights scanning for dissenters.

I'd personally also try making the 8 the searchlight source, how the beam interacts with the lower part of the 9 is not helpful IMO. If you slid the 1984 over and made the lower loop the light source it would be cleaner and the top loop would also suggest a watching eye.

I might also play with the lines that appear to simulate a block of print, you could probably make them larger and fewer and keep the effect with better balance and legibility, maybe experiment with making the letters illuminated by the beam pure white too.