Jump to content

College of William & Mary unveils new logo


xylograph

Recommended Posts

Since W&M's old logo, seen below:

logo_wm.gif

was deemed offensive by the NCAA (and that's another topic for another day), the College spent 18 months and lots of money to develop the new logo, which was unveiled yesterday (12/6):

34135122-06111238.jpg

Opinion seems to be pretty universal... most alumni hate it, especially considering how long it took to come up with. I understand that someone felt that the upside down "W" as an "M" would make the logo look symmetrical, but unfortunately I think it just looks, well, like an upside down "W". I don't mind the new logo, but it certainly does not inspire. I think the logo looks like it was developed by a business school professor who had the idea that all modern logos should look good emblazoned on company buildings and golf shirts.

Here's an article about the new logo and the history of W&M logos

Anyway, I'd be interested in your honest opinions. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I like the idea, but if they were going to go that route they should have made it a true ambigram. Otherwise you're left with a goofy "M" for no reason.

They've had some good logos in the past:

34134463.jpg

I really like the interlocking letters from the 1943 crest, or the 1973 side-by-sides. I also really love the version with the weathervane, but that wouldn't work so well for athletics.

I don't like the one they just replaced - the overlapping letters make for a silhouette that's far too busy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One should never take alumni design complaints seriously. Basically 95 percent of all alumni will always hate any change from what the school looked like when they were students. It's pure knee-jerk reactionism, and it's pretty much the reason schools hold Homecoming weeks: It keeps the damned alumni off campus the other 51 weeks.

I say as an aging, grumpy alumnus of two universities.

Anyway, how is the fact that the M and the W are flipped versions of one another even a legitimate complaint here? The old logo had the same feature. As a U of Minnesota alumnus, the old logo looks to me like a perfectly normal Minnesota-style collegiate M with the M flipped upside down to form the W. I'd have flipped the M horizontally as well, just to make it read a little bit better as an M, but the new logo is a solid modernization of the old. It translates the core concepts of the old logo into a modern visual vernacular, so job well done there.

My only issue with this is the size of the ampersand. It's just large enough to be disruptive, but just small enough to look out of place with the other two letters. It's the weak link between the two letters, and has a not-ready-for-prime-time feel.

The fundamental question here is how a school named William & Mary ever ended up with an Indian-related identity in the first place, and how it wound up with colors other than orange. Just one of many cases were the Indian-themed school identity needed changing not because it was offensive but because it was lazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, how is the fact that the M and the W are flipped versions of one another even a legitimate complaint here? The old logo had the same feature.

The difference is that it worked on the old logo because the letters, though the inverse of each other, held their own integrity. This "M" looks really odd, until you realize that they just flipped the "W".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a former instructor of typography for the art department at a university, I can tell you specifically why the upside-down W in this logo does not work as an M:

A serif W does not necessarily need serifs at the bottom to work properly, so the W in this new logo works fine.

But a serif M such as this one does need serifs at the top to work properly, and when this W is turned upside-down, it does not have the necessary serifs at the top.

So it's not just a matter of it not looking right -- it actually IS not right.

And that's the designer's fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fundamental question here is how a school named William & Mary ever ended up with an Indian-related identity in the first place, and how it wound up with colors other than orange. Just one of many cases were the Indian-themed school identity needed changing not because it was offensive but because it was lazy.

You're talking out of your backside, BallWonk. This is NOT one of those cases of laziness, as your "fundamental question" has an answer. The school was initially chartered in 1618 to have an Indian branch, and served as an Indian school for many years. The College changed its identity not because it was offensive, but because it didn't want to use the monumental resources necessary to fight the NCAA over their politically correct stance that the two feathers were offensive. How those two feathers were offensive, yet FSU's logo and mascot are not, is a discussion that I don't care to get into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fundamental question here is how a school named William & Mary ever ended up with an Indian-related identity in the first place, and how it wound up with colors other than orange. Just one of many cases were the Indian-themed school identity needed changing not because it was offensive but because it was lazy.

You're talking out of your backside, BallWonk. This is NOT one of those cases of laziness, as your "fundamental question" has an answer. The school was initially chartered in 1618 to have an Indian branch, and served as an Indian school for many years. The College changed its identity not because it was offensive, but because it didn't want to use the monumental resources necessary to fight the NCAA over their politically correct stance that the two feathers were offensive. How those two feathers were offensive, yet FSU's logo and mascot are not, is a discussion that I don't care to get into.

Um, as it displays fairly prominently in some of the previous logos, The College of William & Mary was officially chartered in 1693. Just a cursory glance at the William & Mary website reveals that 1618 was only the date of the first attempt to Christianize the "savages" and it was abandoned after a massacre in 1622. In this instance, I think that usage of the nickname "Tribe" is a little presumptous. As for the new logo, it just looks a little too cute in the mirror image department. Someone definitely tried too hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The need to remove a couple of feathers is pretty ridiculous...but if I remember correctly, it was a result of having to change the nickname.

That being said...the new logo is okay at best. Very clean and symmetrical....but very sanitized and boring. I disagree with the need to remove the ampersand. I think that without it you are left with an overly linear repetitive borefest. The curls and roundness of the ampersand is what breaks things up and gives the logo just enough to make it look 'Eh' as opposed to 'Meh'.

Big difference in my book. ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't like the NCAA's rules regarding logos with Native American features. For the most part, these logos are not designed or intended to offend the tribes. You don't see Irish people getting mad at Notre Dame, or Scottish people fuming over NJIT's Highlander, and the NCAA doesn't make restrictions on those things, so why just Native Americans?

As for the logo, it's a downgrade IMO. I've never been fond of logos that are solely letters without pictures, and this is no exception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the ampersand doesn't work in this logo, but it's also the best thing about the logo.

Have you been listening to political debates or something?

Actually, I agree with Gothamite on this one. If the rest of the logo matched the ampersand, and if the ampersand were incorporated properly, this would be a better logo.

As a matter of fact, I was in favor of the ampersand before I was against it. It just depends on what the meaning of & is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.