4 ms·

I get that Pentagram feels they have enough of a handle on good design that they know the right way to break some of the rules of design. But this feels like br

by koboll 8y ago

I get that Pentagram feels they have enough of a handle on good design that they know the right way to break some of the rules of design. But this feels like breaking the rules of design so much that it's actually breaking the rules, in a way that produces something unpleasant and ugly. I mean... a close cousin of Impact? Black and orange? A second, unnecessary copy of the word 'library' that's so large it's hard to make out the name of the institution by comparison? This smacks of designers being so in love with their own process that they abandon the basic principles of good design -- i.e., it has to be immediately recognizable and look aesthetically pleasing -- entirely in favor of some weird brutalist experiment. Which might be a good idea for an avant garde institution in Manhattan, but is entirely inappropriate for the Library of freaking Congress.

alexpetralia 8y ago
It's seriously surprising that a premiere design company produced this.
- koboll 8y ago
  Contrast this with their excellent identity refresh for American Express: https://www.pentagram.com/work/american-express-1 https://www.pentagram.com/work/american-express-1 The difference is night and day. Imagine how fantastic that kind of modernizing light touch could have looked for this client, too.
  - nkkollaw 8y ago
    I think this is pretty horrible, too, though.
    - Bluestrike2 8y ago
      I disagree, but I accept that there's a lot of subjectivity to it; the Amex refresh is just that--a refresh of an existing brand identity with very strong recognition, and consistently high brand loyalty. Pentagram managed to refrain from abandoning everything, while fixing problems that were...annoying (see the alternate blue square logo for small-space digital use, for example). I'm not a fan of the more aggressively cropped 'C' but that's more a nuisance feeling than anything objectionable. Overall, I'd say Pentagram's AMEX work is interesting more for their restraint and ability to recognize when it's not appropriate to just abandon everything. The surreal thing is that, as important as continuity and timelessness can be for financial services firms, it's even more fundamental to the LOC's roles. If you've ever been to the Thomas Jefferson Building, to walk its halls the first time is to almost be overwhelmed by a sense of connection to millennia of human thought and achievement. There are libraries out there with modern-looking identities (as an example, Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh--though I really hate the combined i/l mark).[0] I don't know of any that are as in-your-face as the LOC redesign. A lot of these kinds of "make it modern" updates are because companies are trying to better connect with consumers. The really crazy part about this is just how irrelevant that is to the Library of Congress' mission. The LOC isn't trying to reinvent itself before the internet kills it, as with so many other libraries across the country. It's really hard to imagine someone actually visiting, well, any of the LOC buildings and coming away with the impression that Druk Condensed feels right. Pentagram has an impressive body of work, but their work for the Library of Congress comes across as the sort of pitch an intern might make prior to being fired before they might accidentally stumble in front of a client. 0. http://www.landesbergdesign.com/projects/carnegielibrary.shtml http://www.landesbergdesign.com/projects/carnegielibrary.sht...
lucideer 8y ago
I can see pretty clearly where the logo design has come from: if you scroll down to the "Stationary"/"LCM Magazine"/"Posters" examples it's clear that they started with print layouts and worked backward to find a logo that would fit within their plans for those print layouts. The problem is (a) the print layout, while nice, is neither innovative, nor suitable to the brief (it's a carbon copy of every cultural/avant garde/art magazine I've seen recently) and (b) it's very restrictively print-oriented. The iPhone X screens look like lazy afterthoughts.
wmeredith 8y ago
It's not just you. The entire design world thinks this is misguided garbage.
snowwrestler 8y ago
I'm having a hard time understanding why the Library of Congress was paying Pentagram for a new identity in the first place. Smells like someone playing "corporate brand executive" with taxpayer money. It's not like the Library of Congress has to steal marketshare from tech companies or something.

by koboll 8y ago

alexpetralia 8y ago

It's seriously surprising that a premiere design company produced this.

koboll 8y ago
Contrast this with their excellent identity refresh for American Express: https://www.pentagram.com/work/american-express-1 https://www.pentagram.com/work/american-express-1 The difference is night and day. Imagine how fantastic that kind of modernizing light touch could have looked for this client, too.
- nkkollaw 8y ago
  I think this is pretty horrible, too, though.
  - Bluestrike2 8y ago
    I disagree, but I accept that there's a lot of subjectivity to it; the Amex refresh is just that--a refresh of an existing brand identity with very strong recognition, and consistently high brand loyalty. Pentagram managed to refrain from abandoning everything, while fixing problems that were...annoying (see the alternate blue square logo for small-space digital use, for example). I'm not a fan of the more aggressively cropped 'C' but that's more a nuisance feeling than anything objectionable. Overall, I'd say Pentagram's AMEX work is interesting more for their restraint and ability to recognize when it's not appropriate to just abandon everything. The surreal thing is that, as important as continuity and timelessness can be for financial services firms, it's even more fundamental to the LOC's roles. If you've ever been to the Thomas Jefferson Building, to walk its halls the first time is to almost be overwhelmed by a sense of connection to millennia of human thought and achievement. There are libraries out there with modern-looking identities (as an example, Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh--though I really hate the combined i/l mark).[0] I don't know of any that are as in-your-face as the LOC redesign. A lot of these kinds of "make it modern" updates are because companies are trying to better connect with consumers. The really crazy part about this is just how irrelevant that is to the Library of Congress' mission. The LOC isn't trying to reinvent itself before the internet kills it, as with so many other libraries across the country. It's really hard to imagine someone actually visiting, well, any of the LOC buildings and coming away with the impression that Druk Condensed feels right. Pentagram has an impressive body of work, but their work for the Library of Congress comes across as the sort of pitch an intern might make prior to being fired before they might accidentally stumble in front of a client. 0. http://www.landesbergdesign.com/projects/carnegielibrary.shtml http://www.landesbergdesign.com/projects/carnegielibrary.sht...

lucideer 8y ago

I can see pretty clearly where the logo design has come from: if you scroll down to the "Stationary"/"LCM Magazine"/"Posters" examples it's clear that they started with print layouts and worked backward to find a logo that would fit within their plans for those print layouts. The problem is (a) the print layout, while nice, is neither innovative, nor suitable to the brief (it's a carbon copy of every cultural/avant garde/art magazine I've seen recently) and (b) it's very restrictively print-oriented. The iPhone X screens look like lazy afterthoughts.

wmeredith 8y ago

It's not just you. The entire design world thinks this is misguided garbage.

snowwrestler 8y ago

I'm having a hard time understanding why the Library of Congress was paying Pentagram for a new identity in the first place. Smells like someone playing "corporate brand executive" with taxpayer money. It's not like the Library of Congress has to steal marketshare from tech companies or something.