6 ms·

The one that bums me out the most is the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. They went from an elegant serif font to a bland sans with a few funky tails. Before: ht

The one that bums me out the most is the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. They went from an elegant serif font to a bland sans with a few funky tails. Before: https://mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/disp/6a35674196742.5601d8305f0ac.jpg https://mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/disp/6a356... After: https://creativereview.imgix.net/content/uploads/2022/09/MFA_OOH2_Seaport_Sarah_Hopp-1920x1075.jpg https://creativereview.imgix.net/content/uploads/2022/09/MFA... Their stated purpose was to make it more accessible. The reasoned that the neoclassical architecture and old-style font made the space intimidating to people who didn’t hold those things to be part of their culture and that it was out of tune with the increasing diversity of their collection and programs. I think that’s the real trend here: change. Sans is so tempting because it hardly means anything and so designers will tell you it’s a blank canvas you can imbue with whatever values you want. If those values change, you don’t have to tear down your whole identity. That’s deeply appealing for firms in the tech world considering the rapid change of pace. What’s disappointing to me is to see cultural institutions take the same defensive approach. A logo change is fine, but saying “we want to be accessible to everybody so we’ll strip out anything that ties us to a time, place, or tradition” is like trying to make a welcoming living room by replacing all the sofas, tables, and rugs with a milk crate and a metal foldout chair. It doesn’t have to be that way. A few miles away the Boston Athenaeum did a rebrand with the same usual rhetoric on accessibility and diversity, but came through with a font that fits their tradition Before: https://web.archive.org/web/20210126132351/https://bostonathenaeum.org/ https://web.archive.org/web/20210126132351/https://bostonath... After: https://bostonathenaeum.org/ https://bostonathenaeum.org/

JCharante 3y ago
Wow I haven't been to the MFA in a while but have good memories there. The new logo is absolutely abhorrent.
lotsofpulp 3y ago
> Their stated purpose was to make it more accessible. The reasoned that the neoclassical architecture and old-style font made the space intimidating to people who didn’t hold those things to be part of their culture and that it was out of tune with the increasing diversity of their collection and programs. Can put this under the dictionary definition of insanity. Or someone needed justification to get paid without doing any real work.
- Auracle 3y ago
  I would simply call it demeaning.
- coldtea 3y ago
  >The reasoned that the neoclassical architecture and old-style font made the space intimidating to people who didn’t hold those things to be part of their culture and that it was out of tune with the increasing diversity of their collection and programs. The whole purpose of an actually inclusive "Museum of Fine Arts" should have been the opposite: to make people appreciate, understand, and enjoy things that they don't feel are "part of their culture", expand their cultural horizons and lift their tastes. Not to excise things they don't identify with, and feed them "safe" stuff tailored to them. That's entertainment.
  - InCityDreams 3y ago
    >...expand their cultural horizons and lift their tastes. Their tastes prior, being (considered) lower?
    - p3rls 3y ago
      Yes, it's called aesthetics.
    - coldtea 3y ago
      Yes. To conceive of a museum of fine arts, you also need to have a culture that has a sense of different relative worths of both artistic styles and art artifacts. What belongs to a museum vs what doesn't, what is fine art vs what is commercial crap or kitch, and so on. One that believes in informed curation - curation being the very core of what a museum does. Of course this requires an era where the opinion of people devoted to studying, discussing, and creating fine art isn't supposed to be equally respected to that of Joe Sixpack, Jaqueline Middlebrow, Joy Belieber, Arthur Incel, or Random J. Person, where everything is up to personal taste.
    - wizofaus 3y ago
      I don't care for the use of terms that imply appreciating the fine arts is somehow on a "higher plane" and places those who do so above those who don't, but I do think it's worth acknowledging that it takes significant time and effort to develop such appreciation, and that the rewards are subsequently substantial. Personally I've invested significantly in the study and appreciation of Western classical music and I believe what I've gained from that could not be achieved simply by listening to top 40 hits on the radio - but I don't believe those who do only the latter are in anyway "lower" on any sort of ranking system, just that their brains are wired differently, and their cultural background etc. is such that it probably wouldn't make sense for them to make the same investment into music appreciation that I have. It's almost certainly true that they've invested considerably into appreciating other worthwhile aspects of life that I haven't - we can't do it all!
coldtea 3y ago
>They went from an elegant serif font to a bland sans with a few funky tails. Wow, now it looks like a logo for a contruction company or something, in cheap suburban billboards...
blueridge 3y ago
Here's Erik Spiekermann on the Johnson & Johnson logo change: "I’m so fed up with marketing people running projects without acknowledging that we designers might have an idea or two about what communicates and what doesn’t. They’ve been told by tech guys and lazy designers that things have to be simplified to work on screens. This is knowledge from the 90s and not true anymore. Risk and guts have been replaced by bullshit “narratives” invented by people who’ve never taken a risk in their lives. This is the blandification of our world, where fun has to be taken out of the equation because it cannot be quantified. No consumer cares about a company’s internal reorganization, they want to like a brand. When all brands are beige, the beigest one will not win but will be forgotten. The enshittification of our world is run by people who read spreadsheets in bed and look at their smartphones to tell the weather instead of sticking their heads out of the window. Sometimes I’m glad I’m old and don’t have to take orders from gutless employed managers anymore. My best clients were those I could argue with. It wasn’t about winning or being right, it was about doing the best work. Thank you Audi, Deutsche Bahn, BVG, Bosch, Ottobock, The Economist …"
Spooky23 3y ago
That’s just some bunk the agency makes up when selling the pre-made brand kit.
- loughnane 3y ago
  That’s for sure a part of the story.
crazygringo 3y ago
I dunno... to me, the old MFA Boston logo screams 1990's or maybe late 1980's, when Helvetica Condensed was everywhere. It's the bland, boring, generic of its time. It makes me thing of a boring field trip I'm being forced to go on. While the new logo feels very 2020's. Like they're trying to be contemporary, and actually make an effort to connect the art they show to people today, not to those people's parents. It looks like a place with a thought-provoking exhibition I might want to take a date to. So I'm definitely going with the new logo.

JCharante 3y ago

Wow I haven't been to the MFA in a while but have good memories there. The new logo is absolutely abhorrent.

lotsofpulp 3y ago

> Their stated purpose was to make it more accessible. The reasoned that the neoclassical architecture and old-style font made the space intimidating to people who didn’t hold those things to be part of their culture and that it was out of tune with the increasing diversity of their collection and programs. Can put this under the dictionary definition of insanity. Or someone needed justification to get paid without doing any real work.

Auracle 3y ago
I would simply call it demeaning.
coldtea 3y ago
>The reasoned that the neoclassical architecture and old-style font made the space intimidating to people who didn’t hold those things to be part of their culture and that it was out of tune with the increasing diversity of their collection and programs. The whole purpose of an actually inclusive "Museum of Fine Arts" should have been the opposite: to make people appreciate, understand, and enjoy things that they don't feel are "part of their culture", expand their cultural horizons and lift their tastes. Not to excise things they don't identify with, and feed them "safe" stuff tailored to them. That's entertainment.
- InCityDreams 3y ago
  >...expand their cultural horizons and lift their tastes. Their tastes prior, being (considered) lower?
  - p3rls 3y ago
    Yes, it's called aesthetics.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    Yes. To conceive of a museum of fine arts, you also need to have a culture that has a sense of different relative worths of both artistic styles and art artifacts. What belongs to a museum vs what doesn't, what is fine art vs what is commercial crap or kitch, and so on. One that believes in informed curation - curation being the very core of what a museum does. Of course this requires an era where the opinion of people devoted to studying, discussing, and creating fine art isn't supposed to be equally respected to that of Joe Sixpack, Jaqueline Middlebrow, Joy Belieber, Arthur Incel, or Random J. Person, where everything is up to personal taste.
  - wizofaus 3y ago
    I don't care for the use of terms that imply appreciating the fine arts is somehow on a "higher plane" and places those who do so above those who don't, but I do think it's worth acknowledging that it takes significant time and effort to develop such appreciation, and that the rewards are subsequently substantial. Personally I've invested significantly in the study and appreciation of Western classical music and I believe what I've gained from that could not be achieved simply by listening to top 40 hits on the radio - but I don't believe those who do only the latter are in anyway "lower" on any sort of ranking system, just that their brains are wired differently, and their cultural background etc. is such that it probably wouldn't make sense for them to make the same investment into music appreciation that I have. It's almost certainly true that they've invested considerably into appreciating other worthwhile aspects of life that I haven't - we can't do it all!

coldtea 3y ago

>They went from an elegant serif font to a bland sans with a few funky tails. Wow, now it looks like a logo for a contruction company or something, in cheap suburban billboards...

blueridge 3y ago

Here's Erik Spiekermann on the Johnson & Johnson logo change: "I’m so fed up with marketing people running projects without acknowledging that we designers might have an idea or two about what communicates and what doesn’t. They’ve been told by tech guys and lazy designers that things have to be simplified to work on screens. This is knowledge from the 90s and not true anymore. Risk and guts have been replaced by bullshit “narratives” invented by people who’ve never taken a risk in their lives. This is the blandification of our world, where fun has to be taken out of the equation because it cannot be quantified. No consumer cares about a company’s internal reorganization, they want to like a brand. When all brands are beige, the beigest one will not win but will be forgotten. The enshittification of our world is run by people who read spreadsheets in bed and look at their smartphones to tell the weather instead of sticking their heads out of the window. Sometimes I’m glad I’m old and don’t have to take orders from gutless employed managers anymore. My best clients were those I could argue with. It wasn’t about winning or being right, it was about doing the best work. Thank you Audi, Deutsche Bahn, BVG, Bosch, Ottobock, The Economist …"

Spooky23 3y ago

That’s just some bunk the agency makes up when selling the pre-made brand kit.

loughnane 3y ago
That’s for sure a part of the story.

crazygringo 3y ago

I dunno... to me, the old MFA Boston logo screams 1990's or maybe late 1980's, when Helvetica Condensed was everywhere. It's the bland, boring, generic of its time. It makes me thing of a boring field trip I'm being forced to go on. While the new logo feels very 2020's. Like they're trying to be contemporary, and actually make an effort to connect the art they show to people today, not to those people's parents. It looks like a place with a thought-provoking exhibition I might want to take a date to. So I'm definitely going with the new logo.