Armin Vit:

The main complaint throughout is that the new logo is not dignified enough and it does not represent the school. But somehow, a crest, like thousands of other crests — who the majority of people don’t know what they stand for anyway — does. Unfortunately this is antiquated thinking. Universities can not get by with traditional crests in today’s über branded environment and, if you look around, most large universities operate with a “marketing” logo and use a traditional seal for boring things like diplomas or the back covers of their catalogues.

Maybe I’m just old fashioned, but the rebranding of universities to fit more in line with current design trends just seems short-sighted. Educational institutions are supposed to be authoritative and established; changing one’s identity to something more modern will give it a few months or years of better exposure. But will it stay as timeless fifty years from now? I don’t think so.

✖