Ah, the logo. An under-appreciated device. Much more than a mere signpost, a well-designed logo conveys an encapsulated set of messages. It’s a visual attempt at a values statement. In truth, it is difficult to do well. One does not have much space to work with; on the page — analog or digital — things are still 2-dimensional. One must have deep knowledge of the organization, its mission, its character, its goals. A good logo cajoles, implies, moves, and maybe even calls you to action. Good or not, a logo will send a message, so great care should be taken in its design.
I’d like to offer my take — value it as you will — on the Hillary for President campaign logo. I’m breaking up my critique into a logo’s principal design elements. It’s an open debate how many such elements exist, but I prefer 3, as the others are mostly intangibles, like “timelessness,” or “simplicity” that are all resultant from the physical design. In the assessment, it is these intangibles that matter, but again, it’s the physical expression that fosters them. The 3 principal design elements are:
geometry, color, and symbols
1. Geometry
Sounds simple enough, but it’s not. Do we use crisp, angular shapes? Do we go loosey-goosey, free-flowing organic or do we use rigid, martial lines? (NOTE: Yes, I know many organic things in nature are sharply angular in their micro symmetry, the yang to the ying of the golden spiral.) Do we use shapes at all? Words or letters, or none at all? Should the geometry intersect? Should the geometry seem contained within the space, or spill across it, or even appear to extend beyond it? All these choices convey messages, provoke feeling.
In Hillary’s logo, the geometry is rigid, confined, and highly limited. In fact, only right and 45% angles are used; it’s all squares and triangles. Even the overarching presentation is a punctured square, bursting on its right wall.
Yes, it’s playing off the “H” and I suspect the designer was going for comforting exactness, discipline, rational, reasoned, and marching forward! But, that’s not what I see. To me, it feels like the geometry is rigid, harsh, and confined, yet, struggling to break out.
The geometry also overlays itself, one part dominating the other, not symbiotically working with it.
2. Colors
Welcome to conventional America politics, red, white, and blue. Uninspired, but most use this combination for fear of provoking “anti-mainstream” (those evil greenies!) connotations. But even within this constraint, we have many choices. Which is the dominant color? Do the colors blend or do they oppose, is the use of color subtle or bold? Is the contrast stark? Which color serves as the canvas, the foundation or background? Typically that’s white in this sort of scheme, but it does not have to be.
Given the “H,” we’d have to say white is the background color here, so its really more an omission of color, at least that’s the design. It’s just there. The red and the blue are the intentional colors, which American political and media culture is reflexively trained to read as Republican (red) and Democrat (blue). Some will tell me that’s just a cultural bias, but I’m answering as an expert who is telling you what the average American subconscious will probably “see,” not what you want them to see. No one of sincerity, and damned sure no political advisor, is going to be confused as to the implied message of the colors “red” and “blue” to an American audience when used in a political context.
Here, the red is the aggressive and dominant color. Not only is it super-imposed on the blue, but the “Republican’ red literally crosses out and pierces through the blue. The “Democratic” color here is passive, overrun. Yikes! Did Dick Morris come back to the Clinton camp to consult on the logo project? While I’d like to think it’s not intentional, doing so insults what I’m sure was a highly paid designer and brand consultants, so I won’t insult their intelligence. And that means the message offered is a nod to Republicans, “Like me! I’ll keep those Democrats in check!” wink, wink, nod, nod.
3. Symbols
Oh boy, I’m gonna get creamed for my informed opinions here…
The “H”? Got it. No foul. Great. Appropriate. But, wait, the arrow takes over the bridging portion of the letter, leaving only two vertical blue lines. I read that as “pause,” and so will — subconsciously — every person who have ever hit “pause.” The blue Democratic color is put in pause?
Oh, I see, you want me to note the arrow moving forward. I see that’s the intent, but in every context where you have EVER seen an arrow pointed to the right, what does it mean? It means, go right, not forward. Even a “play” or fast forward button is not represented by a right arrow, but rather 2 consecutive rightward-oriented triangles and that’s not the motif here. And, in fact, in signage, the message “Go forward (or straight)” is represented by an arrow pointing away from us, perpendicular from our orientation.
So I’m sorry, the message here, or the design team was waaaayyy overpaid, is “Go Right!” That message is clearly reinforced by the fact that the right arrow is in red. It’s not the blue Democrats going forward here, it’s the Republican red going right, emphatically and commandingly — bursting right, right through the blue, in literal fact. Maybe Hilary is coming out of her blue shell in which she’s felt so confined all these years? Epic fail designers!
Sigh.
Again, it’s most probable the messaging as I read it was not intentional. I seriously think it’s just very bad design, and simply another poor choice by Hillary’s campaign team, and by default, Hillary herself, because she is the brand.