Thread Reader

I Love Typography



9 tweets

Another disastrous rebrand. A thread:

Andrew Cusack


Sep 22View on Twitter

OUP has rebranded, and it's shite.

Show this thread

Typography: - X is too light - F, R, and D are heavier than X and O - UNIVERSITY PRESS feels weak

Personality, history, legacy? What does the type say other than it is a poor attempt at being trendy?

Mark: Is this the opening for the new James Bond movie?

Finally the ultimate test: What is this logo communicating about the brand? What story does it invite us to read? This is the problem with this crazy rush towards Sans Serifs. It's like going over your history with a scrub, erasing decades and centuries of progress.

If the ultimate progression of a brand is to lose its sense of identity, to lose its humanity, to lose its sense of time and place, then this is not progress. This is erasure of identity.

The argument that it needs to look good on a small screen does not wash. Surely we can do better. There are plenty of talented designers working today. Surely we can have type & lettering that speaks to heritage as well as to today's world and how we live & interact with brands.

So a message to branding agencies, please expand your horizons as to what contemporary typography can look like. It's not all Sans Serifs. There are many other options. Talk to type designers. Let them do what they are so good at. There is more to type than this. - Nadine

Wait. We need to talk about the R. That particular shape recalls the industrial age, the shadow signs we see around London. The previous type had Trajan proportions. Timeless designs inscribed in stones, signifying permanence. Much better suited to an academic publisher.

I Love Typography


Your new favorite place to shop for fonts. Featured Fonts:

Follow on Twitter