Sounds like a hopelessly simplistic and queasily-literal representation of a city which is considerably more complex than can handled by a coin-flip.
And also, I get what the pigeon shit represents, but how the fuck does a pigeon represent the opposite? Pigeons are treated like the shit they emit, or worse.
I guess the same people who did the London 2012 branding are still around.
I don’t hate the pigeon but pigeon poo, really? That’s not really how I’d like my city represented.
Not a fan, pigeons aren’t really unique to London, being common in other major cities. Also feels a bit silly with the pigeon poop, dunno what the thought train was behind it but to me it looks like a shit stain (literally) on London’s history
It’s not April 1st?
Pigeons might be one of the most ubiquitous living things on the planet, I don’t see the London connection.
Reminds me of Dodgeball when Ben Stiller is in his office, pointing out the horrendous, cringey mural of him grabbing a bull by the horns…”It’s a metaphor”.
It’s an almost direct copy of work done by Maywild Studios in 2018. It’s outrageous that the London Museum didn’t do more due diligence in checking the design before announcing their rebrand.
Between this and the new Overground line names I’m convinced we need an immediate pause on any and all rebranding exercises in London until we can work out what is going on.
That’s one of those moments, where nobody in the meeting dared to say no, because they didn’t want to upset the execs or the creatives. The client’s decision maker probably just wanted it to be over with at some point, half checked out and on their way to their next job. This is the leaving present.
I don’t understand the rebranding at all. Like others in the comments here have said, pigeons aren’t a specifically London thing. And the new name, “The London Museum,” doesn’t make sense.
One can only imagine what the rejected suggestions were….some homeless guy shitting into a bin in Croydon town centre or someone inconveniently having to step over a stabbing victim as they walk through Walthamstow or perhaps three teenagers sat in a car doing balloons?
I’m almost as embarrassed for them as I am for the London brand. A city so full of imagination and possibility yet this brain fart is the best they can do?
This is the classic result of design by committee and is frankly depressing. In what world does an thousand conversations about a tragic design decision be evaluated as success. The metrics will not reveal what they need which and correct me if I am wrong, is to plant the museum as the central global resource to learn about an amazing city iteratively created through reams of history. If only I had engaged with the proposal but there frankly is not enough time in my diary. Publics in our city want representation and that is clear and a supremely good goal. This logo does no service to the product. It diminishes it semantically which is a terrible shame. Quick return to drawing board as there is still time.
13 comments
“The symbol of London’s dualities”
Sounds like a hopelessly simplistic and queasily-literal representation of a city which is considerably more complex than can handled by a coin-flip.
And also, I get what the pigeon shit represents, but how the fuck does a pigeon represent the opposite? Pigeons are treated like the shit they emit, or worse.
I guess the same people who did the London 2012 branding are still around.
I don’t hate the pigeon but pigeon poo, really? That’s not really how I’d like my city represented.
Not a fan, pigeons aren’t really unique to London, being common in other major cities. Also feels a bit silly with the pigeon poop, dunno what the thought train was behind it but to me it looks like a shit stain (literally) on London’s history
It’s not April 1st?
Pigeons might be one of the most ubiquitous living things on the planet, I don’t see the London connection.
Reminds me of Dodgeball when Ben Stiller is in his office, pointing out the horrendous, cringey mural of him grabbing a bull by the horns…”It’s a metaphor”.
It’s an almost direct copy of work done by Maywild Studios in 2018. It’s outrageous that the London Museum didn’t do more due diligence in checking the design before announcing their rebrand.
Between this and the new Overground line names I’m convinced we need an immediate pause on any and all rebranding exercises in London until we can work out what is going on.
That’s one of those moments, where nobody in the meeting dared to say no, because they didn’t want to upset the execs or the creatives. The client’s decision maker probably just wanted it to be over with at some point, half checked out and on their way to their next job. This is the leaving present.
I don’t understand the rebranding at all. Like others in the comments here have said, pigeons aren’t a specifically London thing. And the new name, “The London Museum,” doesn’t make sense.
One can only imagine what the rejected suggestions were….some homeless guy shitting into a bin in Croydon town centre or someone inconveniently having to step over a stabbing victim as they walk through Walthamstow or perhaps three teenagers sat in a car doing balloons?
I’m almost as embarrassed for them as I am for the London brand. A city so full of imagination and possibility yet this brain fart is the best they can do?
This is the classic result of design by committee and is frankly depressing. In what world does an thousand conversations about a tragic design decision be evaluated as success. The metrics will not reveal what they need which and correct me if I am wrong, is to plant the museum as the central global resource to learn about an amazing city iteratively created through reams of history. If only I had engaged with the proposal but there frankly is not enough time in my diary. Publics in our city want representation and that is clear and a supremely good goal. This logo does no service to the product. It diminishes it semantically which is a terrible shame. Quick return to drawing board as there is still time.