Paul Rand's Yale Press logo — Typophile archive

mattmc1 October 2009 · 23:00

I'm sure everyone has seen that Paul Rand's Yale Press logo is being phased out in favor of Matthew Carter's Yale typeface.

I have to say, generally I lament the lose of a Rand logo, like the classic UPS logo, but in this case, I wasn't a huge fan of the Yale logo. I've tried understanding the construction of the type and the geometry and I don't quite see the reasoning in it. Here's my quick study of it:

If anyone could shed some light on the grid, the negative space, the reasoning I'd love to hear it. Based on all his other work and the fact that he's considered to be the father of logo design in America, this one seems inconstant and idiosyncratic.

Caleb Ramsey8 October 2009 · 01:32

I don't think this was done out of disrespect. http://www.yale.edu/opa/arc-ybc/v28.n17/story1.html

My best guess as to the change is that people may not appreciate this form of witty communication as much anymore. Also, the letters he designed for this symbol do seem very much of the time he lived; therefore, dating the mark.

I always thought that this design looked like the buildings on the Yale campus. I thought it looked like the architecture. If you have ever visited there I believe you would see them as Professor Rand saw them each day he taught at the campus; however, I am almost positive that he explains the design himself in one of his books and I apologize for not recalling it now.

He always struck me as a very illustrative typographer. He invoked images and personification with his handling of type. He was a master of graphics, iconography, typography, line, shape, color, space,image, instruction, and writing on his trade. He is a designer I always thought was a fantastic communicator. It was often something simple (keep in mind that simplicity is hardly simple to do), witty, and observed by all; however, not articulated until he put his finger on it.

Does Matthew Carter's typeface constitute a great logotype? No. I don't believe it is very successful. Yes, it does bring the university and press together; however, Paul Rand's intention was to separate and differentiate the two. That being said, it is not the reason Carter's logotype seems to fail. I think the logotype, in my opinion, does not make the mark (pun) because it lacks character. It seems pedestrian and common. Don't get me wrong as I like the type design. I think that it is not adequate as a mark of distinction. Just an opinion.