Moss, Type Apropos

Now that the link-hype has died down and every design blog has pointed to Creative Review’s exposé — which you should read to get the details, since there is nothing else to add or go by — of Peter Saville’s logo design for Kate Moss I thought this would be a good time to discuss. With Moss’ clothing collection ready to launch on May 1st through British fashion enabler Topshop, and a myriad of other brandable opportunities stemming from Kate’s seemingly impossible rebirth the need for a unique identity was inevitable.

So how in the world do you brand Kate Moss? How do you capture her chameleon-like looks, almost tripolar personality and indelible contribution to the fashion world? Typography, indeed, seems the only way out without falling into trite imagery. But what typeface could embody the snowballing synergy of what Debbie Millman calls “[the] one brand — one brand above all others — that has risen from the ashes of death and defeat to recapture acclaim and glory”? Bodoni? Gotham? Serifa? Nuptial Script? The problem is that any of these and a hundred other typefaces would be appropriate. With the help of Paul Barnes, Saville made the recommendation to Miss Moss of using Alexey Brodovitch’s quirky Albro typeface that captures a little bit of Kate Moss at every turn, at every line and at every curly ball. The sum of its parts might not be the prettiest result — at least I don’t think so — but when something (or, in this case, someone) can be anything and everything, why not actually design identity that has something for everyone?

Neven’s comment is:

Heh. It looks like something off 1001fonts.com. It honestly doesn’t say “Kate Moss” to me either - it says “your aunt who was mildly groovy in the 70s”.

But it could have been worse. Hey, at least it’s simple and monochromatic.

P.S. That “e” is frightening.

On Apr.26.2007 at 11:31 AM

rykodisc’s comment is:

well, it’s tie to fashion and design history makes it’s warts endearing.

On Apr.26.2007 at 12:15 PM

Patrick Senecal’s comment is:

This identity leaves me totally indifferent, wich I think is even worse than disliking it.

On Apr.26.2007 at 12:16 PM

Jw’s comment is:

I actually don’t hate this- in fact I kinda like it. However, The second reaction to it is “So what?” Kate Moss. Okay… so what?

If I saw this on an item of clothing in a boutique, given that the quality of the print job or packaging was high, I’d find it interesting. Why I’ve been seeing this on tons of design sites, I can’t figure out.

On Apr.26.2007 at 12:33 PM

Kenneth Sundqvist (Evil Oatmeal)’s comment is:

The type reminds me of the Family Guy episode where Chris is an accomplished pop-artist and dates Kate Moss, and where she can be seen from the front and back but not from the sides because she’s too thin. Ha ha ha! Perfect fit!

On Apr.26.2007 at 01:00 PM

tde’s comment is:

That font makes her look fat.

On Apr.26.2007 at 01:11 PM

chris’s comment is:

The thickness of the cross bar on the “t” annoys me, but otherwise I quite like this, can see it going down quite nicely on a label or elegant piece of packaging.

On Apr.26.2007 at 01:42 PM

Josh G’s comment is:

The first time I saw this typeface was in an issue of Portfolio in the RIT archives. This logotype really gives Kate Moss a classic sense about her (however undeserved), it’s as if she was plucked from the pages of Harpers Bazaar circa 1960.

On Apr.26.2007 at 02:17 PM

C-lo’s comment is:

Looks more like set type then anything else. I sure hope they dont try to embroider this onto something. esp with her fashion line coming up. The type is alright minus that awful T, but I was never a fan of just having words as the logo.

On Apr.26.2007 at 02:22 PM

Oh My!’s comment is:

I yi yi… you guys mentioned the “t” which is quite annoying, but what about the “e” with it’s ENORMOUS forehead? quite scary indeed! And it looks like the S’s might be slithering down the page from the rest of the letters…

On Apr.26.2007 at 02:58 PM

Daniel-son’s comment is:

It used to be the case that Peter Saville could do a shit on a piece of paper and I’d love it. Nowadays I’m not sure he still ‘has it’.

This is lazy. He could have at least customized it more…

The font is pretty awful too… it’s just badly designed and lacks any kind of elegance. The Harper’s Bazaar comment is valid, but why not use Bodoni and do something creative with rather than this shite?

On Apr.26.2007 at 03:39 PM

C-lo’s comment is:

Thanks Oh My, you made me hate this “logo” even more. Ha. I think the effect on the two S’s you mentioned comes from it sinking down so far and from it being so thin. Now I think if them as snakes ready to smack the O as they wind around.

On Apr.26.2007 at 04:12 PM

theris’s comment is:

This is getting depressing.

On Apr.26.2007 at 05:17 PM

Paul Riehle’s comment is:

maybe it looks better all coked up…

On Apr.26.2007 at 06:21 PM

Seth Aldridge’s comment is:

I am not a fan. It looks like a cheap free font and isn’t well executed. This is off topic but she should break the brand in two. Kate would be the womans clothing line and Moss could be the men’s line.

On Apr.26.2007 at 06:26 PM

Dale the Somewhat Merciless’s comment is:

stylistically i love it.. but in terms of execution it is a dog.

i wish someone had actually looked at it as a mark rather than just picking a typeface and typing it in.. it should so be customised.. :( depressing.

On Apr.26.2007 at 07:36 PM

L.Vazquez’s comment is:

I get no emotional response from this. I’m not into fashion, and this doesn’t provoke me in any way to find out more.

Also, what does it matter if it came from Saville Associates?

On Apr.26.2007 at 08:08 PM

J Levi’s comment is:

kinda gross.
kinda interesting.
pretty memorable.
The “e” has major issues.

On Apr.27.2007 at 12:17 AM

J Levi’s comment is:

i think my last comment kinda describes kate moss the person too.

On Apr.27.2007 at 03:04 AM

Patrick Senecal’s comment is:

Paul Riehle’s comment is:
maybe it looks better all coked up…

This made my day, thank you Paul.

On Apr.27.2007 at 10:41 AM

Monostereo’s comment is:

When I first saw the logo I loved it. When I started looking at the individual letters it got all wonky. Now I’m trying to imagine it in a real setting, and I can’t figure out if I would respond to it as cheap or expensive. I think it has the potential to be really exquisite or really bland. We’ll see…

On Apr.27.2007 at 12:08 PM

Simon’s comment is:

I agree with monosetreo…there needs to be some context of usage, but the “e” is still just weird.

tde’s: haha, does this logo make me look fat?

On Apr.27.2007 at 04:05 PM

Von Glitschka’s comment is:

tde’s said: “That font makes her look fat.”

I nearly did a spit take on my laptop reading that. LOL

The ‘e’ and ‘m’ look really wonky. Looks like they were atempting to be all elegant and sophisticated but didn’t apply enough make up.

On Apr.27.2007 at 07:46 PM

Andrew’s comment is:

Blah.

On Apr.27.2007 at 09:15 PM

Eliot’s comment is:

Can’t get enough of that Kate Mogg!

On Apr.29.2007 at 11:31 PM

Drew Kora’s comment is:

looks like sample text for a font on veer.com. hahaha

On Apr.30.2007 at 10:07 AM

Tony Goff’s comment is:

I had the misforunte to pass by Oxford Street at the opening of her collection lastnight and the logo looked a lot better printed up and on the window displays, looked a bit bolder too…

On May.01.2007 at 05:42 AM

AL’s comment is:

The ‘style’ is not bad but the execution is terrible. Where’s this good old craftsmanship?

On May.01.2007 at 06:07 AM

jenn.suz.hoy’s comment is:

Is her clothing line to be sold at Target? That’s the sort of faux-fabulous vibe I get from it.

On May.01.2007 at 01:02 PM

Mark’s comment is:

It looks quirky and interesting,suprisingly this logo has personality,quite rare these days.

Its a logo that you’d hate to love but on the other hand you’d also hate to hate.

So what if the “e” looks weird,or the “t” doesn’t look quite right. This is a logo representing a person NOT a faceless company,the long overused alternative path would be using her signature,but that has been done 100s of times already,plus legibility can be a pain.

I like it, it almost feels like its an actual person.

It’s not “chic” nor “stylish” or “trendy” it more lends itself to curiosity.

one things for sure it isn’t dull.

On May.01.2007 at 09:22 PM

Bruce’s comment is:

The heavy curly ball on the “k” alludes to a lowercase “i” and a quick glace I see “katie moss”. This makes me think this is a young girls clothing line, not high fashion. Maybe it is, I’m not that familiar with the brand to be honest.
I don’t really care for the logo.

On May.07.2007 at 03:29 PM

ST’s comment is:

I agree this logo to me says 70’s to me and it looks very retro. One other things Kate Moss is a fashion line. I would think that some of those line weights are going to be a pain to reproduce on certain fabrics.

On May.11.2007 at 11:47 AM

WORK’s comment is:

Came across the Alexey Brodovitch typeface that this was made from. I can appreciate the Brodovitch approach, but not the outcome.

On Jan.25.2008 at 12:12 PM

waukesha car accident lawyer’s comment is:

It’s not the greatest in the world, but only because it doesn’t stand out that much to me. I’m positive they could have done much worse but I think that I’d prefer something just a little more unique.

On Nov.02.2009 at 10:42 AM

Blossom Phillis’s comment is:

Not many bloggers worth saving but this is going on Mixx right now

On Jul.01.2010 at 10:42 PM