This Just in: History is Coming Back… Sort of

Before it closed down for renovations in 2009, to reopen in 2011, the Atwater Kent Museum of Philadelphia suffered from lack of exposure. A quick look at the original website reveals all you need to know about the old brand. The brutish colors and default appearance reveal a small organization without much concern for engaging the audience. Compared to the other kid-friendly museums in Philadelphia like the Franklin Institute (whose original home was actually the Atwater Kent building), the Atwater Kent Museum is about as exciting as a textbook. Having visited the museum once in my elementary school class trips, I remember it as an old, austere space that contained just bunch of artifacts. Change was overdue.

Recently, the museum announced a name change to become The Philadelphia History Museum — with “At the Atwater Kent” suffixed at the bottom of the logo. Piloted by local branding firm 160over90, the move makes good sense considering how aloof and incommunicable “Atwater Kent Museum” sounds. With a new name comes a new logo. The logo is meant to be a nod to Philadelphia’s notable street grid. That connection is somewhat of a reach, since shaky single lines are the opposite of what you’d usually get in a street map. Plus, line grids are so common that they don’t normally call for a second glance to find any meaning.

As for the typography, custom drawn letters sit in the grid, forcing words together and breaking them unnaturally. A change of color from gray to blue helps with the mark’s readability, though it’s trendy in choice, like the grid itself. It wouldn’t be surprising if this concept was the first and only idea sketched, with rationalization as an afterthought. Of course, that’s not how the process was described.

The project’s designer, Adam Garcia, began sketching versions of Philadelphia’s grid. We all liked [the] hand drawn version, as it echoed Penn’s original map while also containing the slight imperfections that make Philadelphia so unique and interesting. The final piece was adding type. And just like Philadelphia itself, that confining grid ended up giving the logo its distinctive character.[…]

The odd word breaks convey Philly’s inherent quirkiness, and the custom typeface pays homage to the city’s rich printing and typographic history.
— 160over90 blog

I’m not totally convinced. So the fact that it’s custom drawn means that it pays homage to typographic history? If an existing typeface were used, you could say the same exact thing. That probably would’ve been a better solution, too. Here, the ambiguous, techie letters do nothing to communicate anything historic. Instead, the type is nothing more than a result of the unforgiving grid — a forced monospace design that ends up looking cold.

The new logo isn’t horrible, but it all comes together, well, boringly. History involves storytelling, and that’s where the logo falls flat. The only exciting part of the rebranding is the copy on the promotional materials. If only they weren’t so disjointed from the logo’s aesthetic, or vice versa. Gripes aside, an improvement to an underdeveloped brand is still an improvement. The museum isn’t even open yet and already the new name has garnered it some publicity. Renovations are sure to make the space a more interesting experience. When it’s complete, maybe I’ll pay a visit.

Recently unveiled signage at the museum. Photo: Tom Ammon/160over90.

Ryan’s comment is:

I love the secondary typeface.

On Mar.08.2010 at 06:25 AM

Florian’s comment is:

Why do museums try so hard to make their logos as illegible as possible using the same old blocky look?

A logo is no cubist painting, no Kandinsky.

On Mar.08.2010 at 06:46 AM

Rachel Ortiz’s comment is:

it’s not great by any means - but at least they were successful in creating something more inviting and engaging than their previous brand.

On Mar.08.2010 at 06:57 AM

Ross Graham’s comment is:

I was just going for the same thing, Florian.

If word breaks illustrate Philly’s inherent quirkiness, does the Indianapolis Museum of Art logo illustrate Philly’s inherent quirkiness too?

On Mar.08.2010 at 06:59 AM

Zanda’s comment is:

A logo? You mean a jigsaw puzzle! I wish this so-called logo was as great as the BS rationale on the 160over90 blog. This is as boring as history was at school. Adam Garcia needs some advanced lessons in branding!

On Mar.08.2010 at 07:03 AM

buruno’s comment is:

It does look less unattractive, but still… The posters and its typography doesn’t seem to be part of the identity at all. Trying too hard to look hip?

ps. Hello, Gotham. Long time no see.

On Mar.08.2010 at 07:21 AM

ScottyM’s comment is:

I don’t like the secondary type treatment at all. I do, however, like the concept of those materials.

I think this logo isn’t as bad as what appears on first blush. An unknown, staid museum gets freshened up by a local shop. The “conversation” they’re trying to start is then followed up with a campaign that speaks to its history. = Success

May or may not age well. But it’s interesting.

On Mar.08.2010 at 07:25 AM

Martin Boath’s comment is:

I really love 160over90 but this typographic-grid-as-logo is now done to death surely?

I have no doubt that the overall branding will look magnificent (the stationery snapshots look great) but I find the idea behind the logo lazy. It’s all just a bit convenient. (project name = 25 characters = 5 x 5 grid = logo). If it were 21 characters?

The fact the ’sketch’ element has been included perhaps indicates the desperation to make this overdone typographic treatment look a bit different.

And the ‘city-laid-out-as-grid’ is neither unique in a logo sense nor in a structural/town planning sense. I’d have thought Philadelphia nowadays was more than an old streetplan from 350 years ago that was never properly realised.

On Mar.08.2010 at 08:16 AM

David H’s comment is:

Cutting up words to fit into a space is such a weak design choice. They should work around the words, not cram them in.

On Mar.08.2010 at 08:28 AM

Nick Irwin’s comment is:

more inviting and engaging yes, poster design successful, my only problem with the logo design is the crossword puzzle-esque aethstetic

On Mar.08.2010 at 08:31 AM

Larry W’s comment is:

I said it before and I’ll say it again; Why must my hometown get so many bad logos?

I actually walk by that museum every day, and I actually never knew there was a logo, let alone the one I saw. Is it an improvement? It is. I hated it the firs time I saw it, but its growing on me a bit.

But I agree, I’m sick of museums trying so damn hard to make hard-to-read logos. What happened to simple, elegant, and inviting logos for museums.

On Mar.08.2010 at 08:32 AM

Barclay D’s comment is:

If it was a museum of math history, then this is a superb logo (maybe). The new blue signage outside of this historic looking museum for example looks strange, and acts as if an older crowd is trying to be hip. In their eyes it’s their way to relate and stay new (brand new). When I think of Philadelphia I think of a lot of other ‘cool’ things to use other then a grid street system. In my eyes as a young designer it looks like a stretch and it’s obvious.

On Mar.08.2010 at 08:48 AM

Matt Stevens’s comment is:

Adobe illustrator brush line effects are fine for a comp, but seems strange they didn’t hand draw what’s supposed to look hand drawn. You can see repetition in the lines that breaks the illusion and is distracting.

Overall, I like the accompanying work much more than the mark itself, although I think it will look dated pretty quickly.

On Mar.08.2010 at 09:05 AM

Jacob’s comment is:

Words/names cut-off and continuing on the next line in this style is quickly becoming the pretentious version of the “swoosh”.

On Mar.08.2010 at 09:07 AM

Christopher’s comment is:

Actually as a designer interested in in community development and the history of urban design, Philadelphia’s grid street system *is* unique. Contrast it to the mishmash that was Boston or much of Manhattan in the 18th century. It’s Philly that pioneered that rational system and that rationalist way of thinking, thinking that would later go on to influence the development of the nation’s capital. It’s interesting too as Philly was so early American version of Silicon Valley — a home for rational thinking, medical research, and university scholarship which set its city identity against the dirty commerce of New York and the dirty politics of DC. It was a central location for rational thought and research between the too.

Right now Philly has a strong letterpress and poster design community, something that connects back throughout it’s history. So together the logo and posters work to enforce these twin perspectives of Philly history.

Nicely done.

On Mar.08.2010 at 09:10 AM

Jose Nieto’s comment is:

I think legibility is less of an issue with these institutional logos that it would be for, say, a product; it’s not like people need to spot the the Philadelphia History Museum in a crowded store shelf. More important is recognizability, which should come with time as the form of the logo is pretty distinctive, particularly when compared to the logos of other local institutions.

The real problem for me, though, is the tone-deaf way the words were broken. The notion of history as “his-story” is such an old feminist joke that I find it stunning that nobody caught it during the review process— it’s the first thing that came to mind when I saw that “his” at the end of the middle line of the grid. History museums have long been taken to task for documenting only (white) men’s experience; most have worked assiduously to present the past in more inclusive ways. This logo seems to work against such efforts.

On Mar.08.2010 at 09:27 AM

Tim’s comment is:

I’m a huge fan of 160 over 90 so this seems a little out of the ordinary. They’re usually able to push the envelope, so I’m wondering if it’s a rushed job or a safe client. It’s in their portfolio so I suppose somebody liked it. I wish the posters and grid could have met in the middle and created a really unique system.

Either way I feel bad for such a unique and historic city always getting poor results in terms of brands.

On Mar.08.2010 at 09:28 AM

Tim’s comment is:

I actually want to retract my statement when I said poor, I think it’s fine just nothing wow-ing. Definitely an improvement over their previous voice.

On Mar.08.2010 at 09:31 AM

twoeightnine’s comment is:

“I’d have thought Philadelphia nowadays was more than an old streetplan from 350 years ago that was never properly realised.”

But it was realized. Almost as perfectly as Penn wanted. And it was a revolutionary idea at the time. Unfortunately for this logo though it was not made of squares but for the most part rectangles. (Except for the 5 city squares.)

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~cap/PENN/pnplan.html

On Mar.08.2010 at 09:49 AM

Colin’s comment is:

Word breaking might be here for awhile. I do like this though

On Mar.08.2010 at 10:06 AM

Martin Boath’s comment is:

Sorry Christopher and twoeightnine – Philadelphia’s own particular grid system may be unique but cities designed on a gird system at the time was not and that’s the point I was trying to make. The logo does not show any of the uniqueness of the Philadelphia grid so in that sense it is purely a generic grid, something we have all seen countless times in logos.

If the city’s grid system is to be used as a unique factor, then why not make it unique, or even try to incorporate some of it’s own particular elements?

On Mar.08.2010 at 10:18 AM

Impossibly Stupid’s comment is:

Considering the map that twoeightnine posted, there are immediately better choices that come to mind than jamming letters into a square grid. Even a simple design based off the “centre square” would be more evocative than the generic mess they got.

As far as the word search puzzle that also results, I’m reminded of the comments here:

http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/monospace_theatre.php

How many words can you find in the Philadelphia History Museum logo? Most prominent to me is HELP, which is where I stopped, because that’s exactly what they need.

On Mar.08.2010 at 10:25 AM

satalight’s comment is:

Would it kill the designer to actually hand-draw the strokes in the logo rather than use and re-use the same illustrator brush style (pencil — thin)? “We all liked the hand-drawn version.” Which version is that, exactly?

On Mar.08.2010 at 10:29 AM

Penn’s comment is:

The canned illustrator strokes are killing me.

On Mar.08.2010 at 10:46 AM

stan’s comment is:

chopped up words is the new swoosh

On Mar.08.2010 at 11:03 AM

Jill’s comment is:

I normally don’t mind/like a nice word break, but the choices here are bad. Breaking up ‘museum’ as m-useum is bizarre. I think if you want to break up words, do it in a way that still makes them readable, like at syllable breaks.

And the scraggly Illustrator lines are very poorly done. I think either commit to the concept and create original lines with a bit more heft, or go to clean lines, which would compliment the text more IMHO.

On Mar.08.2010 at 11:27 AM

mat’s comment is:

I agree. Good re-branding. not great. Much better than before, but it was pretty vanilla to start.

On Mar.08.2010 at 11:45 AM

Brian Son’s comment is:

I’m all for alternative ways to lay out long names for logotypes, most people complain about grids or type that is “hard to read” but it’s an ideal solution when the name itself needs to be prominent, without making a very horizontal (and long) piece. But if you’re going to go with this approach, at least make it finished.

However, in this case visuals overrule the concept and aspects of branding. It’s well-designed and visually appealing, but this should be more than that, it does not relate back to what it is branding.

Effective? Possibly. It’s definitely a fresh makeover, but that’s it, it’s trendy and not sustainable.

The mark itself is kind of a technical disaster, just looking at it you can tell it’s not even fine-tuned. The clean sans-serif type with the “drawn” lines makes it look unfinished and in this case, wrong. It doesn’t help the mark at all.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m usually the person who cares about visuals over concept, but this is an example where you have to step back and realize you’ve become too lost in the visuals themselves.

On Mar.08.2010 at 12:04 PM

Jennifer Moline, PsPrint’s comment is:

What Florian said: “Why do museums try so hard to make their logos as illegible as possible using the same old blocky look?”

On Mar.08.2010 at 12:42 PM

Andrea’s comment is:

As someone not familiar with Philadelphia at all, I wouldn’t “get” the street map theme without the explanation. Perhaps that’s OK if the audience is only locals. But I’m guessing it’s not.

It looks like a crossword puzzle book logo, and I TOTALLY agree with @Jose Nieto about the “His-Story”. That is the first thing I saw, too, to which I say “Boooo!”

On Mar.08.2010 at 12:50 PM

Jung’s comment is:

HELP

is what i see

On Mar.08.2010 at 12:56 PM

michael scott’s comment is:

Like the logo that came before it, this will become outdated within a decade. Too many people are turning to these typographic logos because they’re out of ideas. The concept is just.. eh.

On Mar.08.2010 at 01:02 PM

Juan Barrera’s comment is:

It looks like this a new trend for museum logos… just over a week ago the Indianapolis Museum of Art (posted here) had a similar approach. So much for unique.

On Mar.08.2010 at 01:33 PM

jonathan’s comment is:

Yes, all of its trendy and played out - but lets keep things in perspective here, this is an upgrade. As a designer, don’t you want the overall landscape of design improved as a whole? Wouldn’t you rather have this up than that previous mark? Yes.

Maybe the envelope wasn’t pushed, and maybe this was a missed opportunity, but let that weigh on the designer, the agency. This mark isn’t terrible, and for design as a whole, I suppose I’d mark this as a win.

On Mar.08.2010 at 01:55 PM

David Sanchez’s comment is:

I usually make several trips to PHL a year to visit family. This new brand approach is unexpected, a signal of change.

The execution reminds me of the peculiar street layouts of the city, is an obvious grid system yet clever. Very clear signal that challenges the ordinary.

Well done.

On Mar.08.2010 at 02:10 PM

CampSteve’s comment is:

The grid is made of the same single line copied and pasted, resized a little, possibly with a little line thickness variation. The designer couldn’t bother to draw 8 original wiggled straight lines? How in the world does that get by anyone?

My eye went directly to the top of each vertical line and the way it ends with a slight dot. That’s weak attention to detail, or lack thereof. If you’re going to make something look “hand drawn” avoid excessive copy and paste.

On Mar.08.2010 at 02:12 PM

Fonzie’s comment is:

I’m not convinced. It’s better than what they had ? Good.

On Mar.08.2010 at 02:37 PM

qwertyale’s comment is:

CAN’T read “THE” if you SHRINK this KING SIZED logo.

On Mar.08.2010 at 02:57 PM

Mr Miyagi’s comment is:

great, another logo falls victim to the bro-ken word fad. Then add either cyan, magenta, or yellow and ta-daa… we have this. As a designer at least this teaches me what to stay away from.

On Mar.08.2010 at 03:19 PM

Chris Rugen’s comment is:

This identity is a dramatic improvement, but it seems a bit too hip for its own good. Every decision is visually interesting, but I’m not sure it stands up in the long run or feels appropriate to the client.

The grid feels like yet another “I don’t want to deal with a long name so I’ll make it a rectangle. Plus all the cool museums are using funny word breaks, why can’t you?” cultural institution rebrand.

The logo and the type treatment on the posters seem strangely disjointed. As though two designers were assigned to work on it and they couldn’t agree on how to approach it, so one worked on the frame identity and the other worked on the advertising identity. Also, that logo looks pretty spindly. It looks like anything under 2 inches might start to fade away or turn into a bit of a nondescript square.

The sassy writing is entertaining, but I’ve seen it in other 160over90 projects, such as Loyola’s rebranding. Is that really the right tone for the museum? Does edgy/snarky equal young? Will this tone carry throughout the museum’s programming? Also, the headlines are so manipulated and distorted that the reading of the verbal cleverness falls away in favor of visual style. Not necessarily a wrong choice (visuals attract), but it seems like more of that “two ideas not reconciled” thing. Though the posters aren’t to my personal taste.

I hope the museum lives up to the image they’re portraying and refines it with time. With luck and purpose, the identity and institution could find their groove and succeed in branding the Philadelphia History Museum.

On Mar.08.2010 at 03:27 PM

Grumpy Josh’s comment is:

Awful! Back to work!

On Mar.08.2010 at 03:51 PM

Jason Laughlin’s comment is:

Obviously this is an improvement over the existing materials. It’s lovely to look at. But the conceptual bit is simply farce. If not farce it is certainly nothing anyone would pick up on. I’m not entirely sure it matters in terms of reinvigorating the brand, however.

But let’s face it, square grids are not reminiscent of maps, and custom typography does not hearken back to a printing and typography industry. Maybe tangentially. But this isn’t a free-association James Joyce novel. it’s a logo. A very pretty, though not entirely readable logo.

On Mar.08.2010 at 04:12 PM

Johannes’s comment is:

*Must find hidden socialistic message*

On Mar.08.2010 at 04:46 PM

Matt2’s comment is:

“How many words can you find in the Philadelphia History Museum logo? Most prominent to me is HELP, which is where I stopped, because that’s exactly what they need”

HORSE, IDEA and YUM particularly stand out.

On Mar.08.2010 at 04:52 PM

Matt2’s comment is:

Oh wait, I got another one. MISHAP.

I want to shake the logo up and get new cubes now.

On Mar.08.2010 at 04:57 PM

Bill Dawson (XK9)’s comment is:

I’m really not a fan. There’s no concept or context. The secondary font is a deconstructed mess, hardly an appropriate message for this museum. Philadelphia is the center of history of the United States; nothing about this logo or its companion design speaks that.

Philadelphia is also a center of the printed page in America. This solution seems to be disrespectful to that history.

On Mar.08.2010 at 05:04 PM

Nate’s comment is:

This shit is ridiculous.

I’m all for typographic experimentation, but this doesn’t seem like an appropriate outlet for freestyle type treatments. There is a certain coolness to the fucked up, hand-set, randomness, but in a “David Carson Transworld Skateboarding mag” kinda way. Not a “we’re a museum take us seriously” kinda way.

On Mar.08.2010 at 06:16 PM

Fidel Pamintuan’s comment is:

GREAT. Every museum and art organization out there has been going for that “play on text within a square space” logo lately.

On Mar.08.2010 at 07:30 PM

JD’s comment is:

Why do all museum logos seem to be going this route?

On Mar.08.2010 at 08:30 PM

Ryan’s comment is:

Totally inappropriate, yet still an improvement over the previous situation… I’ll take what I can get in this case.

On Mar.08.2010 at 11:54 PM

Chris’s comment is:

What bugs me most about this is that it seems to imply that all the letters are interrelated when they aren’t. The text is meant to be read left to right, but it also seems to imply that reading the text vertically would be just as useful. It’s not and that’s a problem. Ambiguity can be good if it leads the viewer into a direction that helps the overall message, but when you make images that imply things that don’t exist is a failure in my view.

Sure, it’s pretty, but that only goes so far. It’s also awkward and trendy.

On Mar.09.2010 at 02:09 AM

ilovetype’s comment is:

The explanation, that this treatment reflects the bold grid system design by William Penn, seems too contrived in world where word breaks are the trend du jour.

Also, I don’t get the relationship of the logo and membership aesthetic to the promotional posters and secondary typography. Seems like two entirely different brands fighting each other! I’m confused by the messaging.

That said, an improvement overall to the old clunky logo.

On Mar.09.2010 at 09:32 AM

Doug Bartow’s comment is:

I really like the supporting typographic elements. #nice

On Mar.09.2010 at 11:09 AM

FelixS’s comment is:

The relationship between the logo/identity and promotional materials is lost… As branding effort, I’d say it’s quite a failure.

On Mar.09.2010 at 11:36 AM

Mesothelioma’s comment is:

I think that it’s a good look. I really enjoy the idea and execution.

On Mar.09.2010 at 02:48 PM

evan’s comment is:

i definately like the typeface. i hate the slice and stack method though. its overdone.

On Mar.09.2010 at 03:50 PM

b.r.o.o.d.y.’s comment is:

Far from the disaster everyone is making it out to be. The branding as seen in the promotional material is quite bold as it is, and the logo being conceptually and visually dry keeps the mark from looking like it is desperately trying to be edgy (which history in general isn’t…).

Besides, if this brand is so bad why is it garnering publicity already? Isn’t it fulfilling its function, which is the point of every design?

On Mar.09.2010 at 08:10 PM

=David’s comment is:

Upgrade? Yes. Unique? No. It’s fine, I suppose, as logos go; their target audience being moderately undefinable, and their product being ethereal (the only solid things would have to be rooted in the cliche Americana that’s so played out we’d rake it over the coals even more — Liberty Bell, Independence Hall, etc.), I think they did the best they could with the time they had. I don’t think this is a stinker, but it definitely doesn’t shine.

On Mar.09.2010 at 09:23 PM

FG’s comment is:

Here we go again with yet ANOTHER museum using broken text on a grid. It’s getting extremely old now. It was clever when it was first used, but now, it’s sort of a hackneyed symbol for “museum in the early 2000s which is trying to discard a dated 80s/90s logo.” Really weak.

On Mar.10.2010 at 05:29 PM

MSGDS’s comment is:

another “break up text and stack it” logo… I’m tired of seeing this garbage over and over again.

On Mar.15.2010 at 05:01 PM

Cristela’s comment is:

As a native of Philly, i do not appreciate this approach. Its very cold and almost generic. No life which is the complete opposite of my beloved city. Yeah the grid is great but the cities website on the other hand, is very inviting and everything about Philly should be held with this amount of care and aesthetic. http://www.visitphilly.com/

On Mar.26.2010 at 11:15 AM

suhagra’s comment is:

As someone not familiar with Philadelphia at all, I wouldn’t “get” the street map theme without the explanation. Perhaps that’s OK if the audience is only locals. But I’m guessing it’s not.

It looks like a crossword puzzle book logo, and I TOTALLY agree with @Jose Nieto about the “His-Story”. That is the first thing I saw, too, to which I say “Boooo!”

On Jun.10.2010 at 03:41 PM

Ebi Atawodi’s comment is:

Days like this I’m thankfull for the V&A. Creative idea but not sure how appropriate, especially over the more apparent than real minimum logo lifecycle of 25 years…

On Jul.07.2010 at 09:47 PM