Getting it right
Having begun yesterday with the assumption that there must be as many different types of family relationship as there are families, yesterday I came to the conclusion that there are may actually be a finite number – and that, one day not too far away, I’m going to read a report in the Daily Mail on academic research that has not only established just how many but also defined what they are.
Let me list a few straight from my head as I type:
Strong-bonded families, grounded in strong paternal figures, who are constantly in reach others’ pockets and organise extended family meals and gatherings at Christmas, Easter and perhaps anniversaries too.
Families who have spread geographically far and wide, don’t really get on and barely see each other at all.
Large families, full of brothers and sisters and their descendants, that I’d describe as ‘high volume’: they’re demonstrably at both ends of the emotional spectrum, viz. at times over-the-top loving and affectionate and yet – when some issue of conflict arises – over-the-top loud in their arguments.
Families that in the past used to be close but which (as the kids grew up and acquired partners) have become distant and cold, often because of the actions or attitude of some of the partners.
Families that are, on the face of it, unemotional and reserved and yet – when the occasional and inevitable life crises come along – suddenly pull together in a ‘circle the wagon’ fashion to repel the threats or dangers.
And so on …
I have two kids, a daughter who lives north-west of London with her partner and whom I see once or twice a month – usually by driving up for an early evening catch-up meal – and a son who, since leaving school, has largely ploughed his own furrow, mostly by living and working abroad, and who returns to the UK only two or three times a year.
For nearly a decade now the latter has been based in Palma, Mallorca, though (working in the yachting industry) he has often not actually been there much because he’s been away sailing and working at all points around the Atlantic Ocean and Baltic Sea.
Unlike some families, ever since my kids grew up, the three of us have basically lived our own separate lives, albeit always remaining in touch and (if I may be allowed to say so) being remarkably close, ‘open’, straightforward and even blunt in our three-way relationship. I’m not saying that others would regard it as perfect or even something they’d ever aspire to, but it seems to work for us.
Which brings me to a little project that I became involved in at the weekend.
I rose on Sunday morning to attend to my ‘early’ dayshift and found four emails sitting in my inbox from Barry my son.
The last time I visited him in Palma in December we discussed various aspect of his yachting business and, over dinner one night during a free-ranging conversation, I suggested that at some point he should consider re-designing at his company’s brand/logo (in my opinion it was a bit ‘busy’ and ‘fussy’ and therefore not a logo that ‘worked’ in every manifestation). He agreed but said it might take him some time to get around to it.
Which takes me back to last weekend – the four emails he sent me had attached to them some fifteen different possible new brand/logos, having canvassed all sorts of people (including three different graphic design firms), he was now asking my opinion on them.
I duly gave it, humbly adding in my reply email that my opinion should carry no more weight with him than anyone else’s and that – it being his company – at the end of the day he should trust his own gut instinct.
Three hours later, whilst I was at breakfast, he rang. He said he wasn’t interested in the slightest in going with his own gut instinct and/or ‘the one that he liked best’. He wanted to find out – by seeking reactions from everyone whose opinions he respected – a general view as to which design worked best!
He then asked whether I could enlist Tim, a graphic designer and art director I’d known since school, in the project. Yesterday mid-morning I finally reached Tim on the phone, forwarded Barry’s emails to him and just after lunch received his response by phone call, which I then sent on to Barry in an email.
One of the things to be admired about those who achieve great things in any walk of life you’d care to identify is generally-speaking how generous they are prepared to be with their time. I think this is something to do with the sense of quiet self-confidence that comes with the acquisition of great knowledge and experience. When you really know what you’re talking about, you don’t mind – in fact you enjoy – helping or advising others who know less, especially the young. Regarding technical matters, I guess one element of the satisfaction they gain from helping others is in the challenge to explain that which is really complicated in a manner that the average punter can actually understand.
Based upon my own career experience, those who were secretive with knowledge in their area of special expertise tended to be those who (wrongly) felt that if others knew what they did, their jobs might be at threat. Thus they kept as much as possible of their expertise to themselves and represented it to others as far more complicated than it needed to be.
I’d classify my art director pal Tim in the ‘great expert’ category. This morning when I awoke and turned my mind to considering a blog topic, I concluded that Rust readers today might like to see the gist of Tim’s advice that I sent to Barry yesterday:-
[He began with the caveat that although he was a graphic artist, what he was about to impart was only his opinion based upon his years of experience. Others (graphic designers or not) would also have their opinions and – even if these were different from his – they would nevertheless be just as valid. Barry just had to choose which to go with.]
The fundamental of any brand/logo design (corporate or otherwise) was whether or not it ‘worked’ in its simplest form – i.e. as a black image on a white background and/or as a black image on a white background.
If it did, you were home and dry, because the sole purpose of a brand/logo image was to get the name of the organisation across to the public. If it achieved that, what it actually looked like was almost a secondary consideration because the public always got used to a brand/logo once they’d registered the name.
That said, all the other extra things you could do (e.g. add one or a number of colours in combinations, extra squiggles, break up some of the lettering, add glitter stars around it etc.) might then make the design sexier, more noticeable and striking … however, the only thing that mattered (to repeat for emphasis) was the name.
And that was it.
On the brand/logos currently occupying Barry’s preferred short list, whilst they were all worthy attempts, Tim felt that they were all too ‘blocky’.
They made him speculate that the company was in IT, or heavy industrial engineering, or farm machinery – and not in the yachting industry which (in contrast) ought to come across as being fun, exciting, expensive, luxurious, sporting and sexy.
[The implication as to what Tim thinks Barry should now do was there in metaphorical black bold capitals …]
I await Barry’s next move with interest.
