Whitney Identity Article(s): Question Response
- What was your initial reaction to the Whitney identity system after reading the first article?
My initial reaction to the Whitney Identity system was that it seems to be very versatile, like it could go on many different canvases — large or small, wide or narrow — and still look like it belongs on that canvas. Another thing is that it’s so simple, it would pair well with the other chosen font/font color and not really detract from it.
2. In your own words, describe what responsive design is. What are the pros and cons of applying responsive design to an identity system?
A responsive design is a design that can fit on many different mediums and not look out of place or clash with what other design it’s paired with. The pros of applying a responsive design to an identity system is that it’s open, it can (in the case of the ‘W’ at least) can take on different forms.
The cons of it is that some might find it boring or struggle to find the meaning in the design.
3. The new Whitney identity has been criticized as boring and duplicitous due its simplistic, open-ended design. Do you agree or disagree — why? Are boring and simple one in the same?
I disagree because while it is simple and open ended, it works with what the Whitney Museum of American Art is going for. Not only that, but the simplistic design can take on different shapes so it works well with different mediums. Were it a complicated design instead, I think it would clash with the overall design. Take the buttons for example: The design, with the zig-zag simplistic ‘W’ works well because of the simplistic identity. It’s interesting it draws the eye. Replace that with something more complicated and suddenly it’s not so interesting to look at.
I personally believed that boring and simple are not one in the same when the design is designed well, draws the eye, looks interesting, and is used effectively, whether that be on promotional materials or otherwise.
