It seems as if the Comic Booked team have a great deal of faith in me, as they thought it wise to place into my hands an opinion piece that I could sink my teeth into. Of course, first I have to peel off the wrapper.
The decidedly … D … wrapper …
You see, it seems as if DC has opted to deviate from the logo that has been plastered on our cover pages for the last seven years, now opting for a “thin layer of D” to partially represent the company. Allegedly, DC’s marketing team would like the fans to associate this thin layer of D and the semiotic transition with some well-learned first-aid advice:
It’s like a bandaid, folks. Pull that sucker RIGHT OFF as quickly as you can.
If we adopt this visual, then certainly the change will only sting for a second, and then we can get on with our prized continuity. The wonderful thing about reader-centred approaches to media is that we adopt our visual interpretations based on our own cultural experiences. Therefore, a reader has endless possibilities for interpretation. Let’s explore that, shall we?
The thin layer of D could be a bandaid, but it could also be that layer of cooked chicken skin that a 10-year-old picks off of a wishbone with her fingers – sure, the chicken skin tastes delicious, but the wishbone already looks broken underneath.
The thin layer of D could also be the sloppy work of poster adhesive, shedding away in the rain to uncover the tattered advertisement that is wasting away underneath it.
Or, if a reader was very creative (or feeling a bit eccentric – of which I am both), she could even tell the story of a joyful Christmas morning destroyed when the present revealed under the thin layer of D seems to be missing a piece. Or missing the batteries.
Yes, I could have fun with this all night, because I am certain that there are many other associations that come to mind with this new corporate branding. It is a pity that these interpretations are so … putrid and hopeless.
Unfortunately for DC, they believed that readers would associate the new logo with the physical sensation of “turning a page in a book”.
I’m not entirely sure that DC thought this through. If that thin layer of D symbolised an invitation to the reader, what are they greeted with on the next page? The thin layer of D is a page that is healthy and complete. However, that next layer of C looks like a page that has been ripped down the middle or attacked by squirrels. Ironically, DC’s analogy has mocked the preservation of the book as an artefact, and left the target audience of the reader a little bit confused.
In 2005, the current DC logo was met with some trepidation, with its font choice and DC’s decision to include with a star that journeyed around the company name faster than the speeding bullet that had been recognised in DC’s previous branding in 1976. But that logo has grown to be so much more. It is symbolic of a universe, diverse in its characterisation and reinventing its world to challenge our perceptions and entertain us with every page.
This new logo lacks the imagination and creativity that is present in such a creative industry, painting it in a sepia palette that contrasts the pages of colour. It seems stagnant and devoid of lively narration.
To be honest, I’m going to feel a little bit …. grubby …. turning the page of a DC Comic. That thin layer of D will always feel like a piece of dead skin that needs to be removed to heal.
….See? Another analogy!
Tags: Comic Books, DC, DC Comics, DC Entertainment, editorial, Logo
About the Author
Written by Sarah Ellen
Sarah is an Australian-born girl wielding dual citizenships and a +5 charisma (her dexterity roll was shockingly low). Reads books, hearts Batgirl, plays board games, and levels up characters.
It’s all of those things and more (or does that make it less?).
Is there any colour to the new logo? Why is it monochromatic? Maybe the lack of colour is an attempt to make it serious and edgy.
I also notice that the parent company, Warner Brothers, also has a black, white and grey logo (or sometimes just grey with white negative space). Coincidence?
Cheers
They chose the standard monochromatic to represent it initial so that they could chose any color they wanted down the road.
Please don’t take that as justifying the new logo. It’s…not good.
I really hope DC doesn’t follow through with making this their new company logo. Like the old saying, if it ain’t broke, don;t fix it. While I do think that companies need to rebrand every so often to stay fresh, DC seems to be taking a step in the wrong direction.
I’m with Michael on this one – it is probably to allow for future colour transitions. But I don’t think it would even look good in a different colour!
It seems as if they are trying to engage with the product, but not with the content. Anyone can sell a book. But who could sell a SUPERMAN COMIC that suspends disbelief for those few, precious pages?
I don’t think we’re disagreeing here. They may very well add colour later, but why would they release a draft version of their logo? If they replicated it in each of the five or six colours (depending on the content) then it would at least have more relevance.
It’s a bad logo and the mono form presented here makes it look boring as well. The concept behind it and the execution are flawed.
cheers
That looks terrible in any color. DC is really on a role, this couldn’t help any. It looks like a generic logo for a printing company or perhaps one that produces aluminum.
Yeah, this logo is way too dull for a comic book company, and I’m not even talking about the color scheme (or lack thereof). I’d expect something like this from a law firm, but not from a comic publisher!
Not a fan of the new logo. Not a fan at all.
The new logo sucks. I’ve not seen much positive reaction on it. Bury it in the same hole they put those E.T. Atari games in and move on.
DC, seriously, you’ve already destroyed your legacy with a pretty pointless reboot and now you want to complete your destruction with the worst product change since Clear Pepsi…
Word of advice: just drop the whole thing and bring the Bullet back!
The DC logo should just be Batman. He is on and in everything. When I was a kid watching Cartoons, at the end Spider-Man would crawl on the Marvel Productions logo. Why not keep it real? Also I miss Crystal Clear Pepsi.
I suspect (or is it hope?) that DC leaked this logo in order to gauge the reaction of the fans.
I’m not sure that I hate it, I feel pretty “meh” about the whole thing, but then I’ve never had much of an emotional investment in DC – the only DCnU ongoing I read is Action Comics.
Sometimes it really is best to trust in the judgement of fans, and this would be one of those times. That said, considering that DC just made Liefeld the writer on THREE new titles (one as artist) it would seem that they interpret negative reactions by fans as a very good thing.
All they need to do now is make Greg Land the artist on Batman and give Action Comics to Jeph Loeb and they’ll have completed the Triumvirate of Suck.
Holy Cheese, Batman! Is this for real? IMHO it looks like it was created in a high school graphic design class, not a recognized media giant. Did they actually look at this and say, yeah, this ROCKS! If so, could they please share what they were smoking at the time? To think they actually paid someone to design this dreck! It boggles the mind!
Yeah, I am sorry to say I don’t like it either.
It doesn’t make sense to me
Looks to be live now, new 52, now this. Hmmm…..