well, that's just so special. right on the tail of the TSC Is Less Than Direct logo, and the problematic Missing M mantra of Quiznos, comes the 'refreshing' logo of Walmart (note, it's now one word; we're taking the human element out, he is dead after all...).
people. srsly. learn your symbols.
just like ">" can be read as "less than," the "*," or asterisk, often denotes fine print. and i'm sure we all know the incredible amount of fine print that Wal-Mart (oh, i'm sorry, Walmart) can accrue. just as perhaps the "less than direct" was inadvertent honesty, so possibly is the asterisk. i can't think of a better symbol to embody all the cover-ups and discontinuity of the worldwide empire.
WALMART*
* unlivable wages
* shitty benefits packages
* destruction of open space
* non-environmental interests
* monopolistic regime
* culture death
* lack of sustainability
* faux-interest in change
...i could go on. but i'll let you. so, in short, i think the new facelift is entirely appropriate. it symbolizes everything Wal-Mart has become: a faceless, humanless entity only interested in giving the illusion of change while hiding as much fine print as possible. yeah, sounds about right, logo designers.
7 comments:
BRAVO!!!! Amen to that, sista.
Wow - I saw this yesterday, but didn't really think much of it. I just thought it looked like it was done by some intern with a PC version of Illustrator. But great observation...
thanks. i probably wouldn't have thought about it as hard if i hadn't been analyzing logo symbols already. it probably (in reality) could have been done better without the asterisk. it also reminds me of the apple os "loading" symbol. not sure what that communicates...
is that thing suppose to be a sun or a starburst? I don't get WHY they added it? What happened to that smiley face thing that was slashing prices all the time? at least it was recognizable.
> is greater than but the point is well taken
As usual, Kurt said it
first and best.
@ross - yeah, i touched on that in my previous post. i messed up. not so good at math... do you know before i wrote that post, i reread my phrase at least 80 times because i knew i was likely to get it wrong? just when i thought i was safe... ;)
@anonymous - interesting... never read that before. or really thought of it like that. yet apropos.
Post a Comment