Neverminding the Gap

Gap has revealed its new logo last week with quite a bit of criticism by graphic designers and laymen alike. I’ve read a few blogs about the new logo and do not agree with some of the harsh and often quite spiteful comments about the logo, the apparel company itself, and the logo designers (I have tried to find out who created the new logo, but it seems nobody want to take credit for it.) And I really don’t think that this is a ploy by Gap itself to have designers chime in with better and free ideas for the company to use. This is one idea currently floating around the twittersphere. I have not reached that point of cynicism yet. I don’t believe any retailer would take a chance on a ploy like this working, knowing how much money it would cost to change the packaging, advertising, and signage for each store. The company currently has about 3,076 stores worldwide and a change like this has incredible consequences. I have thought about the logo for the past week and have gone back an forth with my opinion about it and asked myself some questions to help me decide. Here is the breakdown:

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

IF IT WAS A NEW BRAND, WOULD THE NEW LOGO BE CONSIDERED TERRIBLE?
No. Not really. Comparing it to retailers such and American Apparel, Basic Basic, or Express you notice it is quite similar. If Gap was introduced as a new brand is would have not been noticed and this is a problem. It would have not gotten any of the harsh criticism as well, but the generic look and typeface would not have made it in the pages of Communication Arts or the latest edition of Graphis Logos. It does represent what the brand is though. The clothing of Gap has always played to the masses. There is a great deal of staples of clothing in the stores, but nothing that gives it any real personality.

IS THE OLD LOGO OUTDATED?
Somewhat. The very tall, slim, and very anemic looking typeface is a reminder of the 1980’s. It typifies and era in which there was a sense romanticism to the Deco period but pushing itself to be modern. Try to see the logo as sign above the entrance of an Art Deco hotel in Miami Vice and you get where I’m going at with this. The typeface would only be chosen in the time period it was created. If you tried to design a logo with a typeface with that much difference between the thick and thins, it would be considered too hard to read from a distance and not suitable for web purposes.

IS THE NEW LOGO A GOOD EVOLUTION OF THE BLUE BOX?
Absolutely not. The gradient has no meaning and is not even distinctive (much like the clothing.) It does not relate to the type and neither does the gradient. This could have been explore and executed much better and I don’t think that much thought was put into this aspect.

DOES THE OLD LOGO OWN THE BLUE BOX?
Absolutely. Put any three letters in a blue box no matter how big or small, it will always be compared to Gap. In fact, I have tried to this with other projects and placed type within squares of different colors and it has always been compared to the Gap logo. The old logo has been around long enough to own that space. There is one clothing company that has done it successfully enough to distinguish itself from Gap and it is Uniqlo. The red box and typeface is done well enough to separate itself from the competing retailer. When Uniqlo first came to New York, I often heard of it referred to as “the Japanese Gap”.

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

“The Gap” was first launched in 1969 by Don and Doris Fisher. Somewhere along the line, much like Facebook, they lost the “the” of their name. “The Gap” referred to the generational gap of the time. It seemed appropriate that the store’s name and style should reflect their audience’s tastes and sensibilities. The chain store expanded during the recession of the early nineties mainly due to the business causal clothing policies companies were adopting and their price point were suited for the time. (In 1995 even IBM loosened the company dress code to business casual, no longer requiring employees to wear ties for men or skirts and dresses for women)

Nowadays, “the gap” reflects the narrowing gap between Old Navy and Banana Republic. When Banana Republic was acquired, they developed their own sense of business casual, it was known as “the grown-up Gap” at one point. Higher style with a higher price tag. As the business casual market grew, it took part of the Gap’s market from the top down. Prices at Banana Republic were reduced to reflect the economy. When Old Navy was introduced in 1994, It had many of the staples that Gap had – t-shirts, jeans, polos, underwear, etc. It took part of Gap’s market from the bottom up. To me, it was the beginning of the loss of Gap’s identity. Old Navy took care of the lower-end basics and Banana Republic took care of the higher-end business casual. Leaving Gap less room to create a style and identity of it’s own. I find it ironic that Gap is being squeezed out of a space that it once defined. It’s main problem is that it has only ever evolved to reflect trends and not create a voice and style of its own. While Gap’s sister retailers have developed their style and their market, Gap’s style has remained stagnant. There are more and more places to buy khakis, jeans, t-shirts and Gap no longer corners the market in this.

So, a new logo does not really make much sense since there is no change in direction of Gap’s current style. The new logo has taken much criticism for being too “generic” looking, critics have been comparing it to a software company. In that frame of mind the new logo seems appropriate. When have you shopped at Gap lately? When was last time you saw a “must have” in the Gap window? When has anyone complimented you on something you bought at Gap? This is where the new logo really fails. Not in execution, but in concept. New logos usually signify a change in direction, a new start, or a change in management. And for clothing retailers, it should mean a change in style. What’s the use of a new logo on a shopping bag when you have the same style of clothing in it?

 

In comparison with its sister brands, the new Gap logo is the more generic of the five. It has the added problem of being the neglected middle child of the bricks and mortar stores. Banana Republic being Jan and Old Navy being Cindy.

 

 

Advertisement