I really would love to hear what everyone thinks about the new Air India identity. Are there others too, who, like me, think it's a colossal waste of public money, a wasted opportunity, and above all, a national disgrace? Or does it have levels of merit that I just don't get?
I mean, should this not have been a showcase of the best of Indian design? Was this not that once-in-decades opportunity to pull out all stops and wow the world with what we can do? Should this not have been a launch that made us all ridiculously proud? Is THIS it?!!! And are we just going to shrug and move on as usual?
As much the design itself, what bothers me is that a project of such iconic scale, should pass almost completely uncommented... by people in general, by the media, even by the 43 odd people (pun not intended) who make up this country’s design community.
After all don’t we pretend to be experts on these things - brand strategy, brand identity, typography, colours…? Should we not at least make a few noises that all is not well (if all is not, that is)?
I’m really curious about the typography on the redesigned AI. Why did they chose to leave the 1950s airline-style lettering unchanged when virtually every other airline that has gone through a revamp in recent years has moved away from that sort of italicized Extra Black sans serif, and often replaced it with exquisite letter-forms, that in the best examples, evoke national styles? Was it a deliberate choice driven by a clear strategic imperative? Or was the design-firm just not sure enough of their ability to come up with something better that they chose ‘minimum intervention’? Or still worse, were they just not required to push the bar?
What is the new Air India mark anyway? Is it the Centaur (who now has to balance himself on two legs)? Is it the forked serpent-tongue device with a wheel tattooed on it? Is it just that klunky logotype? Or is it the forever kowtowing Maharaja whose days of glory are so obviously behind him, and seems to live on as a sad caricature of what he once was? What really connects all these things? (Or is that indeed the concept: a sort of oriental bazaar; a brilliant strategic coup to sell ‘exotic India’ to western travellers?)
Agreed, even with the best intent, this sort of project could run into rough weather. Certainly there must be older advisers in the ministry who must have reminded Mr. Praful Patel how bad a nightmare the whole thing turned out to be the last time AI sought to don new clothes in the early 90s. A mishmash of tired old elements must have seemed a safer bet compared to being embarrassed in parliament.
But wasn’t this meant to be AI’s last big push? With billions in tax money, hundreds of jobs and national prestige at stake, didn’t it merit a clear, bold and decisive approach instead of this confused one? Wouldn’t an exciting new visual personality have signaled the real changes that AI claims to have made on the ground… brand new fleet, more responsive reservation system, better schedules and a dozen other things that could interest the international traveller to give AI a try?
What of the communication; shouldn't the ads have articulated all this with some originality and style? Flipping through back issues of, say the Reader's Digest, from the 50s or 60s, one runs into these small B/w AI ads that, after all these years, still sparkle by their originality, style and wit. The Maharaja in those days (when he still had his privy purse) was a carefree and genial soul. Suave, intelligent, generous and charming, he had the personality of the perfect companion on a long trip. If their strategy was to retain the old even while bringing it all up-to-date, then why not restore the Maharaja to his previous glory? Agencies would have literally slit each other's throat to get hold of that brief!
Yes, of course, we all know of the mysterious ways in which government projects are run in our country. But must we necessarily leave it at that and mourn our misfortune about not being born in England? Can’t we instead get more people to talk about these things, at least online? Ask friends what they think, draw in a few more ‘experts’? Could be interesting to kick-start a dialogue and see where it goes. After all wasn't that what this space was meant to be?
9 comments:
I am completely in sync with your views on the final face of the Air India identity. And yes I do feel that its an opportunity lost.
However, the new identity seems to be a net result of a rather dubious process leaving the design agency little scope for any kind design innovation. Apparently, the brief was to merge the existing Indian Airlines (now Indian) identity with the Air India identity. Hence the wheel was a given, and so was the red colour. My heartfelt sympathies for DMA branding for being so boxed in by the client with a demand to think out of the box!
By the way, the wheel is the Konark wheel and the shape is supposed to be a swan!
DMA, director Sanjeev Malhotra, admitted being influenced by the Landor debacle, but said their main concern was to stay evolutionary not revolutionary. "Really top companies rarely change their logos, and even when they do its usually only because of merger or acquisition," he said. "All we have done is to give the Centaur a more modern look." And in doing so, they are best reflecting the airlines identity as part of a confident new India. "Out roots are traditional and haven't changed, but we've just become a bit more modern and dynamic," he said. DMA decided to make ‘A Tradition of Warmth’ as the positioning statement of Air India.
In the New design, I liked the bringing in of the Konark wheel, as it is one of India’s most well known motif. An attempt to make the airline a little more Indian.
But I completely agree to Air India missing out on this great opportunity, especially noting that the airline desperately needed an image change, especially to represent the ‘New India’ as DMA put it. Any marriage brings with it a fair share of challenges. So does the marriage of Air India with Indian Airlines. It seems, where the thoughts and ideas were promising, the final output remained something less desired. I wonder if it was just a lack of communication between the airline administration and the designers?
Maybe subconsciously the need to retain the old font was intentional. A completely drastic different look might not have kept with the sensibilities, Indians over the years have attached to this Air Service. The maharaja for me, from the time I was a toddler, was a funny man who could make you fly and this man connected to Air India will remain an imprint. It is an image that has lasted with most of us, and personally I would have liked it if they managed to bring him back with a touch of contemporary elegance.
Advertising and Design can only communicate the advantages of a new identity. In any new public design, the prime effort should be to initiate dialogue. And then let word-of-mouth do its job. Firstly, one has to overcome a backlog of bad buzz. Air India was poised perilously on the threshold of what could have been its most spectacular turnaround. And sometimes the fifth chance, just could be the last.
I again wonder, did they feel the need to build a ‘whole new brand’? If not, and a merger is all they were looking at then keeping with the old font and symbols makes sense. Then why the hype? It was probably seen as important if not necessary to merge the logos of the two airlines and come up with some hybrid alternate. If you cant make the impact of change, when you’re trying to bring the old to the new, then does it just leave you in the throws of an undesired failure?? Satiating a brief by taking two prominent elements twisted together to form nothing more than what they were individually.
In the end it’s a done deal, which we will learn to live with. Spectacular promises than ended in a whimper.
www.bloggerbloggingblog.blogspot.com
This raises an interesting question: "What would YOU do if you had a client asking for a hugely significant branding job but armed with a very tight and unimaginative brief if not the design solution itself?"
My top-of-the-head answer: (1) Present multiple options that boggle the client's decision making; (2) Stealthily test your designs with sample profiles that your client would be forced to heed; (3) Switch off your 'Swiss Design' thinking and switch on to popular culture, even Bolloywood.
The basic objective of any design is to grab attention and a successful design goes beyond that to holding it and later resulting into retention.
the design here does NOTHING really…
I mean lets look at it from a commoner’s perspective – it’s a huge red patch, which doesn’t convey much, when I look closely I see this charka which is ok cos I relate it to the Ashok Charka (cliché but granted for the Indian people as they know the significance – but I feel the internationally it will be perceived as the sun more than anything else ) @ Poornima it really resembles the charka more than the konark wheel (although in that case I don’t understand the particular use of colour) also the just wheel itself is doesn’t encompass the entire symbolism of the chariot.
The shape of the swan as she says is missed completely as it circles around the tail wing so it appears more like a cut rather than a design form. Its such a large beautiful surface – why restrict the design to just the tail fin bit…. Maybe it was a stingy client with unbelievable monetary issues… I choose not to give in to that perspective.. cos ultimately this is the Indian face to be represented internationally it is a huge deal and opportunity it Shouldn’t be wasted like that !!!! Aahhh well…
About the typography I wouldn’t comment much cos it could be the stingy client with a strong argument that the font is very strongly related to the brand and doesn’t require any change (not that I agree but I am giving a benefit of doubt to the designer – just being nice)
Overall I think the design completely misses the point, it should have been strong and bold with a core message communicated in a visual form – Unfortunately It Dose Nothing.
Thanks Poornima, hadn't known about the swan. I agree with you; it couldn't have been fun being in DMA's shoes - must have been a cases of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't'.
Pratima, given Air India's rather unfortunate record over recent decades, a sort of 'stealth launch' might indeed have made more sense. If the changes at AI are indeed more than cosmetic, then word of mouth just may have done the job.
Fully agree with you that public design should be subject to debate - exactly what this forum seeks to initiate in a small way! When we start responding in increasingly articulate ways, hopefully the 26th attempt by AI, and countless other projects, might be aproached slightly dfferently. Your participation is important!
It's very good to have you on the forum Arvind!
You're right. As a designer when you're critiquing the work of another designer you are judging it, to a large extent, through an idealized prism of your own likely response to that brief.
I'm not sure of your three possible routes though.
1. When presenting multiple options there is this almost immutable law of nature that the client will, unerringly, go for the one option you least desire to get chosen. And even worse, ask you to marry it with elements from the next three least preferred ones!
2. Research data seldom seems to be used as a sort of objective reference to user-preferences. In practise clients, (and design firms for that matter) use research to go ahead with whatever direction they want to take anyway.
3. I wonder if any stylistic preference or non-preference would have really made a difference here. While I can't readily think of any example of very good design inspired by popular culture in India, there are a number of cases where that sort of effort went horribly wrong. Air India Express was a particularly crude outcome.
Which brings us back to your original question, what would I have done if I were given this brief?
The answer is that I wouldn't approach it very much differently from any other project.
I'd just do go through all the steps that I normally take, but be much more thorough given the scale and prestige. From understanding context, evolving strong conceptual frameworks and executing beautifully, I'd just work a lot harder.
An important part of such a project, I guess, would also be to understand the real imperatives of the decision makers and factor that in to the presentation.
Very often, as designers we are curiously naive in expecting clients to choose design just on its merits. That could be particularly unfortunate in a case like this where there multiple decision-influencers who are nevertheless not direct stake holders in the business, and yet have complicated agendas and expectations of their own.
Ultimately, till such time when people care enough to demand that these decisions are taken as part of a more transperant process, the likelihood of good design being commissioned by government clients is largely a matter of chance.
Neha, good to have your comments.
Would be interesting to know your response to Arvind's test. How would you have approached this project?
By the way, are you sure you don't mean Chakra when you say Charka ( which of course has its own of Chakras:) ?
hey Arun
now that the point is, how would I approach the project, i would completely agree with what u have mentioned abt following the right design process and working really hard for it.
but there is just one factor i would like to concentrate on more than anything else- ‘the core message that needs to be communicated’ considering the target audience.
The complexity of the project is the highly varied target audience, hence the strategy to derive the right message relevant to both the national and the international users, would be the most important part of the project.
Form / visual appeal would just follow and fall in place.
Post a Comment