Rebranding the House of God
Designing a identity for any project is a difficult undertaking. The design must be simple, yet eye catching. It must instantly communicate its meaning without seeming simplistic or childish. Most importantly, the symbol must succinctly capture the spirit of the organization. Failing to complete any one of these goals leaves the branding weak and ineffective.
When trying to find a brand for this website, for instance, I worked to balance these goals. The "W" logo, in my opinion, uses its simple lines and strict symmetry to catch the eye. It still retains the shape of the letterform while being easily recognizable as a unique symbol. Despite a basic appearance, a lot of thought went into its design. And when it comes right down to it, the amount of thought required for a personal logo is trivial compared to one that would represent hundred of people and seen by thousands more.
That is the problem which I was given. I was tasked with developing a new identity for Cokesbury United Methodist Church. The old one consisted of the denomination's cross and flame logo to the left of the church's name in the somewhat overused "Papyrus" font. For the redesign, I tried to follow the same principles I used on my personal logo: a simple, yet distinctive line drawing. The design, which I presented to the pastor and associate pastor, uses the church's stained glass windows as an inspiration. A series of criss-crossing lines compose the body of the image. From a graphic and illustrative standpoint, it is simple. However, on a more symbolic plane, the uses of a window are limitless.
I know that this discussion seems premature, as I do not yet have the ability to display the new logo and word-mark on this site. Once I obtain that permission though, this thought will be a couple of steps closer to completion. It is my hope that the rebranding, so to speak, will be more publicly unveiled in the coming weeks.
Update (May 14, 2009): Thanks to the expert legal advice from commenters, I have decided to bite the bullet and post both the old and new identities.
Comments
Dianna Turman wrote:
Joshua Kelly wrote:
"as I do not yet have the ability to display the new logo and word-mark on this site"
I assume that refers to the fact that you can not display images on your website? or what, cause if you are designing it, you can display it on a personal website unless that right is explicitly restricted in a signed contract. ;p just a little legal tip.
Anyway, I also want to see it...so link link
William Flake wrote:
Enjoy critiquing my work.
B.L. Kidman wrote:
I was also a little confused. But I get it now. :-) I like the new logo. You did a good job.
Joshua Kelly wrote:
(Flake, as a warning, this critic is not directed solely at you. It is addressed to the newly emerging "non-denominational" churches which are "redefining" Christianity. (Though they probably use the word revolutionizing, but recreating is a more accurate term.) I think that the logo looks nice, but as a religions studies major, a devout follower of God, and a future preacher, the following is my stance on the new logos of churches which don't include a cross. Sorry, but I think that I make good points.)
However, my criticism of your logo would have to be in the fact that there is no cross in it anywhere.
Call me old school like that, but the Church should not stray from its own message. Almost all that Paul preached about had to do with the cross. The Cross is in fact the whole story of the Church; it IS the Church's message. And not in a time when unity is needed more than ever, more and more "churches" are straying from the cross, branding themselves with their own logos, their own messages - their own salvation.
I know that a logo is just a way to let the world know what you stand for, and that you shouldn't judge a book by its cover; but I also think that in a world where "appearance is everything" the church should be aware of that, and removing the one symbol that has represented our faith for the last 2000 years sends the wrong message to the world. God is unchanging and ever constant with His message and love - so why is it that His followers are trying to change His image?
William Flake wrote:
Reducing the prominence of the cross in the church's branding will not diminish its role in the church. For instance, on our newsletter, the cross-and-flame logo is still featured prominently on the front cover. In the church's buildings, crosses are displayed more often than this new logo ever will. In addition, thanks to years of fundamentalists and other radical-ish groups, the cross in popular culture has taken on a very negative meaning, and, in her case, served to drive her away from God for many years.
Anyhoo, I completely understand your argument, but I do disagree with you to some extent. At least in my mind, the new logo represents the people of Cokesbury UMC, not God or the Church. Also, while the message of God's love is constant, the means of reaching out to the people in the world have always and must change.
David Flake wrote:
Dianna Flake wrote:
I spend a lot of time looking at websites/newsletters/bulletins from all over the country and from many denominations and non-denominations. In almost all cases where a church is growing, there is a very distinct logo. In the case of growing Methodist churches, the cross and flame usually do not appear in the logo but is prominently featured throughout so that there is no way you wouldn't know this is a Methodist church. And after spending several years trying to develop a logo for my previous church, I gotta tell you- trying to incorporate the cross and flame into a logo is almost impossible. The cross and flame was meant to stand alone, and it doesn't play nicely with others. On the other hand, those churches who just use the cross and flame, my first reaction was that they didn't have enough imagination to do anything themselves. And one final point, most people today are not denomination-loyal, so the cross and flame is not the "selling point" it once was.
Dianna Flake wrote:
A couple of books I would highly recommend:
The Great Emergence by Phyllis Tickle
The Hidden Power of Electronic Media by Shane Hipps
Read them in that order.
The church is emerging. There is no other option.