Mon 17 Jul 2006
My dad recently sent me a copy of an interview he did with Larry Cornies, editor of the London Free Press about the new Ontario symbol. My dad designed the last one, which Ontario has had for over 30 years. This new symbol is quite contraversial for a couple reasons, as stated in the article.
1. Many have said it looks unfriendly, like poison ivy. I think it’s just ugly (not that I’m biased).
2. Many feel it was a waste of money, when that money could have been spent on more important government services. Let me enlighten you. When my dad did it, it cost $10,000. The new symbol? $219,000. That much money was spent on re-doing a perfectly good symbol (in my, and many others’, opinion). Why did they change it? Good question. Beats me.
To me, this is a sad reality check on some of our governments priorities.
July 19th, 2006 at 1:04 pm
You’ll probably get a kick out of this [caledoncitizen.com]and this [savethetrillium.ca].
July 19th, 2006 at 1:05 pm
Shoot. Second link should go here.
July 19th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
Thanks, Steve. I checked out both, and they just reinforce my point, and then some. I didn’t even realize the political implications behind it.
July 19th, 2006 at 11:44 pm
What I wonder about is whether all this publicity will mean free advertising for Ana’s dad, who is still a practising graphic designer.
July 20th, 2006 at 12:26 am
This from the same premier who, during the election campaign, obviously without looking at the budget beforehand, promised to freeze tuition for two years.
Then he gets in, and doesn’t want to anymore (I wonder why…). But then comes the uproar, as a major part of his voter domain came from students… so then he proceeds with the freezing of tuition, puts Ontario into debt, and then blames the Federal government for not providing enough money to Ontario.
Somehow, a move to spend $200,000 to replace a perfectly good, recognizable logo, seems par for the course…
July 20th, 2006 at 8:33 am
So does your father still get royalty cheques? :p
July 20th, 2006 at 9:56 am
Seems to me neither logo is partcularly accurate. Should the logo not also incluce the three contrasting leaves that fill the space between the flower petals?
As a non-Ontarian by birth I’ve never understood this province’s obsession with this flower or this logo. It honestly seems to take on the same cultural mythology as the maple leafs or Weber’s on the 400 North.
I think they grossly overspent on this and it probably didn’t need to be done but to be perfectly honest until this new logo nearly all of the other iterations look identical with the exception of changing the colour to green in ‘94(which is also wrong since only the leaves are green not the petals).
I bet if you added up the cost of each of the previous ‘re-designs’ adjusted it to current dollar figures what you’d have is something more expensive for a product that didn’t really change at all. This ‘new design’ is at least new.
I also have no idea what the Tories are talking about when they say it looks like the liberal logo. It looks like a flower John… a flower. A big giant red ‘L’ it is not, nor does it look like the word ‘liberal’ with lots of faces underneath.
Anyway, I’m sure I just don’t get it because I’m not from here. I still find it shocking that I have to go to a ‘beer store’ to get beer and not just the local grocery store. And besides if there is one logo in this country that should be criticised its the 2010 Vancouver IN-GUMBY-SHUK
Cheers,
P