Exactly three years ago Tripura Tourism went for its new logo. Now it should be changed.
Loaded with too much of paint works it is complex and cumbersome sans any focal message to the audience. Too much use of too many bright colours- varied shades of red, yellow and pink – has made it also a bit ‘effeminate’. While the new logo has been created defying the basics of logo designing, salt is added to eye sore by an ‘unexplained Flag’ flying high on top of the logo–over the ‘mountains’ ( Do we have mountains of that scale in Tripura ? We have hills ..but the depiction of snow clapped mountains appears misleading for the tourists). The Mountains appear to have ‘Alpine woods’ even.
That-the flag- makes it funny, too. Besides, look at the tail of the Spectacle Monkey –it has got, perhaps, world’s longest monkey tail.
First thing first, the creator of this logo seemed to have confused illustration with a logo—which is essentially a ‘symbol’ that effectively and by nature entirely represents the brand-here tourism of Tripura.
A logo is expected to be sharp, crisp, strong but at the same time easy, simple to understand and relate—and most importantly it must be stimulating. The fundamental character of a logo is to ‘symbolically’ encapsulate, articulate and emphasize the very essence of the subject- here Tourism in Tripura.
It has miserably failed in all these aforesaid basics.
Here the new logo has evidently sought to incorporate pictorial subjects that are popular in nature, ostensibly to reflect, or more precisely, to tell the audience about Tripura many things – about its hills or monkeys, temples or pineapples etc. But in the process and pattern, as it appears, the creator has followed the all familiar formulae of ‘illustration’. This is no doubt a good ‘illustration’ but the end product is at best a collage of popular subjects like pineapple, Unokoti bas relief, Matabari temple, Spectacle monkey, a small deer, a tong ghor or for that matter a tribal lady.
While a tourism logo is expected to carry a central concept reflective of the core essence of the state’s uniqueness and its specialty, depiction of too many figures is not only unsettling but also disruptive for focused attention. Actually, there is no focal point or message that will encapsulate the state’s extraordinariness to attract the tourists.
Compare the tourism logos of successful state tourisms like that of Kerala, Rajasthan, Goa or Assam. While Rajasthan or Assam used their Camels and Rhinos (with tea leaves) Kerala went to give a clear idea as to how it looks- single coconut tree or uncomplicated strokes to depict the sea. All these logos are made of sharp, simple, strong and powerfully stimulating designs with clear message. Colours were carefully chosen- mostly one or two colours.
While old tourism logo of Tripura tourism was a stony, and gloomy one bereft of any creativity, this new Tripura tourism logo seems to have spent all its ideas, perhaps, to impart too many information- and that too in a hurry. But in the process it lost an important characteristic – it missed the ‘feel’ of the land. With this logo, at the most the audience may ‘recognize’ Tripura, but will they be attracted or feel the essence of the state –effectively- is a question?
The famous black and white Panda logo of WWF may be mentioned here to understand the use of colours in logo. The WWF took Panda as their logo for a very simple reason. This animal comes in clear black and white and the WWF felt by using this animal as logo they will save huge money- as printing right from letter head to big hoardings or billboards to print media advertisements to anything they would not have to pay more for the multicolour use. The two colour – or should we say monochromatic use not only made the WWF logo extremely powerful but also turned it absolutely economical. Look at the Tripura tourism logo—too many colours not only made it a soft and slightly, what can be called, effeminate, but also highly cost ensuring matter.
Then there is a question of size—the logo has to be legible in all expected printed materials. This new logo in the form of painted Tripura will have to be always printed in big size otherwise the audience will simply miss many a subject- which are already virtually lost in the crowd—say the deer or the Tong ghor.
Even if we forget everything, the Tourism department will, as it appears, face serious difficulty in using the logo in its letter pad. The cumbersome logo will take such a space that will not be proportionate to the letter head. It will hang awkwardly at the beginning of the letter had instead to sending a clear and strong ‘message’.
One of the moot ideas of the tourism is to attract the ‘foreign tourists’ to Tripura. The design of this logo also questions the suitability for a foreign audience – While we who are from Tripura can easily understand what the monkey means, or what the temple or for that matter Unokoti bas –relief means, but for a German or a Swiss tourist do these really carry a message at the face of it ?
In fact, too many characters explicit in a pattern reduce the appeal of a particular character in the crowd. It is like a bowl of salad—where cucumber or onion or for that matter carrot does not necessarily carry their individual taste. And a bowl of salad is essentially a side dish, it is not taken as much cherished main course.
It is not known as to how the Tripura tourism department selected the logo but definitely it was not put for appreciation of the artists and professionals in the concerned fields.
It would have been a better idea to float an open competition for logo designing. Remember how the Rupees symbol was selected some years ago by the government . There are two universities – with fine arts department, one Arts and Crafts college and there are also many eminent artists in the state. Their ideas and designs could have been used.
But this new logo by all intents and purpose seems to have been created with popular and common sentiment. There is no inkling of any creativity in it except perhaps using the monkey’s tail or the nose of the lady as the outline of the Tripura map. That the creator of this logo was neither serious nor aware of the basics of an important logo is loud and clear from the ‘flag’ that was put on the top of the design. Why is this flag, what is its relation with a tourism logo or for that matter with Tripura is not explained.
As they say Devil is in details….
( Edited feature. First published in Tripura Times on Sept 27, 2018)
