By: Elia Pekica Pagon
Anyone who visited London – and even those who never went there – will agree that one of the major visual marks of London as a brand is the logo of the London Underground (Tube). This symbol of London is one of the most recognizable symbols in the world, and its current form was designed by designer Edward Johnston back in 1919. It’s no coincidence that the sans-serif font Johnston had created for printing the names of stations today carries his name. It is good to know that the British appreciate their designers, whose artistry has marked their surroundings, showing thus that they stick to certain standards that contribute to the overall image of their country and their cities, culture and history in general. Recognition is not easy to achieve. Recognition is built throughout years, decades and even centuries. Recognition is something that is gradually built and nurtured. Visual identity of London Underground did not become the most recognizable sign of London and one of the most recognizable symbols in the world in general overnight. Imitating or copying this logo certainly cannot go unnoticed, and not many people would opt for such step.
That’s exactly why I was surprised by the visual identity of the show dedicated to cultural topics called Kulturni kolodvor on Croatian TV station HTV, because it was largely created following the visual identity of the London Underground. Were the creators of the visual identity of the mentioned show trying to pay a compliment to one of the world’s most famous logos? Is their artistic solution supposed to be a reference to the name of the show (Kulturni kolodvor – Cultural Station), playing with the London Underground logo as the best known in that category (and not only in that category), which would really be pretentious? Or did they simply want to pay tribute to London and its culture in general? Answer to these we do not know.
However, it is good to know that such examples of imitations of well-known logos exist and that their creators will always find a way to justify their creations, just as Konzum justified the smile in their recent campaign See You, which irresistibly resembles the Amazon logo, by citing the frequent use of smiley faces in the whole world. With that smile, they allegedly only wanted to emphasize that Konzum greets its customers every day with a smile.
Any logo has the right to draw its smile in its own way, just as every person has the right to their own smile. That much is true. No brand has a monopoly on a smile. It would be as if someone had the right to smile, and others don’t. We also all have our cities, our culture, our TV shows and our stations. Still, let every station, every city, every culture and every brand have its own unique, recognizable smile. Imitation is sometimes justified, even desirable, and sometimes it’s not. Everyone will have their own opinion about it, and it is up to every one of us to decide when it’s desirable and when not. It is also up to every one of us to judge when something is an imitation and homage, and when something is pure copying of someone else’s accomplishment.
