Different countries, different cultures. And different… brands: cities and territories are more and more involved in making their own graphic logos, while Institutions are more and more aware of the potentialities linked to the creation of a visual identity.

If the city branding is a widespread reality, the commitment and the search for effective techniques is still open and alive. In order to better understand how a visual symbol can represent a city, till showing its inner “soul”, we had a talk with Milton Glaser, one of the greatest designers of all times, creator of the legendary brand "I Love NY", pioneering and successful example of city branding that made school in the area.

With the famous NY logo, you succeeded in translating in simple, impactful signs the complex identity of a city of millions of people and a thousand different facets. How is it difficult, in general, to capture the most representative dimension or character of a complex urban identity to be developed in an effective design? Where do you start from when it comes to understand “the soul of a city”?

Ever since I did the ‘I Love NY’ logo in 1977, journalists have been asking me about the process of creating it. I’ve become totally exhausted from my own ongoing efforts to explain it. I’ll try once again with the knowledge that any explanation might be redundant. Some things about the project are not immediately obvious. 

At its core, of course, is the requirement to be memorable — all identity issues cluster around this objective – but the ‘I Love NY’ logo has other less obvious attributes. First, it transforms language by making the noun (love) become a verb (the heart). This is peculiar, perhaps even perverse, to the extent that now people frequently say, “I heart New York” as their translation of the symbolism. The other aspect that makes it distinctive is the requirement for unravelling a puzzle. Here, the letter “I” is a complete word, the heart is a symbol for emotion, and “NY” are the initials of a place. With all of those shifts the identity still is understandable by anyone almost immediately. It also is not a device to persuade an audience to buy something in response. It is actually a call for the audience to respond to a deeply held feeling. As such, unlike most advertising, it contains a sense of  authenticity that is usually unavailable to most advertising efforts.

Some of the most effective city brands are made by abstract, universal and conceptual symbols, which do not directly identify the city itself in its most evident or obvious features. How can a universal symbol like a heart become so strongly linked to a specific territory and be immediately understood by a global audience?

An attribute of Identity that is significant but rarely attained is that the mark itself should be capable of creating affection. Why people have preferences and like certain things more than others is a great puzzle. In order to understand communication, one must deal with the question of likability and preference. When someone says, “I like red better than blue” what in the world can that mean? Certain abstract forms seem to create preferences. In regard to ‘I love NY,’ I’ve begun to believe that the contrast between the rigidity of the letterforms, and the eroticism of the red heart has something to do with people’s acceptance of it. How the brain functions in regard to this issue is beyond me but certainly worthy of scrutiny. 

What is interesting is to what degree the construction of ‘I heart something’ has become adapted by thousands of institutions and manufacturers to promote their own objectives. It seems the world was waiting for a way to say “I love… something” when the logo first appeared, but it is less believable and certainly more banal when it becomes an advertising tool unrelated to its audience. 

The full version of the interview with Milton Glaiser will be published in the next ICS Magzine.