Critical Questions 02-02

For Readings: Brand Strategy, Brand Identity Ideals, Blank Look

In Blank Look, the featureless faces of the people in the NatWest bank commercial are said to be template people. “Generic men and women rather than distinct individuals.” They lack passion and appear as dummies. Is this method of leaving the characters blank so that the viewer may place themselves in that space effective? Are people really able to envision themselves carrying out the same actions as those in the commercial? The link between the graphic style here and the airoplane saftety instructions suggests that these are routine, sensible and necessary actions. If this connection is made will people be more likely to want to do it? Can a similarity be made with clothes store mannequins? They are usually blank so that we may envision ourselves wearing the clothes. If that works, will this work?
In the Brand Identity Ideals section of Designing Brand Identity, it talks of meaning and how “symbols engage intelligence, imagination, emotion, in a way that no other learning does.” Is this really true? Sure I can make some connections when I look at symbols; I can see the reference to the stars and stripes in Obama’s O, and I get the connection of Apple’s apple with education. But there are plenty that I don’t understand and that I’m sure most ordinary consumers don’t get either. I didn’t understand that Mercedes-Benz had a logo that symbolized domination of land sea and air, and I had no idea that the Nike swoosh represented a wing. How are symbols meant to engage intelligence and emotion when we don’t understand what they really mean?