The evolving Belk logo
Belk logos from 1967 (left), 2007 (center) and 2010 (right)
The original 1967 Lippincott & Margulies-designed Belk & Leggett logos were an exceptional effort. They were distinctive, elegant, and went totally against the typical corporate logo trends of the times. The Belk font was custom designed and was rendered beautifully across multiple media. It signaled a revolution in the way Belk thought about its stores and image and served the company very well. It symbolized a company that was willing to dump its stodgy image and compete with the best in retail.
The Belk logo was especially handsome back in the Seventies when they still filled in the parts with various colors and had the bags with the overprint in all the shades. Even the “All For You” period wasn’t especially bad design-wise.
The 2007 logo does nothing for me, as I think it was change for the sake of change, and it symbolized a really boring, promotional period in the company's history that pretty much killed its image in former Parisian/McRae's markets.
When I placed the logos side by side, the 2010 logo makes a little more sense. The wordmark is derivative, as if the flower, but it's an evolution in style and image for a company that is willing to dump its stodgy image and again compete with the best in retail. I can even see a little of the old 1967 logo here and there on the new one.
Still, to me it doesn’t say “Belk.” The logo feels kind of ’70s. The flower is interesting, and the tagline is decent, but the logotype is a ripoff of Bloomingdale’s with a side of Macy’s with the flower positioning. It’s too “me too.” One of the posters to my Facebook page likened the flower to a logo on a feminine hygiene product.
The worst part, I think, is that this is the end of Hudson Belk and Matthews Belk, the last two links to the old partner names. That’s the part that irks me the most, because their interpretations of the Belk logo were especially beautiful.
The evolving Belk logo
Belk logos from 1967 (left), 2007 (center) and 2010 (right)
The original 1967 Lippincott & Margulies-designed Belk & Leggett logos were an exceptional effort. They were distinctive, elegant, and went totally against the typical corporate logo trends of the times. The Belk font was custom designed and was rendered beautifully across multiple media. It signaled a revolution in the way Belk thought about its stores and image and served the company very well. It symbolized a company that was willing to dump its stodgy image and compete with the best in retail.
The Belk logo was especially handsome back in the Seventies when they still filled in the parts with various colors and had the bags with the overprint in all the shades. Even the “All For You” period wasn’t especially bad design-wise.
The 2007 logo does nothing for me, as I think it was change for the sake of change, and it symbolized a really boring, promotional period in the company's history that pretty much killed its image in former Parisian/McRae's markets.
When I placed the logos side by side, the 2010 logo makes a little more sense. The wordmark is derivative, as if the flower, but it's an evolution in style and image for a company that is willing to dump its stodgy image and again compete with the best in retail. I can even see a little of the old 1967 logo here and there on the new one.
Still, to me it doesn’t say “Belk.” The logo feels kind of ’70s. The flower is interesting, and the tagline is decent, but the logotype is a ripoff of Bloomingdale’s with a side of Macy’s with the flower positioning. It’s too “me too.” One of the posters to my Facebook page likened the flower to a logo on a feminine hygiene product.
The worst part, I think, is that this is the end of Hudson Belk and Matthews Belk, the last two links to the old partner names. That’s the part that irks me the most, because their interpretations of the Belk logo were especially beautiful.