New typeface commissioned for use in updated logo

The University has purchased 2,000 licenses for the new typeface and has made it available free of charge to members of the campus community for design purposes through the recently launched website for the new graphic identity, princeton.edu/identity. Members of the public can also use the font but must purchase it from an outside company, according to the site.

“We decided to update Monticello and commissioned Princeton Monticello because the typeface has historic ties to both the University and America,” Communications Director Lauren Robinson-Brown ’85 said. “The new signature is a distinctive mark, rooted in typographic tradition, yet offering contemporary flavor.”

The original Monticello font dates back to America’s first successful type foundry, which was established by Archibald Binny and James Ronaldson in Philadelphia in 1796. Since then, it has undergone numerous revisions. In 1949, the Mergenthaler Linotype Company designed the fourth version of the typeface to provide a historically appropriate style for the publication of “The Papers of Thomas Jefferson” by PUP. It was during this revision that the font was named for Jefferson’s Virginia mansion.

Charles Creesy, the director of publishing technologies at PUP, has done extensive research on the history of the Monticello font, which he calls one of the “most enduring American types ever designed” in his article “Monticello: The History of a Typeface.”

An evolving appearance

The typeface is extensively employed in the University’s new graphic identity, which was launched last fall. The new graphic features a redesigned shield and the University’s name written in the Princeton Monticello script.

New York firm Pentagram Design, in consultation with a University steering committee, created the new image. The new identity replaces one designed by Drenttel Doyle Partners Inc., that was adopted by the University in 1994.

“The new identity is different from the old in that the old separated the orange and black, used one-line and merged ‘Princeton University’ together in two separate fonts that represented the marriage of tradition and innovation,” Robinson-Brown said. “While the old identity was very forward thinking for its time, we believe the new identity accomplishes the same goals, yet in a bolder, more inspiring manner.”

Support nonprofit student journalism. Donate to the ‘Prince’. Donate now »

Planning for the new identity began in 2004, and the three-year process incorporated input from students, faculty, staff and alumni focus groups, Robinson-Brown said. She added that senior administrators at Princeton became interested in developing a new University identity after the successful launch of a new Athletics Department logo in 2004.

Student reactions to the new design

Student input played a role in the planning process for the new image, but student reactions to the new image were mixed. Student Design Agency manager Andy Chen ’09 participated in an early planning meeting with Michael Bierut, a Pentagram partner. Chen said that the creativity of the graphic designers involved was limited by constraints imposed by the University.

“The University largely wanted to keep the way it is perceived by the outside world the same, so any drastic departure from a conservative image would not have been acceptable,” Chen said. “In my opinion, the redesign could have been more daring ... in a way that represents Princeton as a forward-looking institution with greater universal appeal.”

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Chen said the new image was intended to correct the faults of the old identity, which he called “clunky, inelegant and outdated,” because of its combination of two fonts — Baskerville and Univers. The success of the new design in correcting these problems is “limited,” Chen said, adding that, in his opinion, the Princeton Monticello font is “unique” but the redesigned shield is too wide and “heavy.”

Willem Boning ’08, however, criticized the Princeton Monticello font as looking “stiff, stuffy and a little emaciated.” The old logo and fonts had a “more progressive” appearance than the new one, Boning said.

“Princeton still has a reputation for being a stuck-up, exclusive old boys’ club, and the new logo doesn’t do anything to counter that misconception,” Boning said.

The University community may, however, grow more accustomed to the new logo over time.

“It’s not a design that impresses at first glance, but the more I use it, the more I understand its flexibility and usefulness,” Chen said.

Though the font is theoretically available to every member of the campus community, high demand may potentially result in a shortage if all of the University’s licenses are distributed.

“We believe that the initial 2,000 licenses are more than ample to cover design needs on campus,” Robinson-Brown said. “We expect that Princeton Monticello primarily will be used for official print and web publications. However, we purchased many extra licenses so that students and others who wish to show their pride in Princeton by using the new font may also do so.” She added that if there is a substantial demand for more licenses, the University will be able to purchase more.