I then went in search of examples in support of The Red Queen. I found the ammunition I needed at Tiffany's and the pre-K Montessori class that my daughter teaches.
Tiffany's and Co. picked an unusual color over a century ago that was called Robin Egg Blue. The color is now commonly called Tiffany Blue and is copyrighted by the jewelry company. It was not the obvious choice in the late 1800s, but it was the right choice. Instead of the designer being led by the Psychology of Color, he or she blazed a new trail and in doing so, changed the psychology. Tiffany Blue now stirs emotions of romance, quality and elegance.
Pink is the favorite color of two year old boy's in my daughter's pre-K class. But it is not the favorite color of the 3 and 4 year old boys. She has witnessed this phenomena over the past six years. As they grow, they learn an aversion for pink from their parents and their peers. It is not innate, it was pushed for marketing purposes by Department stores in the early 1900's. Before that time, most department stores sold pink clothing as the dominant color for boys.
Here is a chart from a 1927 Time Magazine showing what color the major department stores in the country were selling as the dominant color for boys and girls.
So if something as so deeply ingrained in our psyche as "pink is for girls and blue is for boys" can be changed. It is proof that marketing and design, when done right, can change the psychology of color. So Bob Stein and the Red Queen are right. The designer should not be led by color theory based on the prevalent psychology of the day. A powerful design can change that philosophy.
The designer should not be led. He or she should lead. He or she should be The Red Queen and create the next Tiffany blue.
Great post, this also reminded me of one of our past readings regarding the person that gets paid the most will chose the design he/she enjoys. When a product is marketed the correct way it will create the correct consumers. However if the color is incorrect and the marketing efforts are not there the design will be lost among the other products.
ReplyDeleteWell said! Marketers definitely have the power to shape emotion around a product. If the entire package is put together well, the product will be thought of very highly (like at Tiffany's). It is also very interesting that young boys change their "favorite color" based upon their upbringing. I saw this happen with my nephew - when he was young he has no problem admitting that he loved red, pink, purple and so on, but now at 15 he is very much a "green and black" kind of guy. He has absolutely been conditioned into believing that purple and pink are for girls and blue and green are for boys between 2nd grade and high school.
ReplyDeleteVery, very interesting take. Personally, I didn't enjoy the Red Queen reading as much, but I see clearly it's because I didn't look at it the same way you did. The color of Tiffany's boxes is certainly unique and invokes a response in people unlike very few gifts could and when thinking about it, that is a color not seen in many other places. Leadership risks unpopularity, and that's true even in color selection.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you didn't enjoy the Red Queen, as I thought it was heads and shoulders above the rest of the selections. Just goes to show that we all have different tastes in reading and color - which gets us back to the Red Queen who inspires us to blaze our own trail!
ReplyDeleteThe theory certainly has SOMETHING to it. But at the end of the day we should be able to trust our instincts and not allow science or math determine the colors we use. Color is an art. For those of us who can't seem to match colors the theories may help give us a clue. But for those of us with instinct about matching colors, the science might help us all understand why it works so well. I'm all for going outside the lines, but I find that the theory and research might help us fine tune the art. And there are always exceptions to the rules...like Tiffany and CO.
ReplyDelete