MIT has a new logo, which is very much to my liking. It is bold, and it vaguely suggests the world of science and engineering, the Institute’s proud domain. Still, it is not bold enough. It does not go deep enough into the human mind, either. To wit, it is an entoptic form, albeit a flawed one. The connection with my paintings came to me at first glance. The logo fits into a four-by-six grid, so typical of my compositions. It could fit into such a grid, that is. Yet, the actual logo is too squat for its width. The vertical dimension is someplace between three and four. It is neither here nor there. This is the logo’s fatal flaw. Were it inscribed into a well-formed grid, it would allow for all kinds of interpretations. It would allow for much play. And it would stretch all the way down to cave art. Chances are its designers were innocent of entoptic forms. And my paintings, of course.

Addendum I (January 3, 2004)

I found the new logo in the Technology Review of September 2003, and I sent this piece to the editor. By way of explanation, I attached a couple of images of my paintings. A few days later, I also sent the “corrected” version of the logo, rendered beautifully by Ivan Pešić, my old friend from Belgrade who now lives in Los Angeles. The piece appeared in the Alumni Letters Section of the December 2003/January 2004 issue of MIT’s magazine of innovation, but minus my pictures or the four-by-six logo. Still, I got a kick out of the attribution following the letter: “Ranko Bon, Ph.D. ’75, Motovun, Croatia.” I got a kick out of seeing Motovun in print, that is.

Addendum II (October 10, 2007)

More than four years ago, when I wrote the original piece, I had no idea I would paint MIT’s logo one day. In fact, such a painting would be inconceivable to me back then. The idea came to me only a few weeks ago, in a playful sort of way. And today I actually painted my version of the logo. On the other side of the painting I put something that looks very like the Millennium Bug. It just happened this way, though, without any connection to my alma mater of choice. Anyhow, the logo feels at home on my wall. It is time to take a few pictures of the new painting and send them to the Technology Review once again. The editor will be quite delighted, I am sure. This time around, my version of MIT’s logo may well appear in the Alumni Letters Section.

Addendum III (April 1, 2008)

Together with a new letter to the editor, a picture of my paintings has indeed appeared in the Technology Review of March-April 2008. The new logo is smack in the middle. I was delighted as soon as I opened the magazine this morning, but I immediately noticed that my picture was edited. It did not take long to figure out why: my twin swastika on the opposing wall is cut in half. Clearly, it was a tad too close to the Nazi symbol for the editor’s comfort (in this connection, see “Banning Nazi Symbols,” January 26, 2005). By way of compensation, I got another kick out of everything printed under my name: “Motovun, Istria, Croatia.” Hooray!