The Wall Street Journal has a nice piece today on the history of the MLB logo and Yankee fan Jerry Dior, the long uncredited designer who created it in 1968. The logo is a great piece of design, as its many imitators (including the fine Jerry West NBA version) attest, one of the great signatures of the sport. Dior deserves recognition for this landmark mark, and we're pleased to give it to him here. As for the identity of that anonymous player in silhouette: it's not Harmon Killebrew, as some have speculated. It's nobody and everybody. That's part of the logo's genius. Swing away.
Subscribe to YFSF feed
Good stuff
Posted by: walein | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 02:01 PM
Ball one, for sure. Or a HBP.
Posted by: SF | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 02:34 PM
Well, it's "everybody" who is a right-handed hitter. Lefties must be the "nobodies?" ;)
Posted by: nettles | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 02:42 PM
How can you discern that it's a righty, nettles? Could be a head-on silhouette of a lefty.
Posted by: SF | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 02:45 PM
I see your point, SF. It's just always looked to me that it was a rear view of a righty, mainly due to the curve of the rear shoulder. It seems to me that the batter is slightly leaning away from the viewer's perspective, as a righty would. Also, most batters are righties, so it would seem reasonable to assume this is a depiction of a righty.
But, it's all a perception thing, I suppose, and probably why the artist chose a silhouette in the first place; so fans of teams that are out of the playoffs or never even got there could amuse themselves until next spring! :)
Posted by: nettles | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 03:03 PM
That's interesting. The first thing I see is a lefty, even though I'm right-handed.
Posted by: FenSheaParkway | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 03:05 PM
I think part of the fun of this mark is that it's such an escherian (?) optical shifter. he can be a righty or a lefty.
Posted by: YF | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 03:10 PM
Whoever he is, he ain't swinging!
Posted by: SF | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 03:17 PM
nettles: I see this, to an extent.
http://www.americanasportsgallery.com/photos/baseball_painting_2.jpg
Fun how these things work, YF is right.
Posted by: SF | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 03:19 PM
YF: that wasn't at all what I thought you were seeing/saying. I thought you were seeing the batter as if you were standing across the plate from him, not as if you were standing on the pitcher's mound.
Escherian indeed!
Posted by: nettles | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 03:29 PM
No, nettles, that IS the vantage point I meant that I was standing at. I wasn't clear at all. If I look at that pic of Yaz and I move to the opposite batter's box, I imagine his posture might be like the logo.
I didn't explain myself well.
Posted by: SF | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 03:52 PM
Ahh, OK. I'm with ya, SF.
Posted by: nettles | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 05:34 PM
This is kind of crazy but all this time I've always thought it was a righty, no questions asked. I guess I'm projecting since I'm one myself.
Posted by: Nick-YF | Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 05:35 PM
Maybe Dior DIDN'T design the logo, after all? There apparently is some dispute, as James Sherman claims to have designed it.
http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2008/06/19/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed-160/
AND
http://tinyurl.com/yrkk3f
(Courtesy of UniWatchblog.com)
Posted by: nettles | Friday, October 24, 2008 at 11:51 AM
I always thought he was facing the pitcher and you're viewing him the side, as in the other batter's box.
Also, he'd better be about to eat dirt.
Posted by: Kazz | Friday, October 24, 2008 at 09:15 PM