Typological features and classification of territorial identity from the perspective of content and form. Approaches to the formation and algorithm for designing brand design of territories

Maslov Mikhail Mikhailovich ORCID: 0000-0001-6912-5707 Postgraduate student, Department of History and Theory of Design and Media Communications, St. Petersburg State University of Industrial Technologies and Design 191186, Russia, Saint Petersburg, Bolshaya Morskaya str., 18, lit. A mihail_123@list.ru

Introduction

This article examines the typological features of visual territorial identity from the point of view of content and form, as well as approaches to creating territorial identity, comparing the material with existing theoretical models. It is noted that the area under study is characterized by a weak elaboration in the field of science, the fundamental works of Russian-speaking authors in this field are practically absent. Based on the results of the identification of the author's typologies of modern emblems of territories (from the point of view of form and meaning), an algorithm for designing territorial identity has been formed. It is noted that the separation of form and content in the analysis and design of such symbols is extremely important from the point of view of correct reading and reflection of meaning, and a separate consideration of these aspects is a correct approach for art criticism analysis.

The article presents the author's classification of typological features of territorial identity from the point of view of form and content, for the first time in technical aesthetics these two important factors of shaping are separated. The material is presented in the form of tables with detailed contents, as well as figures; a comparative analysis is carried out with existing classifications of territorial identity presented by other authors, in which inaccuracies have been identified. The most relevant approaches to the creation of a modern visual identity of places are formulated — synthesizing, officially symbolic, national-cultural and natural-climatic, which have received such names from the point of view of the inherent meaning. Based on the approaches highlighted in the article to the formation of modern territorial identity, a practical algorithm for the development of modern emblems of territories and their graphic identity has also been developed.

Review of literature and authors

F. was the first to talk about the marketing of places as a separate type of marketing. Kotler, who published the book "Marketing of Places" in 1993 with co-authors. Attracting investments, enterprises, residents and tourists to cities, communes, regions and countries of Europe", the translation of which into Russian was published in 2005 ^[2]. It is worth noting that post-Soviet society was ripe for such topics only in the 2000s, as a result of which it would have been inappropriate to translate it earlier, and the topic would not have found a response. Researchers write about the marketing of places in Europe, the nuances of territorial marketing and its tasks, brand promotion and other aspects.

With. Anholt, who first mentioned the concept of "branding territories", published the monograph "Brand America: the mother of all brands" in the early 2000s together with D. Hildreth, which was translated into Russian in 2010 ^[3]. The profile of the author and his works is image management of countries, for which the brand and territorial identity, in particular, are considered as a tool.

In 2013, a translation of K. Dinni's monograph "Marketing of Territories" was published in Russian. The best world practices" (2011) ^[4]. In it, the author writes about the subject of branding territories and its nuances, cites implemented projects as examples and analyzes them. In particular, K. Dinni mentions such nuances as "brand partnership" ^{[4, p. 55]} and the power of expressive means of graphic design ^{[4, p. 259]}, which are also touched upon in this article.

The first monograph by a Russian author on territorial identity is "Visual Politics. Corporate identity of Russia" ^[5] p. Rodkina. It refers to the initial period of the development of territorial identity in Russia (1991-2010), when the very concept of "identity" was still practically not used. In this monograph, P. Rodkin introduces his own term "brand identification" to denote the modern visual symbolism of territories, and also forms the structure of its analysis through politics and postmodernism, among other topics, to which other monographs of the author are devoted.

In 2009, A. Stas's monograph "New Heraldry" was published ^[6], which builds a direct hereditary parallel between official state symbols (heraldry) and modern territorial identity. The author examines the concept of a brand, then examples of branding states, regions and cities through modern emblems. Next, the orientation of brands in various territories, the nuances of creating a territorial brand are analyzed, and in conclusion, territorial branding in Russia. A. Stas considers the object of research of this article through marketing, as well as his foreign colleagues mentioned above.

Monograph "Branding of the city" ^[1] d. Vizgalova was published in 2011 and is distinguished by a large amount of illustrative material, bright design, and a glossary is presented at the end of the publication. The structure of the presentation is built through marketing and economics. This book, as well as those given before it, reveals the concept of a brand, technologies and tools for the development of geobrands. It is important that the monograph was published with foreign support, and on the back cover there is a review by D. Hildreth about it — co-author S. Anholt on the book "Brand America" ^[3].

"System analysis for solving business and industrial problems" by S. Optner ^[7] is a work by an American scientist published in the USSR in 1969, the methodology of which is used in this study to formalize the theory into a system – classifications of form and content, approaches to creation, as well as an algorithm for developing territorial identity. The consistency of the material largely determines its reliability, universality and interconnectedness, allows it to be applied in practice, as well as for further scientific research on the topic.

M. M. Maslov formulates the definition of "territorial identity", justifies its necessity and the fundamental difference with the "corporate identity" ^[8]. In the process of analyzing world emblems for cities and countries, as well as their accompanying sets of visual attributes, he deduces the main approaches to the formation of the identity of places from the standpoint of technical aesthetics, comparing them with earlier examples of the symbolism of territories — official coats of arms and flags.

Research methods

The work uses an integrated approach to the object of research — art criticism analysis, analytical method, comparison method, theory of software systems (S. L. Optner) ^[7]. In addition, the synthesis method, the principle of clarity, and the method of typology are used in the work.

Results and discussion

Each of the embodied examples of branding territories is unique, and has its own methodology, since the algorithms for designing and implementing the identity of places, as well as the order of pre–design studies, are not determined by technical aesthetics, and have not been practically studied. Therefore, each country or city that has a well-known brand with visual symbols finds its own ways to create and implement an identity, as well as promote the brand of the territory, based on local characteristics. In the process of developing the symbols of places, the designer has to work with the meanings of this territory, which must be visualized in the emblem and accompanying graphics, regardless of the technical task — whether it regulates a specific set of symbols, or leaves freedom of choice. At the same time, the designer's creativity involves taking risks when using any controversial or ambiguous symbols and signs characteristic of the territory where the new symbol is being designed.

The need for the principles of developing the visual identity of territories is caused, among other things, by the small number of theoretical and empirical studies on this topic in technical aesthetics, which gives an idea of the low degree of development of the topic. It is also worth taking into account the fact that the phenomenon of place branding itself is increasingly covering both Russia and other countries over time. Domestic researchers put forward their own classifications and typologies of territorial emblems, in terms of origin, approaches to creation, and other factors. So, P. Rodkin deduces his own "typologization of brand identification" of places, but mixes in it approaches to creating a graphic identity from the point of view of meaning (idea) and from the point of view of form (design).

The classification given by him contains such items as "compound identity", "typography and letter identity", "grammatical constructions" ^{[9, p. 61]}, which are a visual solution — a form, but not an inherent meaning (content). The items listed in the same list "architecture and sights", "climate and biosphere" are the content that is embedded in the emblem, that is, the idea, but not the form of its execution. In theory, some of the meanings given by P. Rodkin for the symbolism of territories can even be solved graphically using the design solutions proposed in the same list, which is misleading. For example, the content of "climate and biosphere" from the list proposed by the researcher can be graphically embodied by means of a "composite identity", which is presented in the same list on an equal basis.

It is worth noting that P. Rodkin nevertheless identified the most common approaches to creating a territorial identity in practice, which are easy to identify by analyzing the emblems of cities and countries in aggregate, gathering a certain number of them together. However, with a deeper analysis of the emblems of territories from the standpoint of technical aesthetics, it becomes obvious that it is necessary to consider the form and content separately, without mixing or identifying these aspects, since in practice specific meanings should be sought for an adequate design form. In some cases, the design of a symbol is also carried out through the form, and not only through the content – by experimenting directly with graphics, giving meaning secondary importance. However, such a method requires conscious application, and not due to the fact that such a path is the simplest and somewhere there is already a successful solution to the symbol of the territory created in this way.

At certain stages of the development of the phenomenon of branding territories and creating an identity for them, certain design solutions were used. So, for example, by the end of the middle stage of the development of territorial identity in Russia (2010-2015), there is such a trend in graphic design as "modularity" — the need for which was absent at earlier stages, and moreover, was impossible, since communication resources and technical capabilities, and, consequently, visual communications in in principle, they were less developed.

Figure 1 presents three sources of origin of modern territorial identity – official symbols (heraldry), branding of commercial goods (marketing) and corporate identity (graphic design) – I, II and III, respectively, thanks to which such a phenomenon in design arose. The figure also shows the main owners and ambassadors of the identity and brands of places, under the numbers IV, V and VI – they participate in the synthesis of such an identity, and it also functions in their interests. The territorial identity itself is the core of this scheme, indicated by the number VII.

Figure 1. The sources of the origin of modern visual territorial identity

Figure 1 is combined into a system that continues in other figures and tables, which reveal related aspects of the subject of research that also affect the result – the emblems of the territories themselves. Table 1 shows the most common groups of meanings (contents) reflected in the visual identity of places and used to fill symbols with information. Foreign researchers do not separate identity and design from the brand, and the brand itself from marketing, and therefore such a model penetrates into domestic science, as their imitators transfer it to their own disciplines due to the lack of other fundamental works on this topic (branding territories).

Table 1. Semantic content of modern visual territorial identity, content

Table 2 shows the main ways to design the meanings of the territory (Table 1) — that is, the implementation of the content in a design form. Among others, there is such a way of creating a form as "font composition" (number III in Table. 1), which P. Rodkin, highlighting also in his classification ^{[9, p. 61]} places on a par with the meanings for filling, without taking into account the fundamental differences of these aspects. It should be noted that solving such meanings as geographical and climatic features, unique flora and fauna, famous natives/guests of the territory (groups IV, V, VI in Table 1) through a purely typeface form is difficult, since it visualizes mainly a verbal message, and not an image of anything.

The form "font composition" (group III in Table. 2) it is most relevant for such content as "a new meaning for a new symbol (Group VIII in Table 1). In such cases, a decision is made to create a new visual identifier, without reworking existing coats of arms and flags, without using silhouettes of recognizable architectural objects, cultural features, and other meanings. A new symbol of the territory is being formed, exclusively in font execution, the main expressive means of which is typography or lettering — that is, the composition of the font, which must meet the requirements of uniqueness so that it can be remembered and distinguished among similar ones.

Font solutions are most logically used in large metropolitan cities, with a large semantic capital that can be reflected in symbols, but at the same time it is difficult to give preference to some meanings, ignoring others, and it is impossible to reflect everything at once. For example, if a city has a certain number of unique architectural structures and monuments known locally, and several cultures and religions are developing in parallel in it, which interact and influence each other, it makes sense to create a fundamentally new symbol that will carry the meaning of the ambiguity of this place and its multiculturalism. It is not necessary to build a symbol solely through the image of architectural monuments.

It is the font solution of the megalopolis emblem that is not mandatory, or the only possible one — the result depends on many factors and other circumstances peculiar to specific territories. As examples of the font solution of the logo for the largest cities, one can cite the identity of Moscow (from ALS Studio, and from Minale Tattersfield – both projects have not been implemented), as well as New York, Melbourne, Amsterdam, Berlin, and other cities. From the point of view of content, this approach to the formation of symbolism is called "synthesizing" — a new form is created that is endowed with meaning.

From the point of view of implementation in design (that is, in visual form), this approach is correctly called abstract-graphic — the new logo is initially abstract, since it does not use pre-existing visual motifs, and its main expressive means, as a rule, is typography, as noted above. The synthesizing (abstract-graphic) approach to creating a territorial identity is unique, as it allows you to create a fundamentally new symbol without using any motives of already existing identifiers.

Table 2. Methods of design design of the meanings of the territory, the realization of the idea (content) through the form

Table 3. Comparison of content and form – the most common ways of implementation

In Table 3, a comparison of the semantic content – the content of modern emblems of territories is made (Table. 1) with the ways of their implementation through graphic design (Table. 2) — the two main aspects of creating a symbol. The most characteristic design solutions for certain groups of meanings are highlighted, that is, the most relevant forms for specific ideas and groups of ideas.

Other aspects of creating a territorial identity are internal and external target audiences, as well as the legal affiliation of such an identity to someone, which directly affects both the target audience and a specific semantic orientation. Table 4 shows the shareholders of the territory brand who influence it and who need to be involved in its creation and promotion in order for the concept to be well received as a whole at the implementation stage.

Table 4. Shareholders of the territory brand (stakeholders)

As K. Dinny writes, "a key element of the city's branding is the need to involve stakeholders in the process who can help determine the future of this city. Their investments in the development of this territory, the actions they take, and the messages they broadcast are the most important elements of how the story of the city will be told" ^{[4, p. 56]}. As shareholders (or "stakeholders") Dinny identifies such groups as tourism, the private sector, government policy, investment and immigration, culture and education, and people ^{[4, pp. 56-57]}.

Thus, the researcher identifies the same groups as shown in Table 4, but reveals their contents in more detail, dividing them into subgroups. He also mentions the need for communication between brand partners: "branding a city requires partnerships between key stakeholders who can effectively form and, most importantly, implement a brand strategy" ^{[4, p. 58]}, which certainly affects the final result and its visual expression — the identity of the city or country, because in the absence of the involvement and support of one of these groups, the result of brand implementation may not justify the hopes placed on it, and the inherent meaning is not to broadcast the character of the place.

Table 5. Target audience of the place brand, and territorial identity in particular

For the most adequate graphic solution of the territory's emblem, there is a need to conduct pre-design studies in order to determine the identity of the territory, its meanings, unique tangible and intangible objects and features that characterize it, and can be interpreted in graphic language in the symbolism of this place. A comprehensive method of creating a brand of a territory and its visual identity, in particular, includes pre-project studies of the semantic capital of the territory before developing the appearance of its new symbol, and allows you to develop the identity of a city or country precisely in his (her) character, having a greater chance of a positive assessment by the population, and also becomes a tool to stimulate interest in the territory as among both internal and external target audiences.

As I. A. Vasilenko notes in the collective monograph "The Image of the regions of Russia": "the socio–cultural identity of the inhabitants of the region is the process of their self-identification with a certain culture and territorial community" ^[10]. It is precisely this identity that should be expressed in the visual symbolism of this region, and reflect the unity of the inhabitants and this territory, that is, their community, as the researcher writes. An illustrative example of the designer's immersion into the atmosphere of the city to search for such an identity and create its graphic symbols is the emblem of the city of Suzdal, and the book of the brand "Suzdal innermost" developed for him by the Point company. The point of development".

In the article "A modern brand was grown in Ancient Suzdal", it is written about pre—project studies of the meanings of the city as follows: "bearing a city brand is a long process, which, as a rule, stretches for a period of nine months to a year. There is a danger that a brand that has not been suffered by the community will not take root. And the idea itself will be buried for years to come." Given the small size of the city of Suzdal, it is possible to note a greater uniformity of meanings than in the case of a megalopolis. To create a graphic identity of small towns, it is logical to use their historical and cultural meanings (if any), since these settlements, as a rule, do not have groups of clearly opposite meanings, as in the case of megacities — their image is easily reflected in the design. In particular, Almeida D. and Almeida P. note the special importance of such an aspect as the study of the relationship between the image of the territory and the concept of its brand in regional development ^[11].

It is possible to identify basic approaches to creating a territorial identity from the standpoint of both meaning and form, which are presented in the form of a table number 6. All four approaches to the creation of territorial identity are based on the material of the art historical analysis of samples of the world territorial identity. These approaches are not always found in their pure form, and are not always universal, since visual communications and graphic design are in a continuous process of development, research in the field of technical aesthetics is also ongoing.

Table 6. Approaches to creating a territorial identity

from the point of view of meaning and form

For example, abstract graphic symbols (No. 1 in the table. 6) it may have light features of architectural objects, or national symbols that are of secondary importance in relation to the font. Therefore, attribution of such a symbol is theoretically possible not only to point I (Table. 6), but also to the national cultural (No. 3 in the table. 6) if the letters are designed as a silhouette of recognizable architectural objects. The key decision on attribution of such a symbol is made based on the main means of expression — the font, if it is the main means of expression.

Taking into account the analysis of theoretical material, as well as empirical experience gained in analyzing samples of modern emblems of territories, identified typological features of content and form, as well as approaches to creating emblems for cities and countries, an algorithm for designing territorial identity is formulated (Fig. 2), combined into a system together with all previously presented theoretical material, allowing develop variable scenarios in practice.

Figure 2. Algorithm of territorial identity design

Conclusions

1. The form and content in the design of modern territorial identity are separate aspects and stages of designing visual symbols that should not be mixed.

2. Pre–project studies are extremely important for the allocation of the semantic capital of the territory, and directly affect the final result - the perception of the territory's emblem, its relevance to a given place.

3. The highlighted approaches to the formation of territorial identity (synthesizing, officially symbolic, national-cultural, natural-climatic) give an idea of the meanings and methods used to build graphic symbols of places, and can also be used in practice to create new symbols.

4. The synthesizing (abstract-graphic) approach to creating a territorial identity is most relevant for megacities, whose semantic capital is diverse and contradictory, when it is impossible to choose only one meaning to represent in their emblem. A new territory symbol is created without references to existing ones, usually in a unique font solution, and is given a meaning.

5. The developed algorithm for designing territorial identity makes it possible to observe in practice all stages of pre-design research, and to choose the most correct approach to its creation. This procedure is relevant for the creation of modern graphic symbols by designers, since until now it was not clearly defined, some of its stages were ignored, which affected the final result.