For your perusal: From: Andrew Margrave,rpt July 3, 1995 North VA chapter po box 2593 Fairfax, VA 22031 Tel: 703-273-5646 The enclosed commentary was intended for publication in the May 1995 Journal, or its grey suppliment, but for some reason did not see the light of magazine print. This, despite the fact that the piece was sent in soon enough. Therefore, this is conveyed here and elsewhere: This set of comments on Bill Spurlock's article, "Making Our Logo Work for Us" (PTJ, Jan 1995, pp 12,14, and 16) is in no way to be construed as an attack on, or criticism of Bill himself. Bill is a friend of mine who played a major role in my Feb '94 upgrade to rpt. He has been responsible for much wonderful instruction and for many outstanding innovations in tools and techniques. The music industry would be in far better shape if it had more people with Bill's dedication and integrity running things. It is a sign of Bill's and Fern's selfless devotion to PTG that they have done so much to advance marketing ideas they have presented and made available to us. In principle, I agree that there should be only one PTG logo, just as PTG does well to have only one designation for its title of professional certification, and one universal set of exams. Currently I use both logos as much as possible, giving space to each and generally not having them near each other. Then if one logo is temporarily or permanently taken out of circulation, the other one will still be recognized by my public. The absence of "Registered Piano Technician" from the old round logo is not a problem; all an rpt must do is spell out his title near the logo. I happen to believe that the old logo is much better as a pin, while the new logo is slightly better in all other contexts, but I believe the round logo should remain as a "badge" of honor. One major advantage that the old round logo has at present, both within PTG and elsewhere, is that it must be earned, while the admittedly more distinctive new logo can belong to anyone willing to buy it. I never used a PTG logo while still an associate, but I decided in the spring of '93 that I would use the new item, shortcomings and all, as soon as I upgraded. I always have considered the new logo's near microscopic subscript, which denotes membership category, a major defect both before and after my upgrade. I still use the logo as it is because it has much promise and potential as a veritable sapphire in the rough, but those proportions need correcting. The subscript comes across to me as a severe and inexcusable lapse in graphic design, and gives me the impression that we are almost ashamed of our certified title. Finally, there is something in our bylaws about letter size for membership category in relation to letter size for "Piano Technicians Guild". The logo's current proportions have necessitated a bylaws escape clause ("...except as otherwise specified in the graphics standards manual...") that is a very small fig leaf on a very large emperor. More than once, Bill's article implies that associates use their version of the new logo. Associates really should not use the logo or anything else having to do with PTG commercially; they should advertise as if they were non-members, as I did and as many do today. I believe the public will recognize the ethical shortcomings of using a logo and other public PTG resources to gain customers while lacking clear evidence of any attained standard of qualification or accreditation. There is the problem that the public will eventually link the new logo, not with RPTs, or the PTG organization, but only with beginners, or others who walk in off the street, pay their way into PTG, and appropriate the logo even if they are dilettantes. At least the old logo cannot be tarnished in that way. We will make the new logo work well for us only when we have established that it must be earned rather than merely purchased, and when we have brought it into line with PTG bylaws and with common-sense principles of graphic design. Until then, we may be in danger of making our new logo work more against us than for us. We have invested too much - time and money - in that new logo to leave it flawed and continually vulnerable to defilement by associates. Let us safeguard the new logo's future integrity by reserving its public commercial use for those demonstrably qualified. Let us get the sapphire out of the rough and into position to realize its full potential. Andrew Margrave, rpt
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC