Packaging Design: The Butt of the Joke
I’m juvenile. The reason I say this is not because I want you to think less of me, but to warn you that while you may be able to extract an ounce of serious commentary from the content in this post, the side of me that still giggles at potty language is at the forefront of my motivation.
While browsing around various design sites, I came across a rather positive review on The DieLine of the latest packaging design from the San Francisco cleaning product company, Method.
Le Scrub and Lil’ Bowl Blu mark the company’s entrance into “deep cleaning” products and round out their line of bathroom products.
While I agree that there is a sleek and modern loveliness to these bathroom cleaning products, I at once had to snicker at the bare naked fact that the two depicted in the image above look very referential to a butt and an indeterminate colorectal organ shape.
The Tub Scrub product is probably the most hysterical as all I can see when I look at it is what appears to be an abstraction of a set of ass cheeks clenching a sponge. I can’t possibly be alone in this sentiment. And while the toilet bowl cleaner is more of a traditional shape for this sort of cleaning product, it’s smooth gentle curves are less “Clorox toilet bowl cleaner” and more digestive organ.
Of course, asses and bathrooms kind of go together, so maybe Method’s packaging design was deliberate…but probably not. I can’t picture a bunch of ad and design guys sitting around deciding to make their clients’ products look this anal…but what do I know? I’m a web designer, so my expertise seldom crosses into dealing with consumer products.
Of course this happens in web and print design as well. We’ve all designed something that was phallic, or contained a prominent undesirable shape of some sort. If you’re lucky someone catches it before you submit it to the client, or worse, release it into the world for all to giggle at….
On April 1st, 2008, Markasaurus said:
Personally, I prefer the Toilet Duck. According to Wikipedia, it is becoming rare: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilet_Duck.
On April 4th, 2008, Jeremy Anderson said:
There is a long history in art and design, relating to the natural world, either in representation or juxtaposition. Rightly so, I guess, as it would be impossible to have either one, without one of the two. But that does not excuse bad decisions.
The fleshy, organesque trend in toiletries has been around for a while. Extending that to other products used in the bathroom seems to breach some trust between manufacturer and consumer. But alas, I am a snob and probably somewhat of a purest. A cleaning product should look like a cleaning product. “Clean” should come to mind before “organic”.
Maybe the designers at Method are graduates (or students, as the case may be) of The Design Center in Pasadena. Apparently, this kind of thinking is something they greatly encourage.
All joshing aside, give me the toilet duck any day, over a product that seems to be critical of what you put in your stomach, that ultimately led to the unnecessary need to clean.
Ahh, visual language.
On April 5th, 2008, Administrator said:
I am always in great appreciation of products that resemble animals. The toilet duck has a fond place in my heart.
That said, I want to mention that I in no way have an issue with Method or their packaging designs as large. I think they are a great company (and local to SF as well!) and admire their organic, non-toxic approach to home cleaning products.
The sponge clenched between butt cheeks was too amusing to ignore though :)
On June 23rd, 2008, jaren said:
zrjCcA dfv078fnw8f934ndvkg2l