Later in life, Harold used his purple crayon to draw college logos

Wow look at how well produced that video is - says more about Emerson than any logo.

So is rhythmic gymnastics a major now?

Presented with artwork of a dubious nature, I often hear (or probably more often, think to myself) comments along the lines of "Any leper could have done that, even I could have done that !" But to be honest we need to admit we didn't do that and not necessarily because we are capable of doing any better. I find it more conducive to glean a kernel of inspiration by asking "Why didn't I think of that ?" This attitude, certainly one of the true differences between the creative genius and the rest of us, should be written up as one of those Steven Covey style self helps. Or maybe it already is. I wouldn't know, as I personally never read them. Anybody could write that crap.

Did Harvard write a big check to come up with the new catchy name of Harvard Art Museums? So why shouldn't Emerson waste money on a logo that will have to be redone because it fails in the purpose of a logo - to identify its institution.

I didn't even thing the squiggle was to represent the lettter e until that was mentioned in the video.

Reminds me of the emperor in his fine new clothes. Group think that leads believing that a squiggle makes for a good logo. On the other hand Nike has their swoosh. So why shouldn't Emerson have its own squiggle?