I mentioned last week that Sydney Uni was getting rid of its Latin motto from its new look logo. There were a couple of follow up items in the paper that I thought worth mentioning here too:
Same meaning, longer words
The translation of the University of Sydney motto you quote - ''the constellation is changed, the disposition is the same'' - sounds almost deliberately pompous, perhaps to suit the purposes of the designers of the new coat of arms (''Sydney Uni calls time on 150-year Latin love affair'', February 17). I have always understood the accepted translation was "the same mind under a different sky". Originally it smacked of colonialism, but it is - or would be, if it remained on the university's emblem - a perfect motto for a university in the current climate of internationalisation of education and knowledge.
Judy Butlin, Roseville
The bright minds who replaced Sydney University's coat of arms with a logo just didn't go far enough. The top of the new logo needs a big golden double arch, and it would be perfect. I'm lovin' it.
Steven Creagh, Eureka
If Sydney University is relying ''too heavily on its sandstone heritage'', removing the Latin motto from its coat of arms may be the thin edge of the wedge. What's next? Perhaps they can pull down the Great Hall and replace it with ''something bolder, more energetic and more modern''.
John Byrne, Randwick
More may have been lost than realised by dropping the Latin motto and redesigning the University of Sydney logo, writes Brian Crabbe of Artarmon. ''The old logo actually contained a useful map of the main quadrangle. The student newspaper Honi Soit in the 1950s pointed out that the cross represents the main quad, the ''Mens'' part of the Latin motto shows the location of the male toilets, and the lion points to MacLaurin Hall (then Fisher Library) at the opposite end.''
Anthony Healy of Willoughby was told the motto, Sidere mens eadem mutato meant ''See the men eating potatoes''.
Appeal to the dim
It is sad that Sydney University has turned its back on its heritage by dropping its motto and changing its coat of arms to a new and ugly logo (Letters, February 18). It is worse that it believes there are potential students so stupid they choose a university on the basis of its logo and that it wants to attract such people.
Intelligent students would be more inclined to choose a university whose administration was not so gullible and which spent its money on facilities and providing a quality education.
However, there is one benefit: if Sydney can afford to waste $1.25 million, it must be so flush that it won't need to keep up its stream of letters to graduates begging for donations.
Geoff Bellamy, Pearce (ACT)