June 5, 2007
When I first saw the new logo for the London 2012 Olympics, I was quite drawn to it. Ok, my first impression was that it was the logo for one of the new breed of electropop bands like New Young Pony Club or The Sounds -- or possibly a new album by The Gossip -- but the point stands that removed from its context, it's an eye-catching design.
It seems like the world+dog have been deriding the new logo. Axe-grinding politicians, media commentators and anyone else who felt that the world needed to hear their opinion (point taken) have been holding it up as proof that designers and brand consultants are overpaid and produce nothing but rubbish -- and that Britain can't do anything properly these days. Move over, grandad.
Anyone with an understanding of current trends in design and advertising can see that the logo and associated graphics fit in perfectly, with its 80s-styling mix of clashing colours and sharp edges. But in an attempt to appear hip, Wolff Olins has created something that will date quicker than a viral video on YouTube.
London 2012 chairman, Sebastian Coe may protest to the BBC that "we don't do bland. This is not a bland city," -- and he's right, London is the most creative place in the world (except perhaps Leeds). He's also right that it's not a "a dull or dry corporate logo". But then he inadvertently spells out just what's wrong with the logo by saying that "this is something that has got to live for the next five years."
He's almost right. The logo is something that we will have to live with for the next five years -- it's going to be on every free wall in London that hasn't got a billboard pushing mobile phones or Banksy graffiti on it already. It's got be able to work within the context of five years of shifting design and fashion trends -- and unless we're stuck in the current mid-80's timewarp from now until the Olympic Flame is lit, this logo isn't fit for purpose.
Posted by: Neil Bennett
Submit to:
Comments
Posted by milz rollin on June 6, 2007 :
it's got nothing to do with axe-grinding: the logo is garish, immature and way off mark - not reflective of any standard of commercial creative design that is worth mentioning. Unbelievably bad - which is why a large proportion of the population, with nothing to prove, want it changed.
The creative stuff we come across that we've just got to share (rather than simply getting on with creating Digital Arts magazine)
