London 2012 Olympic Logo

belleisle's picture

I live and work in London as a designer, and am appalled by the just revealed choice of logo design for the 2012 Olympics.

I think it is a massive error of judgement by all concerned. It does not in the least reflect any design values that belong to London, and instead looks like the Olympic organisation is breaking up/smashed

It goes without saying that this is one of the premier commisions any designer could ever want, and is a travisty to the design talent that exists in the UK (london).

Can anyone be positive about this?

1542899.jpg14.87 KB
ChuckGroth's picture

Half-baked facts get copyandpasted, read and repeated by other people and soon are taken as facts.

Mr. Spiekermann-
Sorry. It was just a joke. This whole thread has been just about played out.

blank's picture

Sometimes, a little knowledge is dangerous. Half-baked facts get copyandpasted, read and repeated by other people and soon are taken as facts.

Erik, I completely disagree. You are giving the internet WAY more credit than it deserves; half-baked facts belong in the New York times, the internet is just a bunch of nonsense cooked up by people who drink too much and post at two in the morning.

pattyfab's picture

Oh NOW I get it.

Sii, those days are llllooooonnnnngggg behind me, sad to say. The stuff just puts me to sleep. But your post gave me a giggle (altho I do feel like I can't use that word lightly on this forum...).

Paul Cutler's picture

I'm all for it, just not at 4:20…

And Patty, going to sleep is not what happens when it originates from Cali.

Reality is vastly overrated.


pattyfab's picture

This is simply a case of the old motto being applied that originally comes from the advertising world: It is not enough to have no ideas, one also has to be unable to express them.

Or as Jon Stewart put it so eloquently: There's an old saying in the ad game: try not to give them seizures.

I'm with Chuck, this thread has been played out... half baked indeed. Or fully baked. I'm sure it's 4:20 somewhere.

Hiroshige's picture

This whole thread has been just about played out.

Why has there been such an outcry ...globally?

This thread has only just begun...


blank's picture

This thread has only just begun…

Nah, the thread is shot, or at least it needs to be. But we have five years of design criticism ahead of us before we get to see the logo used at the games, and at least another year of criticism after.

Part of me wonders if the logo will start to make more sense once the rest of the identity system dribbles out. But then I remember that the proper context for Olympic logos is low-quality, mass produced crap sold to the masses, and if it’s illegible crap online, it will probably be illegible crap on the side of six-pack.

Paul Cutler's picture

Tao Chien says the perfect man is silent.
Why then did he write those 5,000 words?

(paraphrased from a zen poet)


guest's picture

does the word branding get capitalized now?
a nauseating thought.

dberlow's picture

"Tao Chien says the perfect man is silent."
"Why then did he write those 5,000 words?"

So he would not have to speak them, over and over? :)

I'm starting to like the logo. Work that gets argued over for the same old reasons is something else. This, at least, has nothing to marvel at in color, shape, type or visual concept but has already generated interest worth far beyond it's cost, and like all preceding OOOOO logos, will be buried in trinkets and caps that no one (with a life) will want anyways in 5 years -- so who cares what it looks like as long as it is hugely prominent before it is actually used, at which point ( as a huge visual tragedy ), it lasts only for a second or two at a time. It's contragraphics, the second best thing to something that actually does it all. And by the looks and sounds of the large and ferocious logo approval trails of these kinds of things, the best thing (something super-cool-nice lookin' & talked about in advance, like this one?), is hardly likely to happen.

Endre Berentzen's picture

The Lillehammer Olympics 1994 brand was actually not bad at all when it's compared to this shite!

I tend to blame the client in such cases for doing a bad job in the research & selection phase. They should have chosen a design firm who knows how to build a brand. Someone who knows about both history, culture, psychology as well as trends. Not someone who's only focus is visual and is even sucks at that.

I hope they will consider a redesign!

Endre Berentzen's picture

I just went to their site and saw that they classify themselves as brand experts! It just proves my theory that good design dies in a commitee. Too many people have a say and it ends up as a lump made of constant compromises. My advice to them is once the workshops and identity specification process is done the strategists should back off and let the designer do his part of the job. You've done yours now let us do ours!

mili's picture

Obviously the logo is still not loved by everyone.

Today's Matt from the Daily Telegraph

cyrusselster's picture

I expected the logo to look attractive and appealing but did disappointed me as well. It would have looked better if 2012 wouldn't have been mentioned. I mean everyone knows that its 2012, then why to mention it ?

oldnick's picture

Bottom line? Worst logo ever—unless you're trying to convey that "London Bridge is falling down."

Black Sabbath: Saturday, September 29. Who knows? Maybe the bridge WILL fall down…the logo sure as hell fell flat…

5star's picture

Back in the day I posted here in these hallowed halls as Hiroshige (i heart hiroshige the print maker) ... as I review my comments here on the London 2012 logo I see that I haven't changed my opinion. In fact I have reenforced my opinion with the my London 2012 thread.

Graphic design isn't about pleasing the masses. Sorry fans.

Paul Rand was once asked why he added stripes to the IBM logo .... he said " has nothing to with computers and speed." "...graphic design is to be practical and impracticable at the same time's very important to consider aesthetics to consider content."

Paul Rand three part interview...

That's it that's all ...the London 2012 logo work flawlessly ...IMHO of course ;)


oldnick's picture

Good points, Neil. And, thanks for pointing out that I am not the masses. I still think that the logo sucks, big-time…strokes for folks and all.

5star's picture

Coolio Nick, I don't really care about someone's likes or dislikes although I do hope for opinions to be expressed in detail. For instance one could say the London 2012 logo's elements are grouped in such a discordant manner as to upset the eye.

But then again, I think as time goes on we as a global culture are rapidly being reduced to nothing more than grunts. Twitter is somewhat in that grunt vein with its 140(?) character limit, texting to has begun to form grunting methodology. So, I'm completely empathetic to the one or two grunt critique.

And perhaps in some measure the London 2012 logo is a grunt? But I don't think so, I think it boldly harkens back to early Greek culture whilst sounding out how edgy we have become as a global culture.

This ain't the '60s ...see Mexico's olympiad branding.

I don't think the London 2012 logo is the pinnacle of graphic design ... I just think it has its hand the pulse of modern day culture.

There ain't no kumbaya moments in the London 2012 branding.

I'm beginning to ramble... lol, omg, ...

L8r sk8r


Syndicate content Syndicate content