This is something rather ridiculous, and it’s not really word related, but check out the new logo for the London 2012 Olympics.
Yep, that’s the official logo. More than that, it’s a trademarked brand. The response has been quite extensive and almost exclusively negative. Some of those negative responses have been deliciously eloquent.
Stephen Bayley, art critic and founder of the London Design Museum, described the logo in The Guardian newspaper as a “puerile mess, an artistic flop and a commercial scandal”.
Other comments include:
“I have vomited better logos”
“What a load of drivel.”
“It is very 1980’s and hardly 2012”
There have been some attempts to identify exactly what it is or what it represents. Obviously it’s a rather shocking attempt to write 2012, but beyond that there have been some interesting suggestions:
* A long distance runner on the start line
* mainland Britain
* Lisa Simpson
* a broken swastika
* car parks surrounding a small stadium in the middle
* A window I recently kicked a ball through
* A pink Larry Grayson doing the “I’m a little tea pot” dance
and my personal favourite:
* Vicky Pollard (Yeah, but, no, but, yeah character from Little Britain) in a pink tracksuit getting down with the Elephant Man in a pink tracksuit
Another blog comment very succinctly summed up the most likely explanation:
It looks like a logo designed for young people by old people who don’t understand young people.
Already several online petitions have sprung up in protest, gathering many tens of thousands of signatures. No doubt it’s here to stay and people will just have to get used to it. Denise Lewis, a member of the organising committee for London 2012 said, “it’s not a badge or a stamp but a state of mind”. I think it’s more like the state of a mind on a large dose of psychotropic leisure pharmaceuticals. But often, the visual response is more powerful than the verbal and perhaps this is all that needs to be said:
Especially as it apparently cost £400,000.