In my world, something ugly can be right.
This on going debate about the quality of the Olympic logo, and how the media has decided to play the public’s opinion, has gotten on my nerves in quite the same way that the english media is obsessively handling the Formula One rookie Lewis Hamilton. I feel a need to share my opinion on both the logotype and on the McLaren super-sensational super-rookie, starting with this post on the logotype.
The lack of visual craftsmanship; not good. Epileptic colors; not good.
No, the logotype is not aesthetically appealing “for 5 pennies.”
However, does that then mean that it is a bad logotype?
Is it one of the primary functions of a logotype to look good and blend in?
What is the primary purpose of a logotype?
As a Londoner I have to say that the logotype is the best thing that has happened to the 2012 Olympics up to this date. Until the logotype got presented two weeks ago, the Olympics had only been about miscalculated budgets and east London property prices.
Now, post logotype launch, all of the sudden people are standing behind the Olympics. Protecting it. It’s about Our Olympics. Yeah, it’s Us now, not just Them anymore.
The logotype used for the bidding process (shown above), designed by Kino Design, with The Thames flowing through the word London, is probably what most people expected to be the logotype, or that the official one would go down these lines. But, with all due respect, that logotype has as much of a back bone as disco music, Helvetica, Back Street Boys and Kate Moss.
No thanks.
Alternative options of the logotype has been floating around the web during the week. The one most people seem to be sending around is the one displayed above on the left, designed by Daniel Eatock.
“Look into my eyes, look into my eyes, the eyes, the eyes, not around the eyes, don’t look around my eyes, look into my eyes”
The one to the right was designed by Winkreative for an interview on BBC Breakfast show.
Like they say, brilliant minds do think alike.
A small update: Willow pointed me to an interesting post on this subject and I thought it was worth coming back and update this entry. The interesting post is titled Long overdue post about the London Olympic 2012 logo and is written by Ben Terrett over at Noisydecentgraphics. Ben and I seem to be on the same side of the fence on this one — the side that likes the logo — but besides that, he touches on things I haven’t and that ties in with Tyler Brulé being on the BBC Breakfast show.
Which brings me on to a wider point. Whether you like the logo or not the way our industry has responded to this has been dreadful. Using terms like “knocking up” on BBC air time don’t help designers win more boardroom time. Not liking the logo is one thing, but comments like “£400k? My kid could have done better…”
end of update
Looking back, Montréal and Los Angeles had graphically nice logotypes, and München graphic profile by Otl Aicher was stunning and i’m sure if they ever have an Olympics in Bern, Zürich or Geneva, everything would look very Josef Müller-Brockmann’ish like — graphic designers would get a hard-on and base their next design on it and others would look at it, nodding in agreement, concurring, thinking ‘yes’, and then just get on with it.
But london is london.
Stephen Bayley said in an article in this weekend’s Observer that Wolff Olins had underestimated the public’s taste. I think the public shouldn’t underestimate the competence of a professional branding agency either.
I do believe that the logotype designed by Wolff Olins will get the job done. It’s not like Wolff Olins don’t know what they are doing. They are professionals. And as any good client we should trust them and let them do their job and support them in their decisions.
I’m prepared to put my balls on the table and say in 5 years time the logotype will have the public on it’s side. By then, more values will have been poured into the logotype and the branding will be more established and finalised. The shock will have passed.
All the attention that the logotype has created and received does suggest that Wolff Olins has succeeded in getting people involved and engaged.
Yeah, In my world, something ugly can be right.