Now I'm not one of those "my kid could paint that" brigade and I usually see some merit in designs that cause a bit of a kerfuffle. But I can find no redeeming features at all, unless the idea is just to generate news. It could also be the beginning of a new design phase, called anti-design.
Even the typeface is naff, it almost makes comic sans look good.
I'll bet if I had sent that design to the Olympic Committee and told them they could have it for free if they want to use it, what do you reckon they'd have said. "Brilliant or **** off"?
“This is a bold logo," the chief executive of London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games, Paul Deighton, told UK newspaper The Times.
"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".
My money's on Steve.
I can see images and faces in the most obscure of places but I cannot see "2012" there at all. OK at a stretch I might agree on a 2, if I was told that there were numbers in the design, but that's about it.
Even the typeface is naff, it almost makes comic sans look good.
I'll bet if I had sent that design to the Olympic Committee and told them they could have it for free if they want to use it, what do you reckon they'd have said. "Brilliant or **** off"?
“This is a bold logo," the chief executive of London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games, Paul Deighton, told UK newspaper The Times.
"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".
My money's on Steve.
I can see images and faces in the most obscure of places but I cannot see "2012" there at all. OK at a stretch I might agree on a 2, if I was told that there were numbers in the design, but that's about it.
