To say the official London 2012 Olympics logo was received as enthusiastically as a crying baby on a plane would be a fair observation.
The symbol will undoubtedly be plastered everywhere in the nations capital (and across the wider country) in the run up to the big games, and so surely we have to just tolerate it, some critics may even begin to like it.
So just what were the designers of this controversial piece of art hoping to achieve with this? For those of you that havent yet seen it yet, the logo resembles a doodle that we all used to do on our school books whilst bored in lessons or a piece of amateur graffiti youd see at a train station. The colours are what can only be described as hideous- neon to be precise! But its not just the magenta and yellow that offends us; it is the lack of consideration paid by the people who have been given the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make history in the world of graphic design and indeed of our heritage.
However, can we forgive the logos brashness and seemingly simple creation? Once you see it printed alongside the official sponsors, you may have a change of heart. The crisp sharp lines and the simplicity of the design actually work quite well. Representing such an institution as the Olympics, we should be proud that we are hosting the games, and with a recognisable (and unmissable) logo we will sit firmly at the head of the Olympic table (so to speak).
Many expected the predictable London clichs to play a part in the design of the logo, for example the London skyline or the black cabs. This refreshingly goes against everything that people expected and since its release in 2007 by Seb. Coe, the London 2012 organisers and their design agency Wolff Olins, it has created many heated discussions across the nation.
One thing can definitely be said from this and that is that the logo has brought awareness to the graphic design industry- whether good or bad.