London Olympics 2012

[Jacques]

Look at the logo for the 2012 olympics.

And now as they say on that site, if you move the parts:

Does look like the word ZION,...and again as they say, if you move again the parts:

And one can read on that site about the last image:

But THEN I started getting emails that said there the logo looked like a stylized Swastika!! I dismissed that immediately... but the more time went by, the more I thought about it... So printed out the original logo... cut it up... laid it out in pieces... and guess what... I saw the stylized logo too... I added NO pieces... I did NOT use the large part that had the Olympic circles on it, I cut around the circles so I could put the stylized 3-legged Swastika in the middle circle. I did NOT use the "dot".

 

[anart]

Seems to me to just be a really ugly logo. Basically, you can make anything out of those pieces, especially if you don't use one of them in the final picture, like this person did. Perhaps I'm not looking 'deeply' enough - but I think it's more a case of really bad design than anything else.

 

[Beau]

Rumormillnews is a known dis-info site. I wouldn't put much stock into anything you read there.

 

[mada85]

It's a really ugly piece of work and as Anart says, you can pretty much make anything out of anything, especially if you cherry-pick which parts of the original you use. Here in the UK there was a petition calling for the logo to be scrapped and/or changed, signed by almost 50,ooo people. The petition is now closed, and its author, who remains anonymous says:

I have decided to close the petition as it becomes clear that the logo is here to stay - there is little point in damaging the reputation of our Olympic Games, that was never the intention. The protest has been effectively made.

I was struck by the incredible ugliness of this piece of 'artwork'. I wondered what sort of art psychopaths make. And then I wondered if this logo was a 'testing of the waters' to see how far they could go, and what sort of reaction they would get from something so obviously wrong. Maybe I'm just seeing pathocratic conspiracies everywhere. The logo above is very different from the one used for the bidding process, which can be seen here (at Wikipedia). The earlier version seems more human than the one finally chosen.

This BBC News article says:

Michael Wolff, co-founder of designers Wolff Olins, which created the logo, said it had not been "done justice" and blamed Olympic organisers for not publicising it properly.

Mr Wolff seems to think that anything can be foisted on the public with the 'correct' publicity. In this case, however, I think people demonstrated common sense, and if anyone really wants to protest against it they could refuse to buy anything featuring the logo.

Does anyone else have an instinctive reaction against this logo? I find it quite disturbing and inhuman – lacking in harmony or beauty. My reaction is one of wanting to shake off something infectious or dirty, almost as though it has some kind of ugly subliminal message. Any thoughts?

 

[Alada]

Yeah, it does seem be be stretching it a bit to get 'Zion' and that symbol out of it. Agreed its a pretty ugly unfriendly looking design though, all that pointy sharpness can't be good feng shui. ;)

 

[anart]

I'd have to say my first response to it is that it is 'visually cacophonous' if that makes any sense - it's almost painful to look at. Very discordant and almost agressive with the sharp misaligned angles - so, yes, it does seem to lack an organic human quality - and it almost comes across as divisive, somehow. The colors shown are also visually aggressive and look like something out of a late 1970's t-shirt design. All in all - it's most unpleasant, to my eyes, at least.

 

[Keit]

Here what else people saw in this logo ;)
And I agree. This is ugly piece of "art" and it seriously hurt the eyes.

 

[mada85]

This thing has been bugging me and I have been wondering exactly what makes this logo so repellent. It is composed almost exclusively of triangles and angled forms, with only one four-sided form. The large shape at the top right is a fractured rectangle. If you trace the basic shapes and simplify them, you get a large triangle with a small square on the long edge, like a knife or other chopping instrument. Like this:

The underlying shape, when seen alone, looks like this:

This brought to mind the triangular letter 'V', and I don't mean in the sense of Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici. In Euphonics: A Poet's Dictionary of Enchantments by John Michell, I found this about the letter V:

V
vital and vigorous but vain and vicious

It seems the logo designer has expressed the vain and vicious side of the character of the letter V, of which Mitchell says:

Weakness leads to vice, and so to a vile, vicious, depraved, evil, vindictive, violent, virulent, vexatious, vengeful, voracious villain, virago, vermin, viper, vampire and devil.

Venomous is best descriptive of the malevolent aspect of V.

Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I think there's a bit more to this logo issue. It is a violent image in both shape and colour, and it will be broadcast and seen by millions if not billions of people. The subliminal message is of knives, violence, stabbing, violent penetration, disconnection, fragmentation, fracturing. It gives the viewer an unhealthy impression and will be repeated ad infinitum on the world's TV screens, just like the twin towers and other disasters.

More pathocratic programming of the masses.

 

[CarpeDiem]

Like they made their best to imitate human creativity but all they got is cold kiss from the Ice Queen, a greeting from the side of creation alligned with the entropy and non-being

 

[aurora]

A child could have drawn something much better, and I wonder how much they paid for this eye aching image..

 

[mada85]

I wonder how much they paid for this eye aching image..

This UK Telegraph article gives a figure of £400,000, as does this BBC News article.

To give you an idea, at today's exchange rate, £400,000 sterling is equivalent to:

US dollars: 787,635.29

Euros: 587,828.04

Australian dollars: 936,466.21

…you get the idea…and now, have the sick bag at the ready:

Tony Blair raised hopes that the symbol would leave people "inspired to make a positive change in their life"[…]

[T]he logo, which cost £400,000 … took the best part of a year to be devised by brand consultants Wolff Olins,

"This is the vision at the very heart of our brand," said London 2012 organising committee chairman Seb Coe.

"It will define the venues we build and the Games we hold and act as a reminder of our promise to use the Olympic spirit to inspire everyone and reach out to young people around the world.

"It is an invitation to take part and be involved.

 

[adam7117]

I don’t particularly dislike the logo, actually. This is one of those things that grows on ya – even if the initial impression is one of slight surprise. It IS a little different, isn’t’ it…

Wouldn’t necessarily read too much into the shapes involved either. Mind you, the Way of the Fool does mean that the whole of Creation, All around is of some archetypical significance…

Just the fact that everyone is freaking out about it and the process is already embroiled in controversy means that the main advertising objective is achieved.

All eyes on London 2012.

If it ever happens, that is… ;)

 

[mada85]

This is one of those things that grows on ya – even if the initial impression is one of slight surprise.

To my mind, in relation to this logo, 'grows on you' = becomes accustomed to = becomes desensitised to.

As a very broad generalisation, Laura divided the ancient peoples into two groups: the triangle people and the circle people. And, broadly speaking, the triangle represents the STS hierarchy, the circle represents STO networking. The Olympics logo is most definitely a triangle people design. The five Olympic circles are completely overwhelmed by the other jagged shapes.

Wouldn’t necessarily read too much into the shapes involved either. Mind you, the Way of the Fool does mean that the whole of Creation, All around is of some archetypical significance…

I'm not sure what you really think here. First you discourage us from reading 'too much' into the shapes, then you say that 'all around is of some archetypal significance'. Which side of the fence are you on? If 'all around is of some archetypal significance' then surely 'all around' is communicating with us in some fashion – resonating with our internal archetypes.

Just the fact that everyone is freaking out about it and the process is already embroiled in controversy means that the main advertising objective is achieved.

An objective has been achieved and we can gain some clues about this from the ugly design, and our knowledge of the pathocracy. It is possible that the whole thing is a product of 'normal' human automatism - call me Mr Paranoid if you like, but I do think there is something unwholesome going on here. The Olympics are a global event with massive media exposure and in those conditions, the logo takes on extra symbolic 'weight'.

Logo
An identifying symbol used by a company [or corporation or business], e.g. in its advertising.

Symbol
Something that stands for or suggests something else by reason of association, convention, etc; esp a visible sign of something invisible.

Penguin English Dictionary

The question here is: What is the invisible thing?

 

[Tigersoap]

I don't care about the logo one bit in the end.
There are more important things happening in the UK than this mediocre choice of pseudo-trendy marketing.

I don't think there is anything "evil" in this logo, it's too eighties (although you could summon satan by wearing too much spandex.)

Also "ugly" or not it's all subjective tastes (my subjective taste is that it's a bad blast from the past, so you know).

As a very broad generalisation, Laura divided the ancient peoples into two groups: the triangle people and the circle people. And, broadly speaking, the triangle represents the STS hierarchy, the circle represents STO networking. The Olympics logo is most definitely a triangle people design. The five Olympic circles are completely overwhelmed by the other jagged shapes.

Like you said, I think it's a bit of a stretch to associate every triangle to only STS behavior.
If you look closely at the design portfolio/client list of Wlff Olins, you'll see that they also made "circular" logos.

I'm not sure what you really think here. First you discourage us from reading 'too much' into the shapes, then you say that 'all around is of some archetypal significance'. Which side of the fence are you on? If 'all around is of some archetypal significance' then surely 'all around' is communicating with us in some fashion – resonating with our internal archetypes.

I do agree with Adam7117 though, what would be the point of wanting to prove that this logo was designed to trigger whatever evil resonance within us ?

An objective has been achieved and we can gain some clues about this from the ugly design, and our knowledge of the pathocracy. It is possible that the whole thing is a product of 'normal' human automatism - call me Mr Paranoid if you like, but I do think there is something unwholesome going on here. The Olympics are a global event with massive media exposure and in those conditions, the logo takes on extra symbolic 'weight'.

The question would be, why does it trigger such a strong reaction in you ?
Why do you need to prove there is something sinister in it ?

Again without denying absolutely that there might not be some special significance for the choice of logo I think it's wasting your time and energy.

As for the price, it's fairly common for such an agency to ask this kind of prices.
Just have a look at their client list, they're a worldwide company working for other big companies (BT, Orange, Renault, Tate...)

Moreover, you should know as you said that you were in design that it's the client who finally has the last word so the decision to go with the logo was probably from The London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games.

I do suspect (without proof) that the design agency was chosen because they already had close ties with the UK governement and because they already worked on the 2004 Olympic comittee logo.


In any case they want to be sure to be the sole possessor of the usage "rights" for the logo :

Creative freelancers have been banned from unauthorised use of the London 2012 Olympic logo, following the introduction of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act on March 30.

Under its terms, the Olympic Delivery Authority can prevent any small business to create Olympic or Games related marks in their marketing, without prior permission.

Only the financial backers of the Games, namely official sponsors and stakeholders of the Organising Committee and the International Olympic Committee can make use of marks or associations related to the sporting event.

As a result, all attempts at ‘ambush marketing’ are illegal and creative designers are urged to check the banned keywords that constitute the marks, including ‘London 2012’ ‘Olympic’ and ‘Olympics.’

New powers in the Act also mean the Authority can clampdown on street trading and ticket touting relating to the Olympic Games.

Source : Designtaxi.com

 

[mada85]

…what would be the point of wanting to prove that this logo was designed to trigger whatever evil resonance within us ?

The question would be, why does it trigger such a strong reaction in you ?
Why do you need to prove there is something sinister in it ?

Again without denying absolutely that there might not be some special significance for the choice of logo I think it's wasting your time and energy.

Good points, Tigersoap. This afternoon I was asking myself the same questions. Since I joined this forum I have noticed a program in myself, of getting carried away with trying to analyse the symbolism of things which really are insignificant, such as films and logos, in order to impress with my knowledge, driven by feeling inadequate to comment on more important issues.