2012- Already a bad image.

I want to talk about the logo for the London 2012 Olympics (http://www.london2012.com/). As a designer writing on a blog that other creative types will be reading I really don’t think I have to go into detail about how horrible this so called logo really is. The horrid design was released by Wolff Ollins, a NY and London based branding agency, in July of 2007. According to www.wolffolins.com they are “the world's most influential brand business. It helps its clients seize the opportunities presented by a changing world, by making them unique in their markets, and uniquely valuable to customers and shareholders.” I must agree with at least one of the claims they make here on their website, unique in their market. While traditionally the location specific Olympic logo is influenced by some general geographic or regional imagery, not the case here. For what equals almost $812,000.00 USD the London Olympic Committee has made a wondrous blunder. The logo does not relate to anything British or anything in athletics period. It more so resembles amateurish graffiti scribed on some wall back in 1988. Somehow someone along the way people with power from the agency to the committee felt this was “cutting edge” and an appropriate representation of London in the Olympic world. I read online this past summer that the animated Flash version, meant for the Web, was pulled because it potentially would cause epileptic fits! (http://www.360east.com/?p=763) I want to design something like that, hell, how cool would that be? He guys, check out my website and BAM they are all on the floor fishing out. Besides causing your friends brain problems where else would something that flashy and sparkly be appropriate? To me this is a classic example of those who don’t know a damn thing about design, designing good work and basically what looks good making the big decision, anyone with agency experience can relate first hand to this painful reality. I can see some highly paid stiff sitting in his leather chair, feeling totally brilliant, saying crap like: “this is the route we need to take, the youngsters will identify with this. It is totally hip...” I think it fails on all levels, the colors are odd, the design stinks and it is completely unclear what it represents. When I first saw the logo this past summer, I thought it was a map of England or London broken into pieces but I know for a fact that England is not shaped like that (I know what a map is, I’m not from South Carolina). My second thought was it looked like Pangaea, the map of the world like 100 billion years ago. Nope, it wasn’t until I searched further on the net about it that I found out that the random shapes actually formed out into the number 2-0-1-2. Oh, yeah, I guess it does. So does anyone have any other glowing remarks to make about this design? What were some of your original interpretations as to what it was?