Vancouver 2010 Games to unveil logo

[DMadSport]

Sure it's a Canadian symbol, but that would be like putting a grain elevator or the Bluenose in the logo.

...and yeah, there's an Inukshuk in Stanley Park, but there's also tigers in the zoo... it doesn't make it representative of the location.

Define "location." If you're thinking Vancouver, then yeah, maybe it isn't the first thing you think of when you bring up the city. But if you're thinking Canada, as I'm guessing the selection committee was, then it could be representative. Grain elevators and cowboy boots would be too narrow; beavers would be to comical; a Tim Hortons donut shop would be too commercial; mountains would be too regional (not too many mountain ranges in eastern Canada). What's more, it's not some redesign on the same old maple leaf. This seems much like the same reason Sydney 2000 didn't go with a koala as its mascot. There's more to Canada than just an icon on a flag.

Simply put, it may not be the greatest logo in the world, it may not be as stunning and breathtaking as the bid logo, and it may not be as obvious as a maple leaf, but it serves its purpose as representing where these Games will be played... not just Vancouver, but Canada.

Something else interesting about this: According to the press release at vancouver2010.com, the colors aren't necessarily meant to match the Olympic rings...

Red borrows from the maple leaf (guess they have part of that symbol after all)

Gold for the sunrises

Green and blue for the forest ranges, mountains, and islands.

[DEAD!]

...and let's not forget, the judges consisted of some people people who work in design

from the press release:

* "It is very, very simple which is why we're drawn to it. It stops you." - Theodora Mantzaris, Manager, Image and Identity Department, Athens 2004 Summer Games Organizing Committee.

* "What makes an identity cool, is its little unique characteristics. This one is the mouth. I wish I had designed that!" - Steve Mykolyn, Creative Director, Design and Interactive, Taxi Advertising and Design, Toronto.

* "It is happy, human, welcoming and has a sense of energy." - Scott Givens, Vice President, Entertainment, Disney Entertainment Productions. Leader of the creative and ceremonies teams, Salt Lake 2002 Winter Games.

* "It is universal, but also speaks to the vision and dream of Vancouver and Whistler." - Rod Harris, President and CEO, Tourism British Columbia.

The panel also included someone who works for Electronic Arts.

I agree with DMadSport in that this logo may not be as good as the bid logo, this logo serves it's purpose and that's why I like it. I accepted it for what it represents as opposed to what it doesn't.

It's a good thing the Inuksuk is a logo and not a mascot

I think this logo will also serve as a reminder any of you who work in graphic design or who aspire to be one to maybe think outside of the box once in while.

[IceCap]

the bid logo blows this one away.

[DrBear]

I'd agree with those who call it an "all-Canada" symbol. If you drive the main highway from Sudbury to Toronto, you see similar "trail markings" placed along the highway, albeit as an art project. It became a game during the drive to try to see how many we could find.

[Phil]

Sure it's a Canadian symbol, but that would be like putting a grain elevator or the Bluenose in the logo.

...and yeah, there's an Inukshuk in Stanley Park, but there's also tigers in the zoo... it doesn't make it representative of the location.

Define "location." If you're thinking Vancouver, then yeah, maybe it isn't the first thing you think of when you bring up the city. But if you're thinking Canada, as I'm guessing the selection committee was, then it could be representative. Grain elevators and cowboy boots would be too narrow; beavers would be to comical; a Tim Hortons donut shop would be too commercial; mountains would be too regional (not too many mountain ranges in eastern Canada). What's more, it's not some redesign on the same old maple leaf. This seems much like the same reason Sydney 2000 didn't go with a koala as its mascot. There's more to Canada than just an icon on a flag.

Simply put, it may not be the greatest logo in the world, it may not be as stunning and breathtaking as the bid logo, and it may not be as obvious as a maple leaf, but it serves its purpose as representing where these Games will be played... not just Vancouver, but Canada.

Something else interesting about this: According to the press release at vancouver2010.com, the colors aren't necessarily meant to match the Olympic rings...

Red borrows from the maple leaf (guess they have part of that symbol after all)

Gold for the sunrises

Green and blue for the forest ranges, mountains, and islands.

First off, Vancouver is a very "regional" city. People from Vancouver have more connection with Seattle than Saint John.

Precedent was set by Sydney, which used its familiar Opera House as a very regional tie-in. The Opera House does not represent Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, or Canberra. The boomerang had some national significance, but this was most definitely the logo for Sydney 2000, not Australia 2000.

Similarly, this is Vancouver 2010, not Canada 2010, and certainly not Vancouver-Iqaluit 2010. Don't be afraid to look like it. Not that incorporating a national icon is a bad thing, which leads me to my second point...

You certainly can have a national symbol in the logo, but an Inukshuk is not a national symbol. It's on the Nunavutian flag, similar to a bison being on the Manitoba flag, similar to the fleur-de-lis being on the Quebec flag. It is itself a regional symbol, and one that misrepresents the temperate region in which the games are being held. (Won't find many Inuit native to the Okanagan.)

Third, I hate it when meaning is injected into colours. It's so subjective, it's essentially meaningless. Injecting meaning into them artificially is so contrived it's humourous... sorry, I'm not a big fan of the "artiste" mindset.

If you derive your colours specifically from well known sources, such as a sports team which may derive certain specific shades of colours, then you can make a case. But to represent the Inukshuk's yellow leg as representing the sun? Sorry, I thought he had just had an "accident" of legendary proportions, and was bleeding down one leg and peeing down the other.

Given that the region has so much culture of its own, both of native and of environmental nature, it was disappointing to see them borrow a cultural icon that is not representative of their own.

[DEAD!]

First off, Vancouver is a very "regional" city. People from Vancouver have more connection with Seattle than Saint John.

Precedent was set by Sydney, which used its familiar Opera House as a very regional tie-in. The Opera House does not represent Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, or Canberra. The boomerang had some national significance, but this was most definitely the logo for Sydney 2000, not Australia 2000.

Similarly, this is Vancouver 2010, not Canada 2010, and certainly not Vancouver-Iqaluit 2010. Don't be afraid to look like it. Not that incorporating a national icon is a bad thing, which leads me to my second point...

You certainly can have a national symbol in the logo, but an Inukshuk is not a national symbol. It's on the Nunavutian flag, similar to a bison being on the Manitoba flag, similar to the fleur-de-lis being on the Quebec flag. It is itself a regional symbol, and one that misrepresents the temperate region in which the games are being held. (Won't find many Inuit native to the Okanagan.)

Third, I hate it when meaning is injected into colours. It's so subjective, it's essentially meaningless. Injecting meaning into them artificially is so contrived it's humourous... sorry, I'm not a big fan of the "artiste" mindset.

If you derive your colours specifically from well known sources, such as a sports team which may derive certain specific shades of colours, then you can make a case. But to represent the Inukshuk's yellow leg as representing the sun? Sorry, I thought he had just had an "accident" of legendary proportions, and was bleeding down one leg and peeing down the other.

Given that the region has so much culture of its own, both of native and of environmental nature, it was disappointing to see them borrow a cultural icon that is not representative of their own.

Well, the boomerang is an aboriginal symbol much like the Inukshuk is the Inuit.

I can accept your argument for a more regionalised look, but perhaps, there wasn't an entry that was best suited as an olympic emblem. As for the colour positions, I think the yellow should have used for the torso because at we know where the sun shines I think the yellow was used for the leg because they wanted to emphasize the rest of the body with the other colours. They could have used it for the head, but it wouldn't show too well on a white t-shirt.

As for this "national symbol" debate, I can argue that there really is no, one, true, national symbol for Canada. Sure, we have a maple leaf on our flag, but it doesn't represent all of Canada? How many trees are there north of the Arctic Circle?

[yh]

A second rate logo for a second rate country.

Everybody settle down. I love the Canadians; I kid the Canadians.

I can't say this is an awful logo but it does remind me a lot of Barcelona's and for that reason it gets low marks for a lack of creativity.

[officeglenn]

Apparently now First Nations groups in B.C. are "frustrated" with the logo ? not at the use of a Native symbol, but the fact that a Native designer wasn't used: TSN.ca

[Phil]

Well, the boomerang is an aboriginal symbol much like the Inukshuk is the Inuit.

I can accept your argument for a more regionalised look, but perhaps, there wasn't an entry that was best suited as an olympic emblem. As for the colour positions, I think the yellow should have used for the torso because at we know where the sun shines I think the yellow was used for the leg because they wanted to emphasize the rest of the body with the other colours. They could have used it for the head, but it wouldn't show too well on a white t-shirt.

As for this "national symbol" debate, I can argue that there really is no, one, true, national symbol for Canada. Sure, we have a maple leaf on our flag, but it doesn't represent all of Canada? How many trees are there north of the Arctic Circle?

Yes, but (correct me if I'm wrong here) the heritages of natives living in Australia aren't quite as diverse they are in Canada, where the Haida of the West Coast, the Cree of the Plains, the Iroquois of the Cdn Shield, and the Inuit can't really be lumped together as easily.

There had to have been an entry with a suitable regional look. Good grief, stealthfrog already posted one on this very board!

A maple leaf is a suitable national symbol. It's well beyond being restricted to the Canadian shield... it's on flags from coast to coast... and even in Newfoundland, now that the dispute's settled!

Not saying they needed to use a leaf, but the bid logo itself is evidence that alternatives were available that were more than capable of offering national feel while communicating the appropriate regional message as well. A totem pole is essentially the equivalent symbol from a very public perspective for the Pacific coast natives in comparison with the Inukshuk and the Inuit.

[DEAD!]

A maple leaf is a suitable national symbol. It's well beyond being restricted to the Canadian shield... it's on flags from coast to coast... and even in Newfoundland, now that the dispute's settled!

.... settled until Quebec separates ....