The challenge of designing a successful Olympic logo is in representing the competitive compassion of all people while celebrating the host nation of the games. Every two years since 1994, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has unveiled a new logo and rallied the world around the host nation, illustrating a delicate balance between nationalism and the Olympic Brand. The case of the 2010 Vancouver Winter Games logo reveals the power, pitfalls, and potential of the Olympic Brand in the new millennium.
Although the Olympic games date back to 776 B.C., the brand as we know it originated in 1985, when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) recognized the value of the Olympic brand and created The Olympic Program (TOP) to manage it. In 1992 the Winter Games were split from the Summer Games to alternate every two years, increasing the brand’s exposure and value. The IOC and TOP have grown the Olympic Brand from $2 million in assets to a billion dollar international juggernaut by expanding with corporate sponsorship and television. Today there is no question that the Olympic Brand is one of the most recognizable and powerful in the world, which makes its role in the bi-annual creation of new Olympic logos all the more interesting.
In 2004, the Vancouver Olympic Committee launched a design contest to determine the logo for the 2010 Winter Games, following a trend that showcases the precarious balance between nationalism and the Olympic Brand. This is a powerful reminder of the 2008 Beijing Olympic logo, which China used to elevate its nationalism above the Olympic brand.
The winning Vancouver Olympics logo is the multi-colored five-piece abstract figure named “Ilanaaq the Inuksuk,” created by Elena Rivera MacGregor and Gonzalo Alatorre from the Rivera Design Group. Ilanaaq (pronounced ee-la-nak) means “friend” in the native Inuktitut language and is modeled after inuksuk, the Inuit navigational markers found throughout Canada. When “Ilanaaq the Inuksuk” was revealed as the winning logo it was met with confusion and scorn from the native community.
An inunnguaq (LEFT) and range of inuksuk (RIGHT)
“Inuit never built inuksuk with head, legs, and arms,” says Peter Irniq, a former Inuit commissioner. “These are not called inuksuk. These are called inunnguaq, [meaning] imitation of man.” In fact, the inunnguaq are navigational stone markers commonly left by hikers, not Inuit, and have become so rampant in the last 100 years that park rangers have had to dismantle and ban them to keep people from getting lost. “What we think about inuksuk is what we think about the Canadian flag. It’s that important,” Irniq insists.
The cultural significance and impact of the Vancouver Olympic logo was marred as a result of the contest, the format of which may have led to insufficient research, strategy, or design intelligence. “We were rushing around putting together the submission,” MacGregor wrote. “When we researched inuksuit (plural of inuksuk) for the logo design, I discovered there wasn’t a lot of information documented online about these amazing sculptures and symbols. However, the more details I found the more fascinated I became with their unique identities and personalities, meanings and functions.”
In the five years since unveiling Ilanaaq the term “inuksuit” has been popularized, creating a category that includes inunnguaq and all derivative inuksuk forms as part of the native tradition. For her part, Elena Rivera MacGregor has promoted the native tradition by designing the popular coloring book An Inuksuk Collection, the best-selling children’s book An Inuksuk Adventure, and the interactive kids snack Inukie Cookies. In each case, the meaning of inuksuk allows the Inuit and Olympic symbols to function together while expanding the audience’s knowledge of the Inuit people and symbols. Inukie Cookies are a fantastic example of this because they encourage children to build their own inuksuk and include diagrams of various inuksuk forms and their meaning, including inunnguaq.
An Inuksuk Adventure, Inukie Cookies, and An Inuksuk Collection (LEFT) with inuksuk diagram (RIGHT)
Considering the power and pitfalls of designing an Olympic logo, it is fascinating that the Olympic Brand itself emerges every two years as the prevailing symbol of the games. Since 1992 only one Olympic logo has distinguished the Olympic rings anywhere other than at the foot of the design. The 2012 London Games will be the first since 1996 to incorporate the Olympic rings into the host city’s logo, leading one to wonder if a single logo is stronger than two.
The 1996 Atlanta Olympic Logo (LEFT) and the 2012 London Olympic logo (RIGHT)
Elena Rivera MacGregor is divided on her preference of one or two logos for the Olympic brand. “I always get the sense that they have to cripple the regular logo to make the second one,” she says. In spite of this, MacGregor and the IOC are very happy with the Vancouver Olympics and the logo’s charisma and success on the world stage.
Pierre de Coubertin, the man who launched the Olympic games in 1896 after a millennium-long absence, used to refer to the Olympics saying “Mens sana in corpore sano / A sound mind in a sound body.” The Olympic Brand would do well in the new millennium to remember this sentiment and leverage its own culture and tradition above the nationalism of the logo.
“The olympic symbol is one of the most well known and respected logos in the world.” says Sterling Brands Chief Creative Officer, Simon Lince. “The host nation identities are always going to be secondary. Over the years an olympic visual language has emerged so, host nation identities only seem ‘appropriate’ when they follow those visual conventions. I believe this is a missed opportunity. I would love to see more unique expressions that are more representative of a nation’s character and of the times in which we live.”
Mac Love
Intern in Design Intelligence
Tweet this | Tags: Olympics, Vancouver
[...]> Sterling Brands: The 3rd Button – http://www.sterlingbrands.com/blog/2010/02/above-the-rings – Pinged http://www.123sitego.com/ [...]