Britain's Got No Design Talent

I love Olympic mascots.  Almost as much as I love the Olympics (and a certain short-track speed skater).  My interest in the mascots started when I was interning at a huge PR firm and worked on some post-Atlanta Olympic events for one of the Anheuser-Busch theme parks.  As an intern, I was sent on a business trip to work the event and, as a perk, I got to party with actual Olympians.  Let me just say that you should never go head-to-head on drinking alcohol with swimmers and divers.

Anyway, because of that great experience, I became well-acquainted with Izzy, the mascot for the Atlanta games.  We even have a Christmas ornament of Izzy.  He's kinda funky looking, but the Olympic rings are scattered around his body and he's brightly colored, cheerful and happy and what's not to like about all that?

So today, when I saw the link on CNN titled, "Official mascots of 2012 Olympics in London revealed," I had to click over and see what the Brits came up with.

Oh.  My.  God.  WTF are those?  I mean, I realize Izzy is a little odd, but he at least has two eyes and a mouth that, with a big ol' shit-eatin' grin, conveys his enthusiasm for competitive sporting events. He at least jauntily marches while proudly toting a star-spewing Olympic torch.  Hell, he's even got lightning bolt eyebrows that don't actually reside on his body.  What I'm saying is, he has some human attributes, however remote, that make him somewhat relatable.

I almost started laughing when I saw the picture, but gamely plunged into the article looking for some semblance of an explanation.  I got this: their names are Wenlock and Mandeville, and they were "inspired" by two drops of molten steel spilled while making the last girder for the Olympic stadium.

And then apparently a couple designers got high and came up with these two things. (Okay, so the article didn't say that...it's just my assumption based on what was produced.)

First, the cyclops thing simultaneously creeps me out while making me totally crack up over the inevitable "ol' one eye" jokes that are bound to fly.

Second, the blue one looks like he peed his pants. Nevermind that his head looks like the ergonomically-correct garden rake we bought from Home Depot eight years ago.

Third, the short legs are reminiscent of low-crotch-wearing imbeciles (pants on the ground, pants on the ground, lookin' like a fool wit yer pants on the ground!).  Would like to see any Olympian in any sport try to compete with pants like that.

What completely sent me over the edge while reading, though, was the last line of the article: "Early reviews of wenlock and mandeville are not complimentary."

Uhhhh, ya think?