“Promising to someday write more than Twitters”
Or so you would think:

Vancouver 2010: Where the main event is merchandising
The fact that I can’t remember a single Olympic mascot of the past speaks to the grand ambition of the Vancouver 2010 team, who have clearly consulted with a professional firm to a specific end: A kid-friendly, merchandise-begging, license-breeding, profit-generating set of adorable mascots.
No proletarian, pick-some-stupid-fourth-grader’s-idea-campaign here, no sir. The kids are going to want something to distract them while their parents watch Olympic curling, and those distractions are going to be an adorable bear-thing wearing a totem pole and blackface, a sasquatch bearing earmuffs and Uggs and an inukshuk tattoo on his bicep, and a happy raccoon-rat-winking thing with a cow-lick who is probably “the girl”. I hear that they were going to include a Killer Whale with a scarf around his neck, but that it was too stereotypical.
Mock as I might, I have no problem with Vancouver trying to find something sugar-coated and marketable to support their Olympic event. It’s certainly the exact opposite of London 2012’s abortion of a logo, the key concepts behind which appear to be “enrage the audience” and “exclude the un-pretentious.” I’m
not entirely sure how jagged shapes that vaguely look like “2012″, the five rings and the venue’s name — all gracefully wrapped in a tasteful color scheme that screams 1989 — made it all the way to print without a single person committing suicide, but you get the feeling that there’s hostility behind it.
Seriously, can you think of a less palatable, more difficult image for any event to adopt? Can you think of a single packager, retailer or vendor who’s going to be happy about including that visual object as part of their (inevitable, required, mandated) Olympic promotions? It’s the only explanation that makes sense: The logo could be a brilliant counter-attack against the commercializing of the games, forcing the most inconceivably horrible logo down the throats of the businesses who will be competing to sponsor it. Take that, corporate dogs, the London Games cries, Sully us with your “endorsements” and we’ll sully you right back.
That, or there was heavy abuse of psychotropic drugs among the committee.
Meanwhile, in British Columbia, we get mascots who resemble escapees from Animal Crossing:

Which, if nothing else, gives us the comfort that in Vancouver, we know they’re abusing psychotropic drugs.
So I'm done having killer mysterious headaches and surprising personal calamities and getting doubly suprising promotions. I Twitter now (peep that HA HA HA see what I did there) and I'm back to blogging, so it's now officially more than you can stand.
Kim
November 28th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
People were so ready to hate the mascots right away. An informal poll on Global last night had about 80% giving the thumbs down… but come on. At least it’s not an anthropomorphic inukshuk. It’s a hockey-playing sasquatch! that’s cool!
Do you remember the cowboy bears from the 88 olympics?
Mike
November 28th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
Oh god, I remember them now. I don’t remember feeling strongly about them one way or another, in fact, and I was a kid back then — nothing drove within me the urge to get excited about them. They were just the giant costumed people waving at the screen whenever the CBC had to do an establishing shot between events.
I think what bugs me about the Vancouver mascots is that they’re really, really obviously commercial. I mean, check this out:
“Miga is a young sea bear who lives in the ocean with her family pod, out past Vancouver Island near Tofino, British Columbia. Sea bears are part killer whale and part bear. Miga is part Kermode bear, a rare white bear that only lives in British Columbia.”
Sea bear? Half killer whale and half white bear? What the fuck?
On the other hand, I have to concede your point about the sasquatch. It is very hard to find anything wrong with sasquatches doing people things, like playing hockey or ski jumping or curling. Can you imagine the sasquatch on a luge? That’s comedy cold, right there. I’d have that sasquatch guy all over the place on the first day.
This just in: I really wish they’d just used the sasquatch, and not the two other fucking Pokemon things. That would have made my heart grow two whole sizes.
Beth
November 28th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
I agree with the sasquatch love. The other two are a bit twee, though. I have to admit, the only other mascot I remember is Sam the Eagle from the ‘84 Olympics in L.A. But then again, I’m old.
Meg
November 28th, 2007 at 8:45 pm
The Sasquatch kind of looks like a kid-friendlier version of The Abominable Charles Christopher.
And I think the 2012 logo looks like an angry fox, with Flock of Seagulls hair, telling someone to “get the fuck out.”
Chad
April 23rd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I think the Vancouver mascots look like they were created by firms (they were a collaberation-yes, it took more than one) who turned the tv on for ten minutes and decided to boil down all of the Sponge Bob-Dora the Explorer-Nicktoons-wannabe anime crap to some very forgettable, soul-and flavor-less mulligan stew. Where’s the personality? Does character design have to be bland in order to be international? And to think people got paid to come up with these things. Even Atlanta’s “Izzy”, though a terrible idea for a mascot, had some personality to it.
As for the 2012 logo, I think the Olympics is just becoming a joke. That’s the laziest damned thing I’ve ever seen in commercial art.
Even though 1984’s Sam the eagle was created by a Disney studio employee, it showed grace, time, and effort in character design. Heidi and Howdy from 1988 were a little generic, but again, personality and effort were put into them. These new 2010 mascots have as much emotional output as a slug. Or maybe a slug with a hip tattoo and scarf. Could be the designers thought “how do we out-bland those ‘Friendlies’ from Beijing”?