07
EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA,
1992
Design: promotion and identity of Barcelona’92Due to the influence of my architect father, in the
mid fifties I had the chance to experience the beginning of renewing design
activity in Barcelona. Forty years later, I cannot cease to be surprised that
the movement which I experienced as such an exceptional and incipient event has
become one of the main characterizing elements of our cultural identity and
international image.
Since the first expositions by the «R» Group in the Galeries
Laietanes, in 1952 and 1954, to present-day headlines and comments in the
international press there is a long distance, much richer in social and
cultural dimensions than its actual length in time.
The historians of our «mass» or «everyday» culture
will discover the roots of the «Barcelona-design» phenomenon in the artistic
avantgarde movements of modernism (as a matter of fact, at least
internationally, Gaudí appears as a live cause of the creativity of present-day
Catalan design) or in the successive needs of modernization, marking a
difference in relation to the cultural setback of the rest of the peninsula, or
the backwardness of many of our most ancestral customs.
Among these causes, which we will have to analize in
more detail, I would like to single out the one I have experienced in a most
existencial way: the creative force of present-day design is, in the end, the
result of the long period of cultural opposition against the Franco Regime.
In his book Dit i fet, Oriol Bohigas describes
how, in 1954, the members of the «R» Group had to «convince a group of
businessmen and producers [...] to introduce in their expositions a first
repertoire of industrial design when people were barely beginning to get
acquainted with this activity which has later acquired so much importance». In
the same book, Bohigas describes an anecdote which in many ways helped to shape
my own way of walking through the streets of Barcelona and becoming acquainted
with it. He refers to the answer given by the architect Mister Pevsner to a
Barcelona journalist during one of his visits to the city in the fifties.
According to Pevsner, what he liked less about Barcelona was the view at eye
level: shop windows, signs, advertisements, mailboxes, benches, etc.
Bohigas remembers that in Barcelona in those days «there
were no graphic artists, or window dressers, or designers, or dressmakers, or
decorators who weren’t merely deprofessionalized subproducts for a very
mediocre industry and craftmanship».
Architect Mister Pevsner, on the other hand, had been
the consultant for the London subway signposting system. He was the example
between two worlds, both politically and culturally.
Design in Barcelona was still a language for
minorities, a question of opposition; for this reason, in the families of these
pioneers everything had to be «R», even the most familiar prints and documents,
in opposition to the general trend of things offered in the market and proposed
by the majority, the dominating opinion.
Seen after so many years and still feeling surprised
or astonished, with the international press; publishing headlines that speak of
«Barcelona and design», I believe we can interpret this phenomenon as a result
of the historical recovery of cultural and artistic values long recclaimed and
reflected upon, which had very scarce possibilities of being applied during the
days of dictatorship.
Many hours of discussion, of comparing ideas, of
clarification or criticism, of conceptual cleansing of contradictions but, on
the other hand, very little time and opportunities for putting these things
into practice.
From the point of view of cultural analysis there also
seems to be some truth in what Isidre Molas said about the political reasons
for the nomination of Barcelona
for the Olympic Games; he believed there was a need to find reasons for which
to move forward, to emerge once again, to go ahead.
The Games have been a magnificent opportunity for
expression and communication, not only for the creation of diverse messages but
also for the chance of doing it with the certainty of having an incomparable
worldwide audience. The phenomenon of design cannot be separated from the
phenomenon of the «new look» towards design.
The wager in favour of design was one of the strongest
ideas within the limited possibilities of the anti-Franco movement, since it
was based on a series of ideas that could be expressed in a symbolic
non-linguistic way. This is a wellknown fact in the sociology of Catalan
culture.
But Mister Pevsner was not right about everything, for
there was something even uglier than the view at eye level as you walked
through the streets: what you could read —or could not read— in the censured
newspapers published at the time.
Design offered the possibility of expression in a
defiant and non-conformist way. It shouldn’t surprise us, therefore, that the
first people dedicated to «semiotics» in Barcelona, as opposed to those in
Paris, Milan or London, were architects, designers and art critics.
Once the dictatorship has been overcome, all this
potential is faced with an unsuspected possibility: that of being put into
practice with the support of public initiative and with the whole world
watching.
In this context, the Games are not only a magnificent
opportunity for carrying out the projects but also for doing so in front of a
qualified audience. Design thus provided the plot of a great performance on the
capacity of «Barcelona» to combine creativity with industrial and professional
competence, absolutely essential in order to position ourselves within the new
competitive map of modern Europe.
Designing the
games and designing thanks to the games
In economical terms, but also in terms of design, the
Olympic Games imply, at least, two different types of actions: one type
directly related to their organization and which is absolutely necessary, and
another type that favours an improvement in the organization although it is not
directly involved in it.
Both have determined multiple actions in the field of
design. Among the first, for example, we can consider the design of the Olympic
Torch or the symbol of Barcelona’92, and among the second, the construction of
the new airport or the Olympic Village, or the design of the new public
lighting devices.
The reference to designs that are specifically
necessary for the celebration of the Games will be an important part of our
analysis, divided into several types and categories, but we will also have to
add, as in the case of the economical analysis of the Games, the «induced»
design, an indirect promotional consequence, which characterizes the new
international image of Barcelona.
The design of the
symbols: their cultural and market value
I will refer now to a specific area of Olympic design
that has acquired great importance not only in relation to Barcelona but also, in a more general way, in
relation to the international Olympic movement: communication and graphic
design.
When interpreting the «Barcelona’92» phenomenon we
must not forget that the modern Olympic movement has witnessed the growth in
importance of graphic design, especially as a consequence of its incidence on
the Games’ commercialization processes.
These processes of symbolic association, which are
graphically resolved, are in themselves one of the main ways of financing of
the Games.
The starting point for all this Olympic symbology lies
in the symbols of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) which are, by
extension, the identity symbols of the international Olympic movement; Olympic
flag, rings, representation of the torch, slogan and himn.
But the 1991 Olympic Chart defines the five rings,
basis of the Olympic image, as a basically graphic symbol: «five Olympic rings,
portrayed alone and using one or several colours»; «the group forms a regular
trapezium-type shape in which the smaller base lies on the baseline or lower
part of the diagrams»; «the Olympic symbol represents the union of the five
continents and the meeting of the whole world’s athletes at the Olympic Games»
(chapter 1, rule 12).
These rings, portrayed according to the requirements
of the design techniques described in a manual of rules or norms, have made a
great fortune and are at present one of the most universally wellknown and
valued symbols, both graphically and culturally.
The rings generate a whole series of diverse forms of
institutional and corporative «representations». The rings are used for
referring generically to the Olympic movement or the IOC, but the rings
themselves can be associated with other symbols in order to represent two other
main reference groups: the National Olympic Committees (NOC) and the Olympic
Games of every new Olympiad.
Site symbol or logotype
The changes in the visualization of corporative
images, and also the economical importance of the applications of these images,
have meant that at present we cannot conceive the organization of an olympiad
without the concurrence of a personalized and unique sign of identity.
In fact, one of the first acts carried out by the
Olympic nominees is the approval and presentation of the design of their «logotype»
to the media. Having a «logotype» is equivalent to possessing a public identity
and, in many cases, it means giving «semantics» to something that as yet does
not exist or possess any institutional content.
The specific symbols of every new Olympic organizing
site have three main components:
- Olympic symbol (five rings); - specific
symbol for every new Olympic site;
- specific
logotype for every new Olympic site.
Considering that the denomination “logotype” does not cover all this complexity we will call this group the «site symbol». The «site symbol» acts as a matrix element for the
complete «corporative» identity of the Games. The quality and singularity of
its design is also a good reason for its posterior commercialization.
Its stylistic basis, its shapes and colours, represent
the starting point for the development of a whole set of interventions in the
fields of signposting, looks, stationer material, posters, identifications,
publicity, etc. which will shape the image of the Games.
The growing importance of the site symbols within the
identification processes of the Olympic Games is easily visible if one studies
the historical evolution of Olympic posters.
The first «site symbol» of a clearly corporative
nature in the history of the Olympic Games was the symbol of Tokio’64, created
by Yusaku Kamekura; the symbol of Tokio, with the Japanese flag connotation, is
used with many different media and, for the first time, on the badges that we
now call pins.
The site symbol of Mexico’68, created by
Pedro Ramírez Vázquez, follows this tradition. But its image is no longer
limited to illustrating publications and posters, but rather begins to be
applied to other decorative elements and for creating a certain atmosphere.
For the first time we are face to face with an
integral program of «olympic identity» which is systematically applied to the
design of objects as diverse as the decoration of buildings, signals and signs,
clothes, official vehicles or the typography of news and information.
The program of image design created by Otl Aicher,
director of the Hochschule für Gestaltung in Ulm for the Munich’72 Games, is an
exceptional example that is still studied in specialized schools today.
The assignment entrusted to Otl Aicher was the
creation of a homogeneous but varied conception of an image with a visual brand
adressed to all visitors and appliable to all media (paper, dossiers, look,
wardrobe, posters, souvenirs, etc) and all contents necessary for the
organization of the Games.
With worse or better luck this tradition has continued
in Montreal’76, Moscow’80, Los Angeles’84, Seul’88 and finally the Barcelona’92
Games.
The site symbol of Barcelona’92, created by Josep
Maria Trias, which was preceded by the long and important existence of the
«nomination» symbol, created by the designer América Sánchez, fulfils three
main communicative functions: one of a cultural nature, proposing a certain
identity and aesthetic line for Barcelona, another of an identifying and
referential nature, allowing the unification of the multiple messages and
elements of organization of the Games, and finally a third function that must
not be left out: allowing the great commercial process entailed by the sale of
the Olympic image rights.
The design created by Josep Maria Trias, as has been
admitted by the author himself (Trias, 1992), assumed the connotations
characteristic of the Mediterranean culture, universally acknowledged through
the field of painting and especially the work of Miró.
This symbol adds the use of the manual outline and the
representation of the human figure to the history of Olympic graphic art. This
mobility and anthropomorphism allow the design of all the pictograms of the
Olympic sign system and, at the same time, are an adequate expression of the
humanistic ideals that the Olympic movement seeks.
The symbol produced by Josep Maria Trias was chosen by
means of a restricted contest among the proposals presented by a total of six
prestigious graphic designers: América Sánchez, Cruz Novillo, Rolando, Satué,
Trias and Zimmermann (Caparrós, Capella, Palacios, 1988).
This choice effectively solved one of the main
cultural challenges of Barcelona’92: presenting itself to the world as a city
of design, a creative city in accordance with its humanist tradition and its
prestige as the craddle of avantgarde art. The symbol created by Josep Maria
Trias will probably be historical, and not only insofar as design applied to
the Olympic Games, but also in the history of international graphic design.
Cobi, a commercial and avantgarde
mascot
The mascot, like the symbol, has to carry out
different communication functions; it must represent a cultural project and, at
the same time, be cost-effective and comercial.
An important executive in the marketing department of
the IOC confessed to me that the Cobi had been the best mascot in Olympic
history: its cultural value, logically, is still the object of open discussion
and polemics.
Cobi design, however, has the indisputable value of
being a quality and avantgarde design, clearly breaking away from the acritical
conformism of the commercial culture that has so far been the usual trend in
the world of sports and Olympic sponsoring.
The mascot and the symbol have a common objective or
point of reference: the identification of the Games for every Olympiad. But in
order to do so they must use very different semiotic resources; the mascot, of
a more personalized or «animalized» nature, must carry out the task of easing
the processes of identification and the transmission of festive, euphoric,
subjective messages. The site symbol has the function of institutional
representation and the transmission of more institutional, historical and
cultural values.
The mascot is more easily adapted to popular tastes
and uses. In the hands of its owners it can be turned into a personalized «you»
that consequently allows for imaginary dialogue, jokes, play. The mascot is a
toy doll that children can embrace or take to bed with them, it is a «live»
being that allows the creation of multiple stories, identifications and which
can be present in multiple actions and scenarios.
For all these reasons, the mascot implies great design
complexity. Starting with a concept and a basic image that defines its
pertinent lines, a whole set of applications must be developed; graphic and
industrial designs that imply flat surfaces and three-dimensional surfaces.
More than any other symbol, the mascot is graphic an as well as an object with
multiple shapes and adaptations.
The predecessors of Cobi were Waldi in Munich’72, Amik
in Montreal’76, Misha in Moscow’80, Sam in Los Angeles’84 and Ho-dori in Seul’88,
but Xavier Mariscal’s design for Barcelona’92 breaks away from most of the
established patterns: for example, the tradition of the figurative
representation of animals when designing Olympic mascots, Cobi ambiguously
represents a «character» that is difficult to describe but with clear dog
connotations and the body of a toy doll.
In spite of a certain controversy, Cobi was the result
of a first consensus in the symbolic production of the Barcelona Games. It was
selected by the same jury that chose the Barcelona’92 symbol, in a restricted
contest in which other important artists also took part: Amat, Beaumont,
Capdevila, Mariscal, Peret and Petit.
Among the alternatives to the Cobi there were several
animals (dogs, dragons, rabbits, prawns, frogs, etc), and one vegetable
proposal which consisted of five tomatoes and a personalized figure of the sun,
Sol Olo, designed by Peret, which obtained the second prize.
The jury and the people involved in organizing the
Games and, in a more extended manner, the leaders of cultural opinion,
considered that the symbols of Barcelona should represent a first demonstration
of the design quality of this city, understanding design quality, at least, as
the capacity for applying avantgarde forms to popular mass consumer products.
The Barcelona mascot could not be a mascot made in a
style similar to Walt Disney characters. Neither could it be an analogical
reproduction of the most popular race of dogs in Catalonia (the gos d’atura).
Cobi was a product of Barcelona culture and the
influence of modern avantgarde art, Picasso-type art, with the explicit desire
of being informal, charming and amusing (Mariscal, 1992).
Cobi is part of a new culture of design and “gadgets”
which is both rupturist and attractive.
The new rupturist aspect arose both surprise and
criticisms. A member of Barcelona City Hall felt very sure of his capacity as an art
critic when he said that in his opinion the mascot was «horrible». But Cobi
finally prevailed. Its nature as an open symbol allowed it to adapt to the
demands of a long process of consumption and manipulation.
One reason for its success can be found in its
semantic multiplicity and its capacity for interpreting characters with very
diverse circumstances; it is not only an institutional and standard design, but
also a contestatary and countercultural design; the Cobi is used to portray
messages of protest or caricature of the official management of the Games and
their significance.
The commercial
application of the symbols
We must now insist on the fact that one of the main
sources for financing modern Olympic Games comes from the sale of the rights to
use the Olympic symbols for commercial ends.
The commercial application of the symbols is mainly
done using the following media:
a) in the advertising of the products manufactured by the sponsoring companies; b)
in
the wrapping or packing of their products;
c)
in
several decorative elements of the institutions or authorized companies;
d)
in
objects produced by the licensed firms.
From the commercial point of view, the most important of these applications is advertising. The companies obtain the right to associate the Olympic symbols (rings, site symbols and mascot) with their brands with the aim to improve their sales and business. In a way very much linked to this publicitary
application we must also underline the use of the Olympic symbols in the
packing of licensed products.
Licensed products
The complexity of Olympic marketing forces us to
distinguish a special category of objects to which the Olympic image is applied
and which, as we have seen before, demand varied design action: I am referring
to what are known as «licensed products».
These objects, the variety of which is described in an
annex, use the Olympic symbol to attract buyers amongst the consumer
population, who purchase them as souvenirs or as objects with a certain
prestige.
These objects (T-shirts, cigarette lighters, for
example) can be purchased, without commercial publicity, in various shops,
specialized or otherwise, but they can also be found as a means of promotion or
advertising of the Olympic sponsors, who have the exclusive use of these
images.
The direct sale of these objects and Olympic material
has experienced a great growth in the past few years and is already an
important source of income for the organizing committees.
Barcelona is an exception insofar
as the variety of all these applications,1 in the use of the site
symbol, but especially of the mascot or, even more exceptionally, in the
application of both to the same product.
But the symbol and the mascot can also be autonomous
in the sense that they not always have to appear along with other symbols or
illustrating other objects. The symbol and the mascot themselves can also be manufactured
as symbolic objects.
The site symbol can be reproduced as a jewel and thus
acquire multiple shapes, either flat or with volume and very different sizes.
The mascot, however, holds many more possibilities for
reproduction. In the first place, as opposed to the logotype, because the
mascot allows for multiple versions and forms of representation. Cobi, for
example, can be a skater, a student, a ball player or a swimmer, and all this
can be done in all sizes and volumes.
The most extended application is the new pin fashion
as opposed to the old badges stuck on jacket lapels which only men could wear;
pins can be pinned onto almost anything. «Pinmania», as it is known, has found
a good field of application in the Olympic Games.
Posters, medals, signs and other
Olympic symbols
Apart from the design of the basic symbols, the
Olympic Games also require the design of a great variety of other symbols and
messages.
Thus, for example, the edition of posters has a long
Olympic tradition: which has followed the development of graphic
communication. The first example of Olympic graphic communication dates back to
the 1896 Games in Athens. Since then and until the Games in Amsterdam in 1928,
the graphic image of the Games was applied to the program guide, which, at the time,
carried out the representative function that was later taken up by the use of
posters.
The poster for the Amsterdam Games (1928), of which 10.000
copies were printed, emblematically uses the five Olympic rings for the first
time, and they will not cease to be present in all the Games that have taken
place after them.
Barcelona’92 has a wide program of poster edition.
Four official posters have been created by Josep Maria Trias, Xavier Mariscal,
Antoni Tàpies and Enric Satué, winners of a contest in which eight other
participants took part, whose posters have been made into a collection of
posters of Barcelona’92.
The COOB’92 has also published another series of
posters of painters and official sports, as well as the posters of the
pictograms of Olympic sports designed by Josep Maria Trias for the Olympic
signposting project.
It’s impossible to know the exact final number of
copies printed of all these collections of posters without carrying out
specific research in this sense. The total circulation of the posters is
determined by the participation of the numerous people involved: sponsors, licensed
firms, communication media, who distribute hundreds of thousands of copies of
these posters, etc.
The organization of the Games requires many more actions
and design programs. Amongst the more important is the case of the signs that
have to be put up and the looks of the city and the Olympic sports facilities.
In Barcelona’92, for example, a signposting program1
of sports and Olympic facilities has been planned with introduction of about
30.000 signs. For the first time, this sign system uses pictograms derived from
the shapes of the site symbol, with the background in navy blue and the
adaptation of the system to the four official languages (Catalan, Spanish,
French and English).
In the long Olympic tradition, other symbols and
collectors traditions have had a great importance, for example, stamps or coins
commemorating the event.
The phylatelic program of Barcelona is made up of
eight preolympic and one Olympic series. The creation of these stamps has been
carried out by artists such as Peret, Bartolozzi, Robert Llimós, Arranz Bravo,
Joan Pere Viladecans, Gerard Sala and Perico Pastor, who have contributed
drawings of all the official sports present in Barcelona’92.
Design and sponsoring
Finally, in our analysis of the functions and
applications of design, I believe it is necessary to point out that all these
design programs have their origin and basic function in financing and
sponsoring programs.
Modern Olympic Games constitute a field of application
and basic experimentation for the development of sponsoring using the new
modern international communications system.
In the first place, because of its worldwide scope and
monumental audience but also due to the characteristics of the development of
the Olympic event itself.
The association of the Olympic symbols with a
commercial product is a good marketing option and not only because here these
commercial products manage to become associated with symbols that evoke
positive aspects, but also because it allows them to improve their position in
relation to their own competitors: Coca-Cola versus Pepsi-Cola, Visa versus
American Express, etc.
The role of the sponsors and the Olympic economy
experienced a great change after the application of the new sponsoring norm in
the Los Angeles’84 Games. The new logic was based on the supposition that
«less» (sponsors) would be equivalent to «more» (money).
The Tokio Games were the last to be held in which the
collaboration of commercial companies, sponsors, was made through contributing
goods, without taking into consideration issues such as competition and
exclusivity. The Los Angeles organizers (LAOOC) limited the number of sponsors
to 35, with sole agents for every line of products. On that ocassion the
benefits were almost 100 million dollars.
Alter this experience, the International Olympic
Committee decided to take more direct action in the regulation of this
business, establishing the rights and obligations of alt those involved —the
International Olympic Committee, Organizing Committees, National Olympic
Committees— and also establishing the prerogatives and limits that would affect
the sponsors in their use of the Olympic symbols.
It was considered necessary to establish the
commercial and geographical conditions of this use, thus creating an
international sponsoring program known as the TOP (The Olympic Program).
We must bear in mind that the Olympic Chart expressly
prohibits the exhibition of the commercial symbols (static publicity) inside
and outside the Olympic facilities during the duration of the Games. It also
forbids the exhibition of commercial brands inside the dressing rooms or on the
sports equipment used by the athletes. The only thing that is accepted is the
regulated association of the commercial brands with the Olympic symbols in all
other communication media.
In these circumstances, given these norms and the
investments that all this entails, the graphic design programs acquire maximum
protagonism and complexity.
The symbols designed will have to be applied to a wide
range of categories of sponsors or supporting companies:
a) companies that participate in the world program of Olympic sponsoring (TOP); b)
companies
that take part in a specific sponsoring program of the National Olympic
Committees (NOC) and can use the symbols of the corresponding National
Committees;
c)
companies
that participate in the specific sponsoring program of each one of the Olympic
Games and can use the site symbol and the mascot.
These sponsors, especially the TOP sponsors, coincide with the large multinationals of the diverse categories of large scale consumer products, capable of generating a large amount of products and messages. The TOP program corresponding to Barcelona’92 includes
the participation of the following twelve companies: Coca-Cola (soft drinks),
Kodak (photography), 3M (magnetic tapes), Brooks Brother Industries
(typewriters), Philips (audio, Hi-Fi), Sports Illustrated/Time (magazines),
VISA (credit cards), United States Postal Service (mail service), National
/Panasonic (video), Bausch & Lomb (optical, dental), Ricoh (fax), Mars
(food).
Insofar as the sponsors more directly managed by the
Organizing Committee of the Games, the COOB’92 in the case of Barcelona, we
must distinguish four main categories, each one with different privileges in
relation to the use of images:
a) Collaborating sponsors with a minimum contribution of 2.500 million pesetas, taking part in basic areas of the organization: IBM (computer technology), SEAT (automobiles), Rank Xerox (editing Systems), Telefónica (telecommunications), Alcatel (medical communication services), Banesto (financing entities), La Unió i el Fènix (insurance), Philips (electronics), El Corte Inglés (large department stores). b)
Patronage
sponsors, companies that wish to associate their image to the Games and who
contribute a minimum of 600 million pesetas. These sponsors correspond to sole
rights for specific categories of products: Cola-Cao, Damm, Campofrío, Danone,
Eds, Flex, Asics, Mizuno, Seiko, Enasa-Pegaso, Frigo, Renfe, Freixenet.
c)
Provider
sponsors, who contribute goods or services to the organization, with a
calculated minimum contribution of 150 million pesetas.
Among the sponsors, and in other less relevant categories, we must mention the «suppliers», the «providers of sports equipment», but especially the «licensed sponsors», companies that have been granted the license to use the symbols of the Games (site symbol and mascot) for the commercialization of certain products, whose contribution is calculated according to their turnover. One year before the Games, the COOB’92 had already
granted this license to 58 companies which had produced a total of 450
different applications, not counting differences in size and colour.4
To conclude, we can say that in Barcelona’92 the
cost-effectiveness of these commercial strategies is consolidated. Although we
do not yet have final data on this subject, 500 days before the beginning of
the Games our information was that all records had been beaten, since 540
million dollars had already been obtained by these means, a much larger sum
than in Los Angeles or Seul, which had «on1y» made 189 and 225 million dollars,
respectively.5
1. COOB’92, Productos
licenciados, COOB’92, Barcelona 1991.
2. IOC, L’olympisme par l’affiche, International Olympic Committee, Lausanne 1983.
3. The olympic
signposting project of Barcelona’92
has been created by a team directed by Josep Maria Trias, with the cooperation
of Jordi Matas and the advice, in the field of communication, of a team
directed by the author of the present article. The coordination of the project
was in the hands of the semioticist Miquel Gómez.
4. COOB’92, «Chapter 5, financing», in 500 días para los Juegos Olímpicos,
Dossier de prensa, March
13th, 1991, COOB’92, Barcelona 1991.
5. COOB’92, Barcelona’92,
Finance & Insurance, COOB’92, Barcelona 1991.
|
Sobre l'autor
MIQUEL DE MORAGAS SPÀ
Catedràtic de teoria
de la Comunicació a la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Autor de Semántica
y comunicación de masas (1976) i de Los juegos de la comunicación (1992). Director del Centre
d'Estudis Olímpics de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
Relacionat 07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 ARATA ISOZAKI Un sistema anomenat «arquitectura». El Palau Sant Jordi 07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 ANDRÉ RICARD El disseny de la torxa olímpica 1992 07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 LLUÍS ARMET Notes sobre una dècada de disseny urbà a Barcelona 07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 PEP SANT, RAMON BIGAS Pebeter olímpic 07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 JORDI FARRÉ, JORDI BUSQUET Acceptació i apropiació social de la mascota olímpica de Barcelona'92 Aquest article consta de tres parts: 1. La primera part, relativa a l'acceptació social del Cobi, analitza breument els problemes i les implicacions que es donen en la difícil elecció d'una mascota olímpica. En segon lloc, es fa referència al grau d'acceptació popular i a les resistències que ha suscitat la mascota olímpica en importants sectors de la societat. 2. La segona part inclou una sèrie de consideracions de caràcter sociològic sobre l’«estètica» o l'«antiestètica» del Cobi com a producte de la indústria cultural i com a objecte de disseny. 3. La tercera part fa referència a l'ús i l'apropiació social del Cobi, especialment per part de grups de signe radical i contestatari. Aquesta darrera part inclou un repertori de les imatges més significatives i suggestives de l'«anti-Cobi». [...]07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 FRANCESC ROCA Economia política dels jocs olímpics de Barcelona 07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 IGNASI SOLÁ-MORALES Barcelona'92: conclusions provisionals 07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 JOSEP M. TRIAS Els símbols dels jocs de la xxv olimpíada de Barcelona’92 07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 ANNA CALVERA El kitsch'92: la dignificació del souvenir olímpic 07 EL DISSENY EN ELS JOCS OLÍMPICS. UN LLEGAT PER A BARCELONA, 1992 JOSEP MARIA MONTANER El model Barcelona |