What they are saying about London’s Olympic mascots

The official mascots for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic games - two one-eyed characters called Wenlock and Madeville - have been unveiled... to a mixed reception.

The pair are named after the towns of Much Wenlock and Stoke Mandeville which have an important place in Olympic history. In the 19th century Baron Pierre de Coubertain was inspired to set up the modern Olympics after watching games at Much Wenlock in Shropshire, while Stoke Mandeville Hospital in Buckinghamshire was the birthplace of the Paralympics.

According to the characters back-story, written by children's author Michael Morpurgo, the pair began life as drops of steel taken home from the factory in Bolton by a retiring worker, who turned them into characters for his grandchildren.

The designs are aimed at young children and could be worth millions to the organising committee of the games.

Wenlock wears the Olympic rings as friendship bracelets, and is coloured gold, silver and bronze. Mandeville's head reflects the three crescent shapes of the Paralympics logo.

In a deliberate homage to London taxis, each has a yellow light on top of its head, with an initial in the middle.WHAT THEY ARE SAYING:Tony Husband, cartoonist, in the Times: "Is it me, the way my mind works, or do Wenlock and Mandeville look like you could buy them from some Soho sex shop? Even the names, Wenlock and Mandeville, fit that bill. Having said that, though, they do look like an ultra-modern salt and pepper set you might find at Ikea."

Jonathan Glancey, the Guardian: "Where they are evidently Londoners is in the look of their cyclopean eyes, that may remind many of the lenses of CCTV cameras staring from pretty much every building, station and street corner in the city."

David Bond, BBC: "Most people will probably react with bewilderment when they see London 2012's mascots Mandeville and Wenlock for the first time. But after seeing the one-eyed alien-like characters in animated form and hearing the back story by former children's laureate Michael Morpurgo, they may well be won over."

Paul Kelso, the Telegraph: "Any concern at the appropriateness of the design, which shares a certain abstraction with London's much criticised logo, should be off-set by the smart choice of names, which resonate with Britain's Olympic and Paralympic history."

Stephen Bayley, the design critic, quoted in the Telegraph: "What is it about these Games which seems to drive the organisers into the embrace of this kind of patronising, cretinous infantilism? Why can't we have something that makes us sing with pride, instead of these appalling computerised Smurfs for the iPhone generation?"

Aaron Shields, partner at brand agency DesignInstinct, in the Telegraph: "I don't think people are going to relate to these very modern creations. The first rule of mascot creation is to make something familiar and accessible, not something alien."

Edward M O'Hara, the chief creative officer at branding agency SME, in the New York Times: "It's certainly not the same model as previous mascots, but as a concept, they are right in line with what appeals to youth." ·