But it got me thinking. If a tree fell in the woods, and only Helen Keller was there to hear it... well you get the idea. Does a commercial art project need to be validated to be good? If the designer is happy (if not thrilled) and the client is satisfied, bills are paid and everyone sleeps at night, isn't that successful? Does the client have to pick the direction we wanted them to? We created all the options to begin with, so as long as the client finds a fit amongst the choices... isn't that enough?
So why enter logo competitions at all? Why enter any competition? I really don't think you can compare work unless you understand the process behind the solution. And if you don't consider that, then what are you judging the work on? I mean, if we believe the hype about each project being a collaboration and needing good client input - and if there are good clients vs. bad clients at all, then doesn't that mean that their input is actually relevant if not important? So unless you are going to consider the client's desires and direction, you only have half the story.
But then, I'm a realist. And I believe that design serves a function and isn't just meant as art. But maybe when a design solution ends up in the land of misfit logos, like the one above, maybe then it becomes art – Something you can actually judge based solely on what it looks like - process doesn't matter. Maybe then it becomes fine art... but only if its good.