整个伦敦城沉浸在一片斗志昂扬的奥运气氛之中，看起来英国人是在拼尽全力要把2012伦敦奥运办成空前绝后的历史性盛会了。
当年英国伦敦击败法国巴黎，一举成功夺得2012奥运会主办方举办权的时候，全国上下一片欢腾，一时之间股市飙升，政客们祝贺自己。但英国毕竟是一个谦虚到甚至有些愤世嫉俗的国度。即使在2005年成功获得举办权的当天，英国国内依然不乏一些吹毛求疵的评论和说法，有人说奥运需要耗费的成本和代价实在太高，也有人说举办奥运会可能会破坏城市稳定秩序并带来严重的交通问题。
不过，众说纷纭之间，反复被提并质疑声最响亮的要数“奥运会是否能成功举办”。答案毫无悬念，如果不出意外，发生什么毁灭性的灾难，一定能够成功举办。前车之鉴的是1996年，美国亚特兰大奥运会简直堪称一场后勤安全的噩梦，但无论如何，大会依然完美的展示了人类的勤劳智慧所创造的非凡奇迹。赛场上，各国运动员发扬着“更高更快更强”的顽强拼搏精神，创下了一个又一个的奥运纪录。（尽管早前比赛由于主办方失误，错将韩国国旗当朝鲜国旗，而致使朝鲜队员不得不向韩国国旗致敬。）乌龙事件小插曲也改变不了亚特兰大创造的记录。
而今，伦敦有着比任何一届都可能出现问题的可能性挑战。2000年悉尼奥运，在郊区设了很多分赛场；而当时的悉尼人口数只是现在伦敦人口的一半。四年前，北京奥运，政府下令公民停止办厂或企业，以摧毁房屋和公路为代价，建起了当下看来，当之无愧的世界最大机场航站楼。伦敦人民也被一再告知要乖乖待在家里，但必定有大部分人不会照做。许多体育场馆都在市中心或者周边不远分散而建。
比赛开始了！
用现有的罗斯板球场馆（Lord’s cricket ground）作射箭场地，温布尔顿（Wimbledon）作网球赛场等，按理说已经能够为伦敦奥运节省不少开销了。不过，这也使整个赛事变得错综复杂且分散混乱。为了方便广大观众观看奥运，政府专门开通了奥运专线车，这种人性化的公共交通工具，确实很方便。此外，还有一种长达30英里的专用车道，被称作“吉尔道（Zil lanes）”，是专为参赛运动员、政府官员、赞助商及媒体记者所设的。不过，这项工程已经激起了部分的抗议及反对声。任何对伦敦交通构成不和谐因素的个人及团体都会很快被抓住。
事实上，交通依然是如此之大的问题暗示着其他方面已经完成的相当顺利。时隔七年，浩瀚惊人的公共工程已经圆满。原本破旧沧桑、粗糙灌木丛生并流淌着臭水污流的伦敦东部已然被宏伟壮观的奥运主题公园所取代。军队和警察已经全副武装派驻于此，这也是主办方为提供足够的安保人员所做的。在那里，到处都是与奥运相关的粉色标志，还有巨大飘扬的英国米字旗随处可见，醒目十分。
这一切的发生都是因为——自1960年以来，每场奥运会都有预算。伦敦奥运会筹建局（The Olympic Delivery Authority）宣称官方已为奥运分配93亿英镑（约合144亿美元）资金，最初预算在2007年时几乎翻了两番。与其他届奥运相比，如果不是因为原有的基建设施，成本就更难以量化了。
接下来是运作问题。每一个主办城市都承诺留下奥运纪念；或者至少留下空荡的大型建筑结构。这样做是因为，主办奥运会能够提升一座城市乃至一个国家的地位和形象。1992年西班牙巴塞罗纳、2008年北京都是这样的完美成功案例。但是，由于伦敦自古以来一直都是欧洲旅游必访城市，又是经济商业中心，所以，它的目的便有所不同。不过也算是一种演化。
伦敦奥运还带来了无限的商机并催生经济的快速增长。奥运场馆周边兴建购物区、技术产业集群计划等都吸引了大量的小型企业投资建厂，还有新建场区及住房等。虽然未来仍然充满未知，但毋庸置疑的一点是，交通产业可能成为帮助东伦敦经济繁荣的主要力量：斯特拉特福德现在就已比过去好得多。
然而，与此同时，经济走势也将愈发让人不安。英国当初获得奥运主办权的时候是风光自信的强大富国，而现在却已经时过境迁，经济状况并不乐观。于是，政府不断敦促商人加倍努力工作，增加出口，将海外市场扩展到欧洲以外的新兴市场去。奥运会已经从一场全球性的城市狂欢演变为经济救援摆脱绝望的商务运作。代价实在高得荒唐，确实比预期的要高很多。
然而，依然不排除这仍将是一场受到全球人们热爱的奥运盛事。
The city is trying to pull off a mightily ambitious games
WHEN London unexpectedly beat Paris in the competition to hold the 2012 Olympic games, crowds cheered, the stock market soared and politicians congratulated themselves. But Britain is a nation of self-deprecating cynics. Even on the day of the successful bid in 2005, some commentators were carping about the cost of the games and the likelihood of disruption and transport problems.
The recurring question is whether the games will come off. The answer is that, barring a non-humorous calamity, they will. The 1996 Atlanta games was a logistical and security nightmare, yet the city staged a showcase of extraordinary human endeavour. At each games someone runs faster, jumps higher or rows or cycles harder than anyone has ever done before. Once the athletes are on the field, the Olympics more-or-less runs itself. (Though North Korean footballers were greeted with the South’s flag in an early match.)
London has nevertheless set itself a more severe challenge than almost any other host. Sydney, which held the games in 2000, staged many events on one suburban site; its population was half of London’s now. In Beijing, four years ago, the government commanded its citizens to stop driving or firing up factories; it destroyed houses for highways and built the world’s largest airport terminal with no debate. Londoners have repeatedly been told to stay at home, but most will probably carry on regardless. Many sporting venues are in the heart of the city as well as dispersed around it: the stands that will seat beach volleyball spectators loom above the garden of the prime minister’s residence at 10 Downing Street.
Game on
Using existing arenas such as Lord’s cricket ground (for archery) and Wimbledon (for tennis) was supposed to reduce the bill for the London games. It also makes the project complicated and disruptive. An unprecedented share of games-goers will travel to events by public transport, a system already bulging with local passengers. So-called “Zil lanes”, 30 miles of roadway reserved for Olympic athletes, officials, sponsors and journalists, have provoked protests and the occasional delay. Any stumble in London’s “public-transport games” will quickly be seized upon.
The fact that transport remains such a big question hints at how much else has been achieved, and how smoothly. Seven years on from the bid, one of the largest post-war public works projects has been delivered. A shabby part of east London has been prettified: the site of the main Olympic Park was until recently rough scrubland containing piles of rotting fridges and a dirty river. The army and police have stepped in to fill a gap left by G4S, a contractor which failed to provide enough security staff. Potholes have been filled and transport links upgraded and extended. The capital is adorned with pink signs directing spectators to events, as well as giant union flags handily recycled from the queen’s Jubilee.
All this comes at a price—since 1960 every games has overshot its budget. The Olympic Delivery Authority boasts that it has brought the games in under its allotted £9.3 billion ($14.4 billion), yet it did so only because the original budget was nearly quadrupled in 2007. As with other Olympics, it is hard to quantify the opportunity cost of transport schemes that would not otherwise have been built, or a fancy velodrome that will struggle to recoup its original investment.
And what comes after is a running problem. Each host city promises a legacy; each is left with at least some large, empty, costly structures. The hope is that hosting the games will improve a city’s, and a country’s, image. Barcelona, which hosted the games in 1992, and Beijing used the Olympics to launch their own ambitions on the world stage. Since London is already the most visited city in Europe and a financial and business centre, its aims are different. And they have evolved.
London’s bid highlighted the inspirational bequest to a generation of British youngsters. The capital is filled with injunctions to “Be part of it” and “Inspire a generation”, although there are few signs that the nation is becoming fitter or more sporty, as had been hoped. Organisers also pledged to regenerate the poor East End of London with jobs and homes. The shopping is certainly better now, thanks to the arrival of a swanky new retail centre. But the redevelopment of the Olympic Park is unlikely to enrich the whole area. And the park’s future remains uncertain. Plans for a technology cluster rely on attracting small, young firms that are hard to corral; proposals for new housing are still under way. Transport may help east London more than anything else: Stratford is now even better connected.
Meanwhile the economy has become more worrisome. The Britain that was awarded the games was rich and confident. The current one is ailing and needy. As The Economist went to press, the prime minister was preparing to chivvy a conference of business folk to work harder at exporting beyond sickly Europe to faster-growing emerging markets. The Olympics has turned from a celebration of a global city to a marketing pitch from an economy desperate for growth. Ludicrously expensive, administratively Byzantine and freighted with expectations, it nevertheless promises to be a popular party.
