Tuesday 24 November 2015

Flags, Emblems and Illogical Arguments

The Prime Minister has had a shocker. To try and attach the tragedy that is the death of Jonah Lomu to our flag referrendum is an appalling error of judgement. Not only was it an errroneous connection, it was also a weak argument and most obviously pushing his preference on the nation yet again. (for those who missed it, this is what John Key said on the Paul Henry Show, referring to the Irish Examiner's classy tribute to Jonah Lomu after his sudden and unexpected death.
"Here's the silver fern, front page, with one frond coming off like a tear, with Jonah Lomu and his years," Key said. "Amazingly powerful. That's New Zealand. Where was our flag? Nowhere.")

But let's for argument sake, concede that what the PM said has some merit and follow it's logic through to it's natural conclusion. His argument is basically that because everyone connects the silver fern to New Zealand, that it should be on our flag. It is used throughout our sporting codes as a symbol of their connection to the land that they are playing for. Don't get me wrong, I think it is a beautiful emblem. But, the jump from emblem to being on the flag is a dubious one. By the PM's logic, the following must be true also: We are known the world over as Kiwis. We are proud to be known as that, even if Americans think we have named ourselves after a fruit. Anyway, because a Kiwi is a powerful symbol and connects us to this land, surely by following John Key's logic, it too deserves to be on our flag also.
Oh, what about sheep? Whenever I have travelled overseas, people automatically refer to the number of sheep we have when I say I am from New Zealand. That and Lord of the Rings. Perhaps they too should be on our flag? So we have a laser eyed kiwi with a silver fern and a sheep and the Eye of Sauron. Perhaps the kiwi could be blasting the sheep thus symbolising that we are great at exporting sheep meat for the purpose of cooking. Behind the kiwi could be the Eye of Sauron, symbolising our growing movie industry and a healthy tourism industry helped in part by the LOTR fans descending on our fair lands all in the hope of finding an orc, or a troll, or even meet with an elf.

The reality is that just because an emblem can represent a nation and symbolise that nation well, it doesn't mean that it has to be on the flag. Which brings me to the next part of the argument. Do we need to have the silver fern on the flag? Is it necessary or even non negotiable?

I would argue that a symbol can represent a country but it doesn't have to be on the flag as well. Why do I say that? Well, because it is true and appears time and time again. Let's look at some of the nations we saw at the Rugby World Cup to see how things are. Firstly, the English rugby side uses a red English rose as their symbol. Their flag? A red cross on a white background:





Interesting right? They aren't the same.






How about Scotland? Emblem is a thistle, yet the flag is a white cross on a blue background:


And Ireland? A shamrock and a flag with three colours: Green, White and Orange.


I could also mention Japan, whose endeavours were the toast of the World Cup. Known as the Cherry Blossoms, and whose flag is a simple but effective red circle, symbolising the sun, on a white background. Then there is the team they defeated in their first game, South Africa. Known as the Springboks (which is an interesting story regarding redeeming the name from apartheid) their flag has no springbok on it and instead uses colours and shapes to symbolise their country, known now as the Rainbow Nation.

In fact South Africa is an interesting case and actually one I think we should look to as to how to change flags properly. The Springbok is a beloved symbol in South Africa, particularly amongst rugby supporters. They are proud of the heritage that the symbol represents. They have flags with the springbok on it that are waved and flown at rugby matches and other sports games. Yet the springbok doesn't even register on their flag. They chose something that symbolises who they now are. It was a fresh start flag wise and represented the fresh start the country itself was undertaking.

You can have a wonderful, bold, striking flag that the whole nation can be proud of and still have a wonderful symbol that represents our sporting codes. Both can be different. To claim that the silver fern has to be on our flag limits our options for the flag. To argue that because the silver fern is used for many of our sporting codes therefore it must be on the flag is an argument that easily and quickly falls down.

Now there is nothing wrong with having the silver fern on the flag if that is the winner. If the majority of people want a flag with a silver fern then so be it. However to claim, as the PM has, that it must be on the flag is wrong. It is fine to state that your personal preference is for a flag with a silver fern on it, but don't say it must because it doesn't have to.

My personal preference has always been for a flag based on the tino rangatiratanga flag, a wonderful connection to the Maori culture with a symbolic koru design and three colours. Bold, simple, striking and uniquely Kiwi. It looks like a flag, flies like a flag and stands out amongst other flags. However, no flags based on this design made the final contenders so I have to decide which one of the final five I would prefer. That hasn't been easy and I'm still not sure which one I will vote for yet. What I haven't appreciated is the Prime Minister of our land constantly proclaiming his thoughts and opinions in the media. I feel he is trying to tell me which one to vote for without blatantly saying "vote for this one". In fact it bothers me so much that I am reluctant to put John Key's preference as my number one.

Yes the whole process has been flawed. It could have been and should have been done better. Vexillologists (flag experts), artists and designers should have been on the flag consideration panel. Perhaps what should have happened is that a panel of vexillologists, artists and designers were tasked with coming up with five strong potential designs that we as a nation could vote on. The reality though is that it hasn't. We have to make do with the process we have. So consider all the options on their own merits, but don't just fall into the trap of voting for a flag simply because it has a symbol on it that our sporting codes use. Vote for whichever design you feel is the best on its merits. If you don't like any of the designs there are plenty of voices out there stating how you should vote strategically. If you like our current flag, vote for your next best in this referrendum and vote for the current flag in the next. Do what you feel is the best thing for our country, but don't, please, vote for a design simply because the PM likes it or it has a symbol on it that is used in sport.
-------------------------

By the way, if you want to know more about what makes a good flag according to vexillologists and designers, check out Lachlan Forsyth's item on Story the other day. http://www.3news.co.nz/tvshows/story/what-makes-a-good-flag-2015112319#axzz3sOzaAzVj

Also, here is a great blog from a vexillologist dispelling some of the arguments put forward in this debate. Well worth a read: https://medium.com/@thomaslebas/shedding-light-on-flag-design-840c3e3fa83f#.o3rzt8b8u