Thoughts after the Flag Debate.

The Flag debate is over.  It begs the question…What debate? A vote on an aesthetic choice did not generate the argument I expected.  Where were the poets, artists, philosophers, indigenous leaders and lawmakers of NZ? We live in a time where the concern of corporate influence on the structure of the state and international responsibility is very real for most citizens, myself included. Should this not have been the context of arguing how our nation will be perceived in the future? Should a Flag not arrive from rigorous criticism of our values and the global perception of those values? I am no clearer today than before the flag debate of what NZ’s thinkers and leaders have to say about independence, freedom, justice, state, our Treaty and our international identity. As a result of this outcome, for me, the flag debate failed.  

After the First World War Woodrow Wilson traveled Europe spreading the argument for independent nations rather than Empire. Empires were blamed for that terrible conflict.  Across the globe new Independent nations were formed. With them came new flags and identities. A rebranding exercise of Empire to Commonwealth saved the British influence and strength for a time.  There could be no clearer context though for designing a new flag than independence. For the past 100 yrs the process of independence from colonial roots has continued with new nations, invigorated constitutions and with them new flags. 

New Zealand remained part of the commonwealth and does to this day. Though we no longer identify with Great Britain any urgency that might have existed to announce that has gone. There seems little desire for an independence that many perceive we have already achieved through time and patience rather than through conflict or abrupt change.  As a nation we are not without our shames and failures. We can though take pride in being leaders in indigenous settlement claims and civil rights. Our relative small size has seen us become early adopters to change if not instigators of it.  Have we not thrived in all fields of social, cultural, scientific and business excellence? It seems though there is a growing misconception that we get where we are through passivity. Do we now wear ‘Not rocking the boat’ as a badge of pride? I think remaining with our old flag is a reflection of that passivity.  I also believe the leadership behind the campaign left us with no other choice. I had hoped we would hear stories on how change, excellence and nation forming were earned rather than given. Surely we are not without our struggles and conflict? I had hoped we would be arguing who we are, that the world would have listened and the chosen flag would have reflected a robust sense of self.

I consider myself an artist and designer. My area of experience is in creating cinematic spaces in support of storytelling. I am no expert in statehood or history. I had hoped others would bring this conversation forward. I looked forward to learning something.  I am experienced in designing spaces that can hold the value of complex ideas and stories and I looked forward criticizing a Flag design from that perspective.  For a graphic artist the flag could have been this same opportunity. Sadly no complex ideas and values were ever presented. The challenge a NZ artist could have risen to wasn’t given. This reflects a great lack in leadership. Not leadership in design but rather leadership in debate and ideas which was the responsibility of the Government that instigated the debate.

I would like to think that if the debate had been one of our values against our place on the international stage the resulting flag design would have been inconsequential. It would have been ours. Aesthetic value wouldn’t matter. We wouldn’t discuss liking this one or that. We wouldn’t consider good and bad. We would simply agree on it being right. ‘Right’ to fly a new flag based upon a reinvigorated belief in ‘who we are’ as a nation of people. I haven’t learnt any more of who we are or where we are heading therefore it seems only natural to me that the flag remain the same.  I wanted change but I was never left with the self-belief that we had earned it. I certainly wasn’t offered a design that expressed any such achievement. I suspect though that we have earned it, many times over in fact.  Sadly the leaders that bought us the flag discussion didn’t seem ready to have our values questioned or perhaps their values questioned in a way that would have taken us there.  They left the debate to chance which in my opinion is the equivalent of no leadership at all.

It is fair to criticize John Key. This was an opportunity to give voice to a debate that could resonate around the world and strengthen our identity. It could have been an avenue to educate ourselves and others. Instead it became a discussion on ‘what we like’. With all our core beliefs put to the side ‘what we like’ just didn’t seem all that important and neither did a new flag,