Jump to content

New Zealanders holding referendum on changing national flag


altosax29b

Recommended Posts

My problem with a lot of these flag designs is that they're all approaching the idea as if they were designing a logo for a sports team. Which a flag shouldn't be. A flag should tell a story and have deeper meaning to it than "this symbol and these colours look good together."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The black and white proposals lost a lot of momentum for some reason...

EvyWJZH.jpg

My problem with a lot of these flag designs is that they're all approaching the idea as if they were designing a logo for a sports team. Which a flag shouldn't be. A flag should tell a story and have deeper meaning to it than "this symbol and these colours look good together."

flag%20of%20rsi%20-%20small_zps7m5cyca3.

How sad. This is my flag, and I don't think any spurious connection to ISIS would result from it flying over my fictional country. This flag represents direction and positive change. The choice of black and white is symbolic of the embracing of the contrasts of people around the world, and the knowledge that, working together, we can listen to, and get the best from, all points of view.

As for New Zealand, I don't see how a fern is any more or less "sports team"-ish than stars or a national animal. Bhutan has a freakin' dragon on its national flag; Uganda has a crane, and almost every national coat of arms has some sort of animal on it. They are definitely styled differently than a sports logo is, but I think my point stands. A fern is fine, and is no different to me than the flag of this strange country, which I'm having trouble remembering the name of for some reason...

300px-Flag_of_Canada.svg.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem with a lot of these flag designs is that they're all approaching the idea as if they were designing a logo for a sports team. Which a flag shouldn't be. A flag should tell a story and have deeper meaning to it than "this symbol and these colours look good together."

In theory I would agree with you, but for New Zealand I'm perfectly fine with them approaching it as a sports logo. New zealand is a barren wasteland, in terms of contributions to world culture. Currently they're an imperial product and nothing else. If they had some historical reasons for changing it would make sense, but there's absolutely nothing behind this. It doesn't express anything, if not... rugby :lol: . A perfect summary of the current aseptic and PC anglo-saxon world (NA excluded, mostly)

07Giants.pngnyy.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The black and white proposals lost a lot of momentum for some reason...

EvyWJZH.jpg

My problem with a lot of these flag designs is that they're all approaching the idea as if they were designing a logo for a sports team. Which a flag shouldn't be. A flag should tell a story and have deeper meaning to it than "this symbol and these colours look good together."

flag%20of%20rsi%20-%20small_zps7m5cyca3.

How sad. This is my flag, and I don't think any spurious connection to ISIS would result from it flying over my fictional country. This flag represents direction and positive change. The choice of black and white is symbolic of the embracing of the contrasts of people around the world, and the knowledge that, working together, we can listen to, and get the best from, all points of view.

Fictional countries don't need to take real-world connotations into account. I played the game NationStates for the longest time, and indulged in forum-based geo-political RP (yes, I'm that much of a nerd :P ). My nation's flag was an inverted Cross of Burgundy. The Cross of Burgundy is most often associated with Spanish imperialism and the reactionary Carlist movement in Spain. Did either apply to my nation? No. It was a fictional country in a fictional setting. I just liked the colours and design. I could make up whatever connotations the Cross of Burgundy had to my nation because it was all fictional.

So a black and white flag for a fictional country is fine. A real country, however, needs to be aware of real-world connotations. There's a very good reason why the New Zealand PM switched his preference from a black and white flag to a red, white, and blue flag around the time that ISIS was gaining world-wide notoriety.

The proposal that will go up against the current flag (and probably lose if polls are any indication) mixes the black and white with the red, white, and blue. Which is both a unique colour scheme and probably the best compromise black and white fans can hope for given the current geo-political situation.

As for New Zealand, I don't see how a fern is any more or less "sports team"-ish than stars or a national animal. Bhutan has a freakin' dragon on its national flag; Uganda has a crane, and almost every national coat of arms has some sort of animal on it.

Bhutan has a dragon because Bhutan is said to be the land where dragons come from in Chinese mythology. The King of Bhutan is even styled the Dragon King. Which just might be the coolest name for any head of state in the world. So Bhutan's dragon has deep, ancient cultural significance to the nation.

Uganda's crane is pretty artificial. The British colony of Uganda contained numerous small eastern African kingdoms, all with their own flags. The British chose the crane for the colonial flag over any of the emblems associated with these kingdoms to avoid showing favouritism to any one group. It was just a local animal that was politically neutral. The Ugandans adopted it because Uganda itself is an artificial construct. The independent country needed some sort of symbol to unite the various peoples within its borders. The British had used a crane, so they went along with it.

As for national coats of arms? Yeah, they all contain national symbols. Often derived from very old, sometimes ancient, sources. No one in their right mind would look at the British coat of arms and go "you know, those English lions, that Scottish lion, and Irish harp could really use a face-lift ala the Arizona Cardinals" because you don't do that with symbols that have represented nations for almost a thousand years. The mentality that goes into rendering a national coat of arms or flag is different from designing a sports team logo.

They are definitely styled differently than a sports logo is, but I think my point stands. A fern is fine, and is no different to me than the flag of this strange country, which I'm having trouble remembering the name of for some reason...

[Canadian flag]

One of the most common complaints regarding the Canadian flag proposals during the Great Flag Debate was that the most popular proposals looked too much like Molson beer labels. That includes the winning design/current flag. The nation took to it rather quickly, and we're so in love with our national emblem that a lot of the controversy surrounding its design and adoption is either unknown or conveniently washed over in the national narrative. Those complaints were there though.

Now you could say "well the country go on board with it, no reason to think that New Zealand couldn't if they adopted a similar flag." To which I would say "I prefer either the Pearson Pennant or the old red ensign if we're being honest" :P

The Pearson Pennant utilized the three red leaves on a single stem, Canada's official emblem. The blue bands call back to our national motto, and could also be seen as representing both the country's French and British heritage. The red ensign reflects the nation's cultural heritage in both the coat of arms and Union Jack. Both flags represent the history of the country in different ways. My problem with our flag (which I am confident will never change, so don't take this as a pitch to ditch it) is that it's devoid of any real historical resonance. Canada's official emblem is three leaves, not one. And the red bars on either side don't mean anything. They're just there because they look pleasing. Which doesn't cut it for me. It works when designing a sports team logo. Not a national symbol.

I see the same problems with the main New Zealand proposal. This isn't me being pro-Union Jack. I could get on board with a design as nice and historically significant as the Pearson Pennant, but the design being pitched to the public doesn't reach that bar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The spiral one looks like something from tim burton....I do kind of like it though.

Seriously, the black and bue one is the best IMO, with the red stars. At least it's a bit different from all the red and blue flags out there.

I'm Danny fkn Heatley, I play for myself. That's what fkn all stars do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
25 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

Some key numbers:

  • The vote was 56.6 per cent to 43.2 per cent for the current national flag.
  • 2,124,507 people casting votes - a turnout of 67.3 per cent.
  • John Key wasted $26M NZD on his foolish crusade.

 

While I am very happy with the results of the referendum, I wouldn't call $26M a "waste". That's actually a very small sum of money to pay to hold a national vote on such an important issue.

SigggggII_zps101350a9.png

Nobody cares about your humungous-big signature. 

PotD: 29/1/12

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would argue otherwise considering that polls have indicated that the current flag would win for around a year and a half now. The writing was on the wall but Key went on ahead with his pet project anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, BigBubba said:

 

While I am very happy with the results of the referendum, I wouldn't call $26M a "waste". That's actually a very small sum of money to pay to hold a national vote on such an important issue.

 

As Ice_Cap said, there's no indication that there has ever been any likelihood this referendum would pass.  Nor was there ever a compelling reason, no groundswell of support, to necessitate this national conversation in the first place. It looks a lot less like an important national issue and more like one person's personal agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BigBubba said:

 

While I am very happy with the results of the referendum, I wouldn't call $26M a "waste". That's actually a very small sum of money to pay to hold a national vote on such an important issue.

Maybe in the US, but there's only 4.2M people in New Zealand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 26 March 2016 at 0:18 AM, Cosmic said:

Maybe in the US, but there's only 4.2M people in New Zealand.

I live in New Zealand/Aotearoa and one of the reasons the flag wasn't changed was because of John key himselfimage.jpeg

thats also why they made this flag,which I have a t shirt of.

image.jpeg

image.jpgimage.pngimage.pngGo the Blue Jays!And New Zealand!

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Yayay124yay said:

I live in New Zealand/Aotearoa and one of the reasons the flag wasn't changed was because of John key himselfimage.jpeg

thats also why they made this flag,which I have a t shirt of.

image.jpeg

is the kiwi shooting later beams from its eyes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.