Flag

red terror

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Winger" data-cid="514341" data-time="1441699402">
<div>
NZ does not have to do like Canada did though
</div>
</blockquote>
 
That is true, and rightly true, because clearly they're not going about it the same way. Canada didn't have Johnny Mulligan parachuting in with a new design past the submission deadline. So that's one difference. And Canadians didn't demand a red maple leaf and then instead get offered a brown shape that symbolized a bottle of maple syrup, or a radical round pink medallion with a yellow pea-meal outline (to symbolize the dawn of an early morning near the North Pole and back-bacon for breakfast). They got the red maple leaf they asked for and expected. The resistance to change seems to have been a minor hiccup by comparison to what's happening here, so yeah, this particular process is quite a bit different, I'm in agreement with you there.

red terror

Another new-comer. I'm slowly becoming partial...
 
<img src="https://40.media.tumblr.com/a49fb473b8040828f821368e380a9173/tumblr_inline_nucgasj34D1rzvgly_540.jpg" alt="tumblr_inline_nucgasj34D1rzvgly_540.jpg">
 
<ul><li>Red-white-blue tri-colours symbolizing tradition;</li>
<li>Post-modern deconstruction of the Union Jack symbolizing liberty and overcoming colonialism;</li>
<li>Sacred black stripes symbolizing Maoridom;</li>
<li>Two symbolic red swatches, representing both main islands;</li>
<li>Southern Cross replicated in the St. Andrews Cross, symbolizing cosmology, Aotearoa's place in the universe, and the Otago Highlanders;</li>
<li>Triangles symbolizing volcanoes and mountains and fiords and stuff;</li>
<li>The perfect compromise banner, all in an attractive perfectly balanced composition, will please everybody.</li>
</ul> 
Okay, none of that is actually true.
 
It's the racing silks when Kiwi won his memorable Melbourne Cup in 1983, so you could say it's the Ultimate Kiwi Flag and a "proven winner."
 
Point is, if anyone wanted to (and I'm sure some want to), they could conceivably concoct any ol' "painted word" symbology with nebulous theories applying byzantine meanings into shapes, lines and colour, and then swear to you it's perfect. I'm doing it right now.

Winger

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="red terror" data-cid="514447" data-time="1441721857">
<div>
That is true, and rightly true, because clearly they're not going about it the same way. Canada didn't have Johnny Mulligan parachuting in with a new design past the submission deadline. So that's one difference. And Canadians didn't demand a red maple leaf and then instead get offered a brown shape that symbolized a bottle of maple syrup, or a radical round pink medallion with a yellow pea-meal outline (to symbolize the dawn of an early morning near the North Pole and back-bacon for breakfast). They got the red maple leaf they asked for and expected. The resistance to change seems to have been a minor hiccup by comparison to what's happening here, so yeah, this particular process is quite a bit different, I'm in agreement with you there.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
And it was a long time ago now
 
NZ seem to be following more closely the SA route

Flag of Canada

<div>
<div>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</div>
</div>
<div>This article is about the national flag of Canada. For other Canadian flags, see <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_flags' title="List of Canadian flags">List of Canadian flags</a>.</div>

	Canada

			&nbsp;
	
			&nbsp;
	
			<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_vexillology' title="Glossary of vexillology">Use</a>
		
			<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_flag' title="National flag">National flag</a>, <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_ensign' title="Civil ensign">civil</a> and <a  class="" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_ensign" title="State ensign">state ensign</a>
	
			Proportion
		
			1:2
	
			Adopted
		
			February 15, 1965
	
			Design
		
			A vertical bicolour <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triband_%28flag%29' title="Triband (flag)">triband</a> of red, white, and red in the ratio 1:2:1, with a red <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maple_leaf' title="Maple leaf">maple leaf</a> charged in the centre
	
			Designed&nbsp;by
		
			<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Stanley' title="George Stanley">George F.G. Stanley</a>
	<p>The <b>National Flag of Canada</b>,<sup><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Canada#cite_note-1'><span>[</span>1<span>]</span></a></sup> also known as the <b>Maple Leaf</b> and <i><b><span>l'UnifoliÃ©</span></b></i> (<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_language' title="French language">French</a> for "the one-leafed"), is a <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag' title="Flag">flag</a> consisting of a red field with a white square at its centre, in the middle of which is featured a stylized, 11-pointed, red <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maple_leaf' title="Maple leaf">maple leaf</a>. It is the first ever specified by law for use as the country's national flag.</p>

In 1964, Prime Minister <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_B._Pearson' title="Lester B. Pearson">Lester B. Pearson</a> formed a committee to resolve the issue, sparking a serious <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Canadian_Flag_Debate' title="Great Canadian Flag Debate">debate about a flag change</a> to replace the <a class="" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Flag" title="Union Flag">Union Flag</a>. Out of three choices, the maple leaf design by <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Stanley' title="George Stanley">George Stanley</a>,<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Canada#cite_note-2'>[2]</a> based on the flag of the <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Military_College_of_Canada' title="Royal Military College of Canada">Royal Military College of Canada</a>, was selected. The flag made its first official appearance on February 15, 1965; the date is now celebrated annually as <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Flag_of_Canada_Day' title="National Flag of Canada Day">National Flag of Canada Day</a>.
The <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Red_Ensign' title="Canadian Red Ensign">Canadian Red Ensign</a> had been unofficially used since the 1890s and was approved by a 1945 <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_in_Council' title="Order in Council">Order in Council</a> for use "wherever place or occasion may make it desirable to fly a distinctive Canadian flag".<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Canada#cite_note-1945_order-3'>[3]</a><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Canada#cite_note-first_flags-4'>[4]</a> Also, the <a class="" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Flag" title="Union Flag">Royal Union Flag</a> remains an official flag in Canada. There is no law dictating how the national flag is to be treated. There are, however, conventions and protocols to guide how it is to be displayed and its place in the order of precedence of flags, which gives it primacy over the aforementioned and most other flags.
Many different flags created for use by Canadian officials, government bodies, and military forces contain the maple leaf motif in some fashion, either by having the Canadian flag charged in the canton, or by including maple leaves in the design.

Virgil

A lot easier to change the national flag in 1965 then 2015! Little thing called social media and keyboard warriors. 
Too many voices now too many whack jobs with an opinion that think is important. 
This whole rushed 'NZ Flag Idol/X factor' referendum is a complete waste of time. 
What happens when 51% want one flag and 49% the other? ( change vs old flag ) 
Hardly a majority is it. 
I'm open to change btw, I just don't like the way it's going about and the options we are being forced to choose from. 
I don't feel we should change for the sake of change though.

Baron Silas Greenback

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Virgil" data-cid="514468" data-time="1441738237">
<div>
A lot easier to change the national flag in 1965 then 2015! Little thing called social media and keyboard warriors. 
Too many voices now too many whack jobs with an opinion that think is important. 
This whole rushed 'NZ Flag Idol/X factor' referendum is a complete waste of time. 
What happens when 51% want one flag and 49% the other? ( change vs old flag ) 
Hardly a majority is it. 
I'm open to change btw, I just don't like the way it's going about and the options we are being forced to choose from. 
I don't feel we should change for the sake of change though.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
I think you need to look up what majority means.... because you seem to be following the Green parties definition.

hydro11

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Bones" data-cid="514298" data-time="1441693476">
<div>
I really don't get this kind of argument. Loads of NZers go to the mountains, there are more places than Wanaka or Arthur's Pass. But how does any lack of mountainous activity by NZers then relate to us what...ummm...growing ferns? Looking at ferns? Going to the ferns? The fern isn't unique to NZ either. 
Oh and I'm intrigued to hear the last post played on a triangle.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
The fern is unique to New Zealand. We are the only place in the world where it grows naturally, as red Terror points out. It would be as bizarre for any other country to put a fern on their flag as it would be for us to put a polar bear. Regardless, it is our national symbol. It was used by our soldiers in the Boer War. I'm sure not every Canadian eats maple syrup either but it is clearly the symbol that represents them.

Bones

I'm confused, ferns only grow in NZ? Really?

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Bones" data-cid="514513" data-time="1441755090">
<div>
I'm confused, ferns only grow in NZ? Really?
</div>
</blockquote>
 
I think he means Cyathea dealbata (Silver Fern) which is an NZ plant not naturally found elsewhere.

mariner4life

This is an aside, but it's a similar story to the above
 
Here in Cairns we have this park near the centre of the city that isn't used by anyone except circles of drunk aboriginals (and no that's not a racist generalisation, it's a problem acknowledged by the police, in the paper today they said they have poured out 1,800 litres of booze this year). The Council have a plan to develop the site into a parklands and cultural entertainment precinct. Currently, this park looks like shit, and no one seems to go there except when the circus is in town, but it does have some big old trees on it. The council plan is pretty good, and is a much-needed boost to the city, providing a few jobs etc, as well as generally improving the city.
 
Of course, the development requires the chopping down of a few trees. Yes, they are old, but they are fucking Mango trees, this isn't some rare, slow growing species of tree we're talking here. And the Council's plan will be replacing the current trees with 64 other native trees.
 
Of course, the hippy fuckwits are out in force. Some smelly long-haired fluffybunny has been sitting in it for a week. Countless letters/texts to the paper about how the council are destroying the city. If you listened to the chatter, you would think the masses are against the project. The reality is the exact opposite. But, as usual (and as above) the minority are by far the loudest. There's always some spokesman from some never-before-heard-of environmental action group wanting to put in their 2 cents. And the message is all the same, progess is bad and evil, the status quo should be maintained at all costs. 
 
It's a fucking issue up here with a battling economy, and a couple of big issues that could change the place (a massive international resort, and dredging out the port) facing vocal opposition from an ill-informed minority. Fuck social media.

MajorRage

Mariner, have you thought about the children?

mariner4life

I have, and i am fucked if i am taking my kids to that park in its current state.

Crucial

I think you should give that big mango tree a hug 
Then slip some dynamite in it and run like hell.

Baron Silas Greenback

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="mariner4life" data-cid="514516" data-time="1441756434">
<div>
This is an aside, but it's a similar story to the above
 
Here in Cairns we have this park near the centre of the city that isn't used by anyone except circles of drunk aboriginals (and no that's not a racist generalisation, it's a problem acknowledged by the police, in the paper today they said they have poured out 1,800 litres of booze this year). The Council have a plan to develop the site into a parklands and cultural entertainment precinct. Currently, this park looks like shit, and no one seems to go there except when the circus is in town, but it does have some big old trees on it. The council plan is pretty good, and is a much-needed boost to the city, providing a few jobs etc, as well as generally improving the city.
 
Of course, the development requires the chopping down of a few trees. Yes, they are old, but they are fucking Mango trees, this isn't some rare, slow growing species of tree we're talking here. And the Council's plan will be replacing the current trees with 64 other native trees.
 
Of course, the hippy fuckwits are out in force. Some smelly long-haired fluffybunny has been sitting in it for a week. Countless letters/texts to the paper about how the council are destroying the city. If you listened to the chatter, you would think the masses are against the project. The reality is the exact opposite. But, as usual (and as above) the minority are by far the loudest. There's always some spokesman from some never-before-heard-of environmental action group wanting to put in their 2 cents. And the message is all the same, progess is bad and evil, the status quo should be maintained at all costs. 
 
It's a fucking issue up here with a battling economy, and a couple of big issues that could change the place (a massive international resort, and dredging out the port) facing vocal opposition from an ill-informed minority. Fuck social media. 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
You are such a mean spirited 1% 'er

mariner4life

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="514528" data-time="1441760284">
<div>
You are such a mean spirited 1% 'er
</div>
</blockquote>
probably the most accurate thing you have ever posted

ACT Crusader

Hey mariner, I started following that story last week and read about the undercover cop that posed as a protester. He was doing his shift of sitting up the tree when the council arrived. He was asked to come down by police and he did and they immediately started chopping that one down yesterday.

Hooroo

Brilliant!

mariner4life

yea, it's pretty funny alright. They did the same sort of thing to get rid of the fuckwits who tried to stop the Skyrail development (now widely regarded as one of the best things to ever happen to Cairns).
 
my favourite quote so far is from some hippy bitch called "Del One" who said "I think this whole thing has created awareness that we are all an interconnected lifeforce" first class hippy bullshit right there.

No Quarter

That is fucking brilliant from the police.

dogmeat

Apologies for the length but I found this an interesting perspective from an outsider but one who knows NZ well.
 
Author - Jarrett Walker - is a yank and consultant on public transport who has worked with Akl Transport. I had to remove his images as Forum software didn't like them
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.humantransit.org/2015/09/can-visual-design-learn-from-the-new-zealand-flag-debate.html'>http://www.humantransit.org/2015/09/can-visual-design-learn-from-the-new-zealand-flag-debate.html</a>
 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
If you care at all about visual communication -- and if you aren't blind from birth, then you do -- you should be following the remarkable debate about the New Zealand flag. National flags are so enduring that it is hard to imagine a graphic design task with higher stakes. Revising one triggers a profound argument about national identity, which ultimately comes down to a couple of questions:
<ol><li> One or many ideas? Can the nation come together around one image or idea, or must there me a mash-up of several to satisfy different groups or points of view?</li>
<li> Fashionable or enduring? Graphic design is so much about fashion and fun that identifying an image that will make sense for decades is harder than it sounds. Yet that's what a flag must be - and the greatest company logos have mastered this challenge as well.</li>
</ol>To review, the current New Zealand flag looks like this: (Current flag)
 
The Union Jack and the Southern Cross, the latter a distinctive constellation that is also on Australia's flag. (With all due respect to defenders of this flag, both images are about New Zealand's tie to other countries, countries that the nation's identity has lately been separating from. I also understand the view that flags should never change on principle; that is a different debate.)
The New Zealand flag seems disconnected from the evolving palette of national identity. National imagery rarely uses the flag's colors. Sometimes it uses blue-green colors that echo the textures of the landscape; you will find these in the customs hall at Auckland Airport for example. Increasingly, though, the government uses black. The association of black with New Zealand comes from another image that is so universal that some visitors probably think it's the flag already: (Silver Fern on Black)
 
This image is most common in sports, as it's the logo of most national teams including the famous All Blacks of rugby, but it long ago spilled over into the general consciousness as an unofficial symbol of the country. 
If I may reveal botanical interests more suited to <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://urbanist.typepad.com/'>my other blog,</a> this is not just any random leaf or frond. It's based on the underside of the spectacular Silver Fern, Cyathea dealbata, one of the tree ferns that define so many New Zealand rainforests (top on left, underside on right).
 
Sports and tree-hugging in one image! This would seem to make the silver fern a winner across the cultural spectrum. It might also remind you of another former British colony that tired of its Union Jack, and forged a new identity out of botany:
 
The Canadian flag was <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Canada'>adopted</a> in February 1965, so it just turned 50. Like the Silver Fern in New Zealand, the maple leaf had been hanging around in Canadian imagery for a while. So it's not surprising to see the fern so prominent in New Zealand flag ideas.
So how has the debate gone? Well, the government's earnest committee canvassed the country and came up with these semi-finalists: (the 40)
 
It's remarkable how much consensus there was on which images matter: the Southern Cross, a gesture toward the old flag, plus two main expressions of the fern: the frond and the spiral form called the <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koru'>koru</a>. (The latter, common in Maori imagery, is based on the shape of a frond as it just unfurls.) 
When you look at that field of contenders, does your eye go to the busier ones or the simpler ones? Mine went to the simplest, the ones with a single idea, not a collision of several, and the ones that looked enduring by virtue of not trying to be sexy. For that reason, the original silver-fern-on-black still looked right to me. 
But the people who chose the <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://www.govt.nz/browse/engaging-with-government/the-nz-flag-your-chance-to-decide/'>four finalists</a> felt differently:
 
... at which point, <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/04/new-zealanders-offered-flag-shortlist-ask-can-we-have-this-one-instead'>all hell broke loose</a>. There are many complaints, including that three of the four are too similar to represent a choice, and that #2 is already selling plastic plates:
But the real problems are these:
<ul><li>#2 and #4 are both mash-ups, obviously collisions of multiple unresolved ideas. A mash-up suggests that the country is too divided to revere any single image. If Canada -- a far more diverse country in terms of landscapes and identities -- could avoid this mistake, New Zealand certainly can. (<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://www.google.com/search?q=british+columbia+flag&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch&imgil=U6vTvzDrrfkcBM%253A%253BNMMSo7AdEkmFNM%253Bhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fen.wikipedia.org%25252Fwiki%25252FFlag_of_British_Columbia&source=iu&pf=m&fir=U6vTvzDrrfkcBM%253A%252CNMMSo7AdEkmFNM%252C_&biw=1379&bih=1339&usg=__t6THhQzYAFKFosQ7rQ35viH_tAY%3D&ved=0CCgQyjdqFQoTCNKHjoiq48cCFVNaiAodqa0D0Q&ei=4qzsVdKOINO0oQSp246IDQ#imgrc=U6vTvzDrrfkcBM%3A&usg=__t6THhQzYAFKFosQ7rQ35viH_tAY%3D'>British Columbia</a> is another matter ...)</li>
<li> </li>
<li>Except for #3, they are all over-designed, with an attention to today's graphical fashions instead of any thought about what might stand the test of time. This is equivalent to saying that they call attention to the designer. (the koru design)</li>
</ul>What do you gain, designer of finalist #1, by flipping half of the silver fern image into negative, and making the frond leaflets more rounded so that they no longer resemble the plant? How is this better than the simple silver fern on black? Only that a graphic designer obviously designed it, in a way that is supposed to look cool.
But a flag is supposed to outlast its designer, and the design fashions of the moment. Remember, the Canadian flag was designed in the 1960s. If their design competition had been seeking something as "contemporary" and "designed" as New Zealand's final four, they might have found inspiration in one of these:
 
(Randon psychedelia)
 
 
Fortunately, they didn't. You can't tell, looking at the Canadian flag, that it's an artefact of the 1960s, and that's the whole point. A flag has to have a sense of timelessness and simplicity, which is why you must reject any design that calls attention to the cleverness of the designer or relies on design fashions of the moment. The creativity it requires begins with the willingness to disappear as the creator. None of the finalists displays this. 
How is this debate relevant to this blog's concerns in public transit? If you really want to sell public transit, teach people to count on it. Make it seem solid and enduring, not just sexy and ephemeral. Go for the simple, solid idea that will still make sense -- practically and aesthetically -- decades from now. 
 
(London Underground logo)
 
And this principle extends even beyond graphic design, to <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/the-disneyland-theory-of-transit.html'>debates about whether transit technologies should be chosen for "fun" or reliability</a>. 
Do you notice how insecure companies change their logos and liveries more often than confident ones do? Do you notice how they use flashy look-at-me images instead of clean and enduring ones? 
Flashiness, fun, and novelty may attract customers, but only simplicity and reliability retains them. Which message do you want to put forth about your transit system, or your country?
</blockquote>

Kirwan

Yeah, I've gone in a complete circle now. If we are going to change it has to be black with a properly designed silver fern or else just keep the current flag.
 
I'm also incredibly bored of the whole debate. Really sick of being told the process costs too much money, it's out flag for christs sake - we should spend more than ten bucks on our national image.

The Silver Fern

Flag