Opinions on Vexillography, including a new Set of Guidelines for Flag Design Improving upon those set forth by Ted Kaye
Recently, a lot of flag redesigns have been going on, especially in the United States, as people are beginning to realize the importance of well-designed local flags. Most of these redesigns are centered around the flag design guidelines published by NAVA vexillologist Ted Kaye in his 2006 pamphlet Good Flag, Bad Flag. These guidelines have been included in the official material for the redesign contests for several U.S. states and have massively impacted the vexillographic trends in recent years.
I'm as thrilled as anyone that the general population is beginning to become more conscious of what makes a good flag. My only problem is with this particular set of guidelines. In general, Kaye seems to me to be a little bit obsessed with simplicity, and this is reflected in his pamphlet. For example, he says to use no more than three colours, to never use lettering or seals on a flag, and that flags should be simple enough for a child to draw them from memory. I can immediately think of renowned, well-loved flags that break some or all of his rules. The flag of Mexico uses at least a dozen colours, and I certainly couldn't draw the seal in the middle. The flag of Brazil uses four colours, contains lettering, and has far too many constellations for anyone, let alone a child, to draw from memory. The flag of South Africa contains no less than six colours. In my opinion, some of the most beautiful flags are the ones with loads of colours and symbols.
The reason flags are supposed to be simple is so that they can be recognized and understood from a distance while waving in the wind. But really, this doesn't necessitate simplicity, only distinctiveness. It doesn't matter how many little details are lost in practice so long as I can still see the flag waving and immediately know what I'm looking at. And it's true that seals and lettering are not good at this--if all the information is contained within a small, cluttered space, the flag is rendered illegible. This is why so-called "seal on a bedsheet" flags--the style of banner employed by the majority of U.S. states, with a seal or emblem and nothing else, on a monochrome field--are frowned upon. But as long as the seal or lettering isn't the only information on the flag, it's really not a problem. Take for example Serbia: The fine details of the coat of arms are easily lost from a distance, such that from far enough away, with low enough wind, the image might be completely undecipherable. But regardless of how much of the coat of arms you can make out, you can still tell that there's something there, and, in the context of the rest of the flag, it's obvious that it couldn't be anything but Serbia.
In another example, the flag of California uses a very detailed, lifelike painting of a bear, with lettering underneath it. The Kaye school of thought would have these eradicated or simplified, and yet, no one has any trouble identifying the Californian flag when they see it. It truly doesn't matter if you can see every strand of fur on the bear, or every blade of grass on the mound, or if you can read the words at all. As long as you can see the colours and the general composition, you immediately know what flag it is, because, complex though it may be, California's flag is truly distinct from others.
I am of the opinion that the flag of a nation, region, city or any other community has exactly two purposes: Firstly, to be identifiable from a distance, both for aesthetics and for practical uses (eg on sea), and secondly, to be an object of pride for the individuals whom the flag represents. Both California and Serbia accomplish both of these well, as well as countless other flags that some might consider "too complex" according to Kaye's guidelines. In my opinion, if a flag accomplishes both of these tasks, then it is a good flag, full stop. It doesn't need fixing because it's working just fine.
Now, none of this is to say that simplicity isn't a good rule of thumb. Clutter should be avoided on flags whenever possible. I've made it clear how I feel about needlessly cluttered flags. While, as mentioned above, it is okay to lose details in the wind, it is something that should be avoided, so that every element on the flag can be appreciated. In addition, simple flags are much easier to manufacture by traditional methods. But Kaye, and, to a further extent, the generation of flag designers influenced by his booklet, take simplicity, in my eyes, too far. It seems the prevalent way of thinking nowadays is that anything that can be removed from a flag, should be removed. The state of Minnesota stripped its beautiful redesign of its stripes last-minute in the name of "simplicity," despite the fact that the flag was already perfectly elegant. Modern American flag design seems influenced more by digital graphic design than anything, leading to a feeling of sterility and insipidness. The finalists for Illinois' upcoming redesign are prime examples of this. Out of nearly five thousand designs submitted, these are supposedly the best of the best, and they all feel bland at best. They look more like corporate logos than flags.
I think this is all a byproduct of these guidelines, who are at the forefront of the flag revolution, valuing simplicity so highly above all else. Most people, if they know much of anything about flag design, know Kaye's words. Vexillological circles on the internet, most notably YouTube and Reddit, tend to treat Kaye's guidelines as sacred rules set in stone, even though Kaye himself says in his booklet that every guideline has its exceptions. And as mentioned before, even state governments are sponsoring Kaye's guidelines in official redesign contests.
This is all perfectly well-meaning, but the guidelines being so centered around simplicity imply to amateur designers that the only acceptable flag is a minimalist, inoffensive configuration with absolutely no minute details, which in these days, to someone unfamiliar with vexillographic customs, tends to mean something that looks an awful lot like a corporate logo. And just based on the responses I've seen from the general public, no one really likes these designs. They're all fine, but they don't thrill anyone. They certainly don't thrill me.
That being said, I've decided to draw up my own set of guidelines, not vastly different from Kaye's, but rather, focusing more on the practical purpose of a flag, and framing simplicity as a virtue rather than a requisite. I don't expect these to find nearly as much popular recognition as Kaye's, nor do I intend them to, but rather to lay out my thoughts on what really makes a good flag.
The New Flag Design Guidelines,
From Most to Least Important:
1.) Should be meaningful to the bearer(s). A flag should be a source of pride to the people who fly it. If they truly value it, it does not need changing.
2.) Should be distinctive from other flags, or, if not visually distinct, there should be a meaningful connection between the two flags. Should use symbolism relevant, and preferably unique, to the bearer(s).
3.) Should be simple: Should be legible, or at the very least identifiable, from a distance while waving in low wind, regardless of the condition of the flag.
4.) Should be easily reproducible: Anyone with a needle and thread should be able to make it by hand and have it still be at least recognizable. Colours should be distinct from each other so that variations in dyes and condition will not render the flag unrecognizable or illegible (eg, should not use multiple shades of the same colour, nor gradients, and should generally obey the rule of tincture). Colours should seamlessly transfer from digital to physical and vice versa. A child should be able to draw it from memory, even if badly.
5.) Should use a relatively limited colour palette of two to five colours, each of which is distinct from the others (see guideline 4).
6.) Should not include lettering (see guidelines 3 and 4).
These are just my thoughts, and no set of guidelines can guarantee a perfect design, but a simple list of do's and don't's might help illustrate what a good flag looks like.
