ambiguity about their meaning

Over on plasticbag.org, Englishman Tom Coates critiques the design of American state flags. As a non-designer, I probably value different things in flag design. I’ve always thought the Arizona flag was quite striking, perhaps the best flag in our great nation, but Coates says, “I’m sort of puzzled by it - it’s kind of weirdly evocative, but there’s something very wrong about that star in the middle,” adding that it’s “muddy and confusing.” I have a vivid memory of when I was nine or ten when I was finishing a road race, when my mother pointed to another woman’s running shorts and remarked on the design. “It’s the Arizona flag,” I explained. I thought it was a cool design, but my appreciation may have been bound up in a bit of pubescent scopophilia.

I’d wished Oklahoma had a flag suited to a running short design, but unlike other southwestern states like New Mexico and Texas, Oklahoma’s flag is a bit to complex to make sense on someone’s behind. I also wish Coates had shared some comments on Oklahoma’s flag, which has a few too many ideas for its own good.

Working from long-forgotten Oklahoma history lessons, I’ll point out that the center shield represents a buffalo-skin shield, the branches represent peace (presumably the peace that came from Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Act, which forceably relocated southeastern nations into the wasteland of Oklahoma) and a traditional peace pipe. It’s a little complex for me, and a little too complex for schoolchildren trying to replicate it art class. On the other hand, the original state flag has a nice economy of iconography.

1911 Oklahoma State Flag

Now that’s a flag that would look good on running shorts. A while back, I looked around for a T-shirt that had the original flag design, since I like the spare design and it’s political message. The founders of the state intentionally used a red field to express their socialist ideals and the “46″ indicates that Oklahoma was the forty-sixth state to join the union. I found one outfit offering a red flag t-shirt, but the back of the shirt reads “Okies don’t quit.” Not only do I find “okie” an offensive slur, but I certainly don’t want to wear something that says “okie” in Austin. Maybe some day they’ll come out with a more subtle shirt for leftist Oklahomans.

Coates makes some more interesting observations about American state flags, and you should read the article. A reader may interested to know that Coates has deemed Colorado’s flag the worst of the bunch, saying:

There’s also an alarming lack of meaning to the thing. The blue apparently represents ’sky’; the white, ’snowcapped mountains’; the red, ‘earth’ and the yellow represents the sun. If it wasn’t for the ‘C’, therefore, this flag could cheerfully be used to represent pretty much any country in the entire world. In fact, to me it looks more like a bad corporate logo - perhaps for Carolco or something - than a State flag. Bad form, Colorado. Very disappointing

I’ve long thought there was something a little off about the Colorado flag, but I don’t think I would be as harsh as Coates. I’d give Coloradans credit for trying something a little more different than plopping the state seal on a flag or trying to integrate another flag into the flag like Mississippi or Hawaii. And, besides, it would work on a pair of running shorts.

4 Responses to “ambiguity about their meaning”

  1. On August 7th, 2006 at 7:46 am, adamrice said:

    You know, you’ve got the art, you could set up a cafepress store (or whatever) and make your own shirt, right?

  2. On August 7th, 2006 at 10:45 am, McChris said:

    From what I hear, CafePress just uses those ink-jet iron-ons, which fade and crumble after a few washings. It has, however, occurred to me to get the stuff for silk-screening and do a short run myself.

  3. On August 7th, 2006 at 1:51 pm, elevatedprimate said:

    I always was a little bit uneasy about the Colorado flag, too, though I certainly got used to seeing it growing up. I always understood the yellow circle to represent “gold”…like the kind that comes out of mountains…though I won’t vouch for the truth of that claim. It is a distinctive flag no matter how you cut it (and it does work well on running shorts…I wanted a pair of those SO BAD when I was a kid).

  4. On August 9th, 2006 at 10:08 pm, infobong.com » similarities to show connections said:

    […] I thought I’d follow up my post on Oklahoma flags with a link from Tom Coates’ del.icio.us bookmarks. Good Flag Bad Flag offers five principles for designing flags, and the first is “The flag should be so simple that a child can draw it from memory.” The current flag of Oklahoma clearly violates this principle with its feathers, crosses, olive branches, and symbols with obscure referents. (These symbols also violate the second rule.) Speaking from personal experience, this is a difficult flag for a child to draw. I’ve always thought the lettering “Oklahoma” at the bottom of the flag was superfluous, and it also violates the fourth rule, “no lettering or seals.” I suppose the original state flag violates this rule for having the “46″ in the center of the star, but it doesn’t seem as redundant as using the name of the state. The fifth rule is “be distinctive or be related,” and I think that the old Oklahoma flag trumps the current flag. The red field alludes to red flags used in the US labor movement, as well as socialist movements around the world, while the symbols in the current flag make little sense to anyone, and a blue field is used by 20 other states. Based on these recommendations, I think Oklahomans should take pride in their socialist history and revert back to the origclusioninal flag design. […]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.