Art Gallery Sparks Outrage By Asking Visitors To Step On NZ Flag | EUROtoday

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — A New Zealand flag printed with the phrases “please walk on me” and laid on the ground of an artwork gallery has as soon as once more been packed away following public outcry, 30 years after protests compelled the removing of the identical paintings.

The Suter Art Gallery within the metropolis of Nelson mentioned Thursday it had taken down the work by Māori artist Diane Prince on account of escalating tensions and security fears. The episode mirrored an Auckland gallery’s removing of the work amid public backlash and complaints to regulation enforcement in 1995.

This time, the flag was meant to stay on show for 5 months. Instead, it lasted simply 19 days, reigniting long-running debates in New Zealand over inventive expression, nationwide symbols and the nation’s colonial historical past.

Police advised The Associated Press on Friday that officers had been investigating “several” complaints concerning the exhibition.

The piece, titled Flagging the Future, is a material New Zealand flag displayed on the ground with the phrases “please walk on me” stenciled throughout it. The flag options the British Union Jack and crimson stars on a blue background.

The work was a part of an exhibition, Diane Prince: Activist Artist, and was meant to impress reflection on the Māori expertise since New Zealand’s colonization by Britain within the nineteenth century. Prince created the piece in 1995 in response to a authorities coverage that restricted compensation to Māori tribes for historic land theft.

“I have no attachment to the New Zealand flag,” Prince advised Radio New Zealand in 2024. “I don’t call myself a New Zealander. I call myself a Māori.”

Prince couldn’t be reached instantly for remark Friday.

New Zealand’s reckoning with its colonial previous has gathered tempo in current many years. But there was little urge for food amongst successive governments to sever the nation’s remaining constitutional ties to Britain or change the flag to a design that doesn’t characteristic the Union Jack.

Why did the artwork strike a nerve?

New Zealand is amongst international locations the place desecrating the nationwide flag is taken into account taboo and prohibited by regulation. Damaging a flag in public with intent to dishonor it’s punishable by a effective of as much as 5,000 New Zealand {dollars} ($2,984), however prosecutions are fleetingly uncommon.

As within the United States and elsewhere, the nation’s flag is synonymous for some with navy service. But for others, notably some Māori, it’s a reminder of land dispossession, and lack of tradition and identification.

Protests of the paintings within the metropolis of Nelson, inhabitants 55,000, included movies posted to social media by a neighborhood lady, Ruth Tipu, whose grandfather served within the military’s Māori Battalion throughout World War II. In one clip, she is seen lifting the flag from the ground and draping it over one other paintings, an motion Tipu mentioned she would repeat every day.

A veterans’ group additionally denounced the piece as “shameful” and “offensive.” City council member Tim Skinner mentioned he was “horrified” by the work’s inclusion.

But others welcomed it. Nelson’s deputy mayor, Rohan O’Neill-Stevens, posted on social media “in strong defense of artistic expression and the right for us all to be challenged and confronted by art.”

Why did the gallery take away it?

The work was maybe anticipated to impress controversy and within the exhibition’s opening days, The Suter Gallery defended its inclusion. But a press release on its Facebook web page late Thursday mentioned a “sharp escalation in the tone and nature of the discourse, moving well beyond the bounds of respectful debate” had prompted the flag’s removing.

“This should not be interpreted as a judgement on the artwork or the artist’s intent,” the assertion mentioned. The gallery didn’t element particular incidents of concern and a gallery spokesperson didn’t reply to a request for an interview on Friday.

New Zealand’s Police mentioned in a press release Friday that whereas officers had been investigating complaints, they weren’t referred to as to any disturbances on the exhibition. Prince mentioned when she revived the work in 2024 that threats of prosecution by regulation enforcement had prompted its removing from the Auckland gallery in 1995.

The Nelson gallery didn’t recommend in its assertion that police involvement had influenced Thursday’s determination.