WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) ā A flag printed with the words āplease walk on meā and laid on the floor of an art gallery has once again been packed away following public outcry, 30 years after protests forced the removal of the same artwork.
The Suter Art Gallery in the city of Nelson said Thursday it had taken down the work by MÄori artist Diane Prince due to escalating tensions and safety fears. The episode mirrored an Auckland gallery's removal of the work amid public backlash and complaints to law enforcement in 1995.
This time, the flag was meant to remain on display for five months. Instead, it lasted just 19 days, reigniting long-running debates in New Zealand over artistic expression, national symbols and the countryās colonial history.
Police told The Associated Press on Friday that officers were investigating āseveralā complaints about the exhibition.
What is the artwork?
The piece, titled Flagging the Future, is a cloth New Zealand flag displayed on the floor with the words āplease walk on meā stenciled across it. The flag features the British Union Jack and red stars on a blue background.
The work was part of an exhibition, Diane Prince: Activist Artist, and was meant to provoke reflection on the MÄori experience since New Zealand's colonization by Britain in the 19th century. Prince created the piece in 1995 in response to a government policy that limited compensation to MÄori tribes for historical land theft.
āI have no attachment to the New Zealand flag,ā Prince told Radio New Zealand in 2024. āI donāt call myself a New Zealander. I call myself a MÄori.ā
Prince couldnāt be reached immediately for comment Friday.
New Zealandās has gathered pace in recent decades. But there has been little appetite among successive governments to sever the countryās remaining constitutional ties to Britain or to a design that doesn't feature the Union Jack.
Why did the art strike a nerve?
New Zealand is among countries where desecrating the national flag is considered taboo and prohibited by law. Damaging a flag in public with intent to dishonor it is punishable by a fine of up to 5,000 New Zealand dollars ($2,984), but prosecutions are fleetingly rare.
As in the and elsewhere, the countryās flag is synonymous for some with military service. But for others, particularly some MÄori, itās a reminder of land dispossession, and loss of culture and identity.
Protests of the artwork in the city of Nelson, population 55,000, included videos posted to social media by a local woman, Ruth Tipu, whose grandfather served in the armyās MÄori Battalion during World War II. In one clip, she is seen lifting the flag from the floor and draping it over another artwork, an action Tipu said she would repeat daily.
A veteransā group also denounced the piece as āshamefulā and āoffensive.ā City council member Tim Skinner said he was āhorrifiedā by the workās inclusion.
But others welcomed it. Nelsonās deputy mayor, Rohan OāNeill-Stevens, posted on social media āin strong defense of artistic expression and the right for us all to be challenged and confronted by art.ā
Why did the gallery remove it?
The work was perhaps expected to provoke controversy and in the exhibitionās opening days, The Suter Gallery defended its inclusion. But a statement on its Facebook page late Thursday said a āsharp escalation in the tone and nature of the discourse, moving well beyond the bounds of respectful debateā had prompted the flagās removal.
āThis should not be interpreted as a judgement on the artwork or the artistās intent,ā the statement said. The gallery didnāt detail specific incidents of concern and a gallery spokesperson didnāt respond to a request for an interview on Friday.
New Zealandās Police said in a statement Friday that while officers were investigating complaints, they werenāt called to any disturbances at the exhibition. Prince said when she revived the work in 2024 that threats of prosecution by law enforcement had prompted its removal from the Auckland gallery in 1995.
The Nelson gallery didn't suggest in its statement that police involvement had influenced Thursday's decision.
Charlotte Graham-mclay, The Associated Press
