What are the principles of ‘good flag design’ and how did Minnesota’s old and new flags measure up?
Executive summary
Good flag design is governed by a compact, widely cited set of vexillological principles — simplicity, meaningful symbolism, limited colors, no lettering or seals, and distinctiveness — that aim to make flags recognizable, reproducible and unifying . By those standards Minnesota’s old flag largely failed — it was cluttered, seal‑based, and hard to read at a distance — while the 2024 replacement was explicitly crafted to follow the rules, trading detail for a bold, state‑shaped field, a single north star and simpler color fields, though it has also drawn critiques over perceived simplicity and political context [1].
1. The five fundamentals of ‘good flag design’ and why they matter
Vexillologists distilled the craft into five core rules: keep it simple so a child can draw it; use meaningful symbolism; use few basic colors; avoid lettering and seals; and be distinctive while still belonging to a visual family if desired — rules compiled and promoted by NAVA and set out in Good Flag, Bad Flag and related guidance . These principles are both practical and performative: simple, high‑contrast designs read at a distance, reproduce at tiny or large scale, and turn into wearable, viral emblems that build a shared brand and civic cohesion .
2. Why Minnesota’s old flag was widely judged to violate those principles
The historic Minnesota flag centered on the state seal — a dense portrait full of small elements, dates, lettering and layered motifs — and critics repeatedly argued it could not be read from a few yards away, relied on text to identify the state, repeated symbolism unnecessarily, and reproduced poorly at different sizes and orientations [1]. Vexillologists and state historians noted the seal’s depiction of Indigenous peoples and settler expansion had become controversial as well as visually cluttered, which fueled calls for a new standard that would be both legible and culturally respectful .
3. What the new flag changed — and how it aligns with vexillological rules
The 2024 design replaced the seal with a dark blue polygon in the hoist shaped roughly like Minnesota, a light blue field evoking water, and an eight‑point white star with one point northward; the brief limited colors and emphasized simplicity so the emblem would be distinct, legible and reproducible . Advisors argued the new flag “exemplifies all the principles of good flag design,” pointing to the removal of lettering and the busy seal, the use of a small palette, and symbolism that reads at a distance — decisions explicitly framed by the State Emblems Redesign Commission’s criteria and public design brief .
4. The reception: praise for clarity, criticism over simplicity and process
Supporters hailed the new design’s clarity and inclusiveness, saying it creates a recognizably “brandable” symbol and addresses offensive imagery in the old seal , while detractors called the new look too minimalist or politically motivated and raised questions about whether simplicity sacrifices evocative local character . Reporting and fact‑checks show both readings are present in public debate: the redesign process emphasized civilian submissions and set explicit criteria, but political and cultural fault lines shaped how people interpreted the change .
5. A measured verdict: better by the book, still contingent in practice
Measured strictly against the profession’s five principles, the new Minnesota flag is demonstrably superior to the old one — it is simpler, uses fewer colors, avoids a seal and lettering, and is distinctive through state‑specific geometry and a single, meaningful star . Yet flags are also civic artifacts whose success depends on adoption, affection and contestation; some citizens prefer evocative or historical complexity, and political backlash or perceptions of imposed design can limit a flag’s ability to become the unifying brand vexillologists hope for — an outcome the evidence here does not yet resolve .