Nationalism & Design by Sean McFarlane

JAN 2009

NATIONALISM & DESIGN

SEAN MCFARLANE

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NATIONALISM AND DESIGN WITHIN POST- DEVOLUTION SCOTLAND

NATIONALISM AND DESIGN A Study of the Relationship between Nationalism and Design Within Post-Devolution Scotland A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Product Design Sean McFarlane

Edinburgh Napier University, January 2009

ABSTRACT

Since devolution in 1999, Scotland has seen a resurgence of nationalism, culminating in the Scottish Nationalist Party gaining a majority of seats in the Scottish Parliament after the 2007 Scottish Election; thus forming the first Nationalist government of Scotland. This dissertation is a study of the relationship between nationalism and design within post-devolution Scotland, with a focus on the city of Edinburgh. The dissertation analyses the presence of nationalism with a focus on design, in and around the city of Edinburgh, and the role it plays within Scottish society. The main aim of the dissertation is to explore how nationalism can inspire design, and in result, argue that design has the power to inspire nationalism. Other objectives include a study of banal-nationalism within Scottish society, and blatant nationalism; how design is used as a tool for a nationalist goal. The dissertation explores the key theories of nationalism, arguing that design is fundamental to nationalist ideology and the creation of a nation. Also, an in-depth study - relating to the relationship between nationalism and design - of Scotlandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s road to devolution, the Scottish Parliament building, the rise of nationalism, rebranding of the Scottish Executive, and St Andrewâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Day 2008.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction 5 Background The Nation and Nationalism 9 Primordialism 10 Modernism 11 Ethno-Symbolism 11 Banal Nationalism 13 Nationalism and Design 14 Methodology

Scotland The Road to Devolution 21 The Scottish Parliament Building 23 The Scottish National Party 29 The Re-Branding of the Scottish Executive 29 St. Andrewâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Day 34 Conclusion 41 References 43 List of Illustrations 47 Appendix 49

INTRODUCTION

This dissertation is a study of the relationship between nationalism and design. The focus of my study is the relationship between nationalism and design within postdevolution Scotland, in particular the city of Edinburgh. The presence of nationalism or nationalist sentiment has played a significant role in Scottish society within recent years. In 2007 the Scottish National Party (SNP) were elected to government, and are currently the largest party in the Scottish Parliament; their primary objective, attaining Scottish independence. As the SNP Minister, Kenny MacAskill (MSP – Cabinet Secretary for Justice) quite passionately wrote: Throughout the centuries the Scottish people have dreamed of and aspired to not just Nationhood, but a land worthy of its people. It was fought for on the field of Bannockburn and campaigned for in the coalfields of Fife. Not just a free and independent land, a just and prosperous one. The Scottish Parliament offers that chance; post-devolution Nationalism is about building a Nation. (MacAskill, 2004, p.17)

This dissertation approaches the presence of nationalism within Scotland, postdevolution, with a focus on design in and around the city of Edinburgh. I will explore how nationalism can inspire design, and as a result, argue that design has the power to inspire nationalism and provoke nationalist sentiment. I will also analyse the way in which nationalism mostly exists in Scottish society through the concept of ‘banal nationalism’. By the term banal nationalism, I refer to Michael Billig’s concept of the ways in which a nation is represented everyday; building an imagined sense of national solidarity and belonging. This can be presented in many public forms including flags, songs, symbols on money, stamps, post-boxes and so

forth. The concept refers to the symbols and flaggings, or reminders, of the nation; immersed within a society’s culture. Many of these symbols are most effective due to their repetition, and somewhat subliminal nature; as Billig writes: Daily, the nation is indicated, or ‘flagged’, in the lives of its citizenry. Nationalism, far from being an intermittent mood in established nations, is the endemic condition… The metonymic image of banal nationalism is not a flag which is being consciously waved with fervent passion; it is the flag hanging unnoticed on the public building. (Billig, 1995, p.6 & p.8)

In addition, I will not only explore the way in which the nation is represented in a banal manner; with a ‘hidden’ nature, but also how design is used in a more conscious and deliberate manner to provoke nationalist sentiment, and to remind a nation of its past. I will observe how design is used as a tool to fashion a common identity and culture within a nation (accurate or not), and used with deliberate intent (i.e. as political propaganda) to provoke nationalist sentiment; a tool for a nationalist goal. This dissertation will show that nationalism plays an important role within society, through the use of design. Whether in a banal, or more conscious and deliberate manner, nationalism exists within Scottish society. Design plays a fundamental role in the promotion and utilization of nationalist ideology, and nationalist goals.

BACKGROUND

The Nation and Nationalism To fully understand the relationship between nationalism and design, it is crucial to establish a meaning of the terms nation and nationalism. Professor of Religion (Clemson University, USA) and author, Steven Grosby writes: Nationalism refers to a set of beliefs about the nation. Any particular nation will contain differing views about its character; thus, for any nation there will be different and competing beliefs about it that often manifest themselves as political differences. (Grosby, 2005, p.5)

However, before clarifying further what is meant by the term nationalism, it is important to establish what a nation is, and why the term nation came to exist. From our earliest written records, there is evidence to suggest that humans have divided themselves into groups and societies; separating themselves from others, distinguishing ‘us’ from ‘them’. This is the basis on which a nation is formed; humans dividing into separate and territorially distinct societies. However, this does not account for the emergence, or birth of a nation. Humans dividing in to separate territorial societies may be the foundations, but there are many other factors and historical processes which result in the formation of a nation. It is generally accepted amongst historians and writers on the subject of nationalism that there are three main theories on nationalism, and thus the creation of nations; Primordialism, Modernism and Ethno-Symbolism.

Primordialism The classical theory of nationalism is widely referred to as Primordialism by theorists. It is widely perceived as being the natural, but flawed, approach to the study of nationalism. Primordialism argues that the emergence of the nation is a natural phenomenon, and that all nations are ancient; naturally, ethnic identities emerge, thus creating a division of humanity into ethnic families. These ethnic families naturally regard themselves as superior to other ethnic groups - the inferior, foreign enemy. As the Classical Greek philosopher, Plato wrote, ‘Then when Greeks fight with barbarians and barbarians with Greeks, we’ll assert that they are at war and are enemies by nature’ (Grosby, 2005 p.3). This example of ancient philosophy is a strong argument for the case of primordialist theory. It shows that humans did divide into separate groups and ancient societies; however what it does not show is that these societies were regarded as nations by its members. The philosophy and theory of Primordialism can be traced back to the work of German writer, philosopher and poet, Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803) who believed the nation emerged with language. He argued that language is at one with thought, the language used by an ethnic group or society is their own, and therefore the language used must create individual and separate thoughts and thinking to other groups. The idea of language being passed on as a tradition can also be defined by the term collective consciousness, ‘it refers to a social relation of each of a number of individuals as a consequence of those individuals participating in the same evolving tradition’ (Grosby, 2005, p.9). The idea of traditions being passed on draws parallels to more modern theories of nationalism which I will refer to later on. The theory of Primordialism cannot justify the creation or emergence of the nation. Whilst the theory argues that humans naturally divide themselves in to groups, often conflicting societies; with nationalism deriving from pre-existing nations how can these groups or societies, with a common language, be called a nation? They are merely societies, with local-loyalties, and a common ground. The general argument amongst theorists is that the nation is modern; political, economic, and technological advancements (modernization) brought about the existence of nations.

Modernism The philosopher and sociologist, Ernest Andre Gellner (1925-1995) wrote: Nationalism is primarily a political principle that holds that the political and the national unit should be congruent. (Gellner, 1983, p.1)

His theory of Modernism argues that nations are a modern entity, derived from industrialisation. His belief being, nationalism is a sociological necessity in the modern world, and therefore only appeared in the modern world (post-1800). Unlike the primordialist theory that nationalism derives from the natural nation or preexisting nation, Gellner claims that it is nationalism that creates the nation. However ground breaking, Gellner’s theory of Modernism is somewhat flawed, and has gathered much criticism from theorists. It is argued that Modernism regards the term nationalism too much as a mechanism or tool, it is too functionalist, and does not account for the sentiment or passions generated by nationalism. His theory is also based around post-industrialised societies (Western, European States), and does not account for nationalism in a non-industrialised society. The theory argues that nationalism is an essential function, a sociological necessity, a tool for the purpose of economic gain, and a somewhat soulless ideology. As mentioned before, Gellner fails to take in to account the passions and patriotism generated by nationalism.

Ethno-Symbolism The most modern, and perhaps most valued theory of nationalism is EthnoSymbolism. The Professor of Nationalism and Ethnicity (London School of Economics), Anthony D. Smith (born 1933) created his theory based on EthnoSymbolism. His argument combines primordialist and modernist views, although is widely regarded to be based on that of fellow modern theorists and writers on the subject; nationalism is a modern phenomenon. However, contrary to Gellner’s theory, Smith argues that nations must have had a ‘pre-modern’ existence; and does take in to account the passions generated by nationalism.

The fundamental basis of Ethno-Symbolism is the theory that nationalism draws on the pre-existing history of a group or society, which then culminates to create a common identity or shared bond; a nation is therefore created from the memories of its past. These memories may not, and need not, be factually accurate; they still create an understanding of the present, Smith explains: Variations between nations are equally important, both in themselves and for their political consequences. My belief is that the most important of these variations are determined by specific historical experiences and by the ‘deposit’ left by these collective experiences. Hence the importance attached here to the various ‘myths’ and ‘memories’, ‘symbols’ and ‘values’, which so often define and differentiate nations. (Smith, 1986, ix)

Unlike the primordialist theory that humans naturally divide into ethnic identities and ethnic groups, Smith argues that nationalism does not require a nation’s citizenry to be the same, but only that they should feel a strong and common ‘togetherness’; a bond of solidarity to the nation and its people. Ethno-symbolism argues that a nation is built and defined by, ‘‘myths’ and ‘memories, ‘symbols’ and ‘values’’ (Smith, 1986, ix), indicating that a group or society can transform into a nation; through common mythologies, common identities, shared traditions, shared beliefs, and mass public culture. These ‘common bonds’ can be presented in many forms; one example is the primordialist theory that a nation emerged with language. This might not be entirely true, as language itself does not create the nation; but language is however a passedon tradition. When this tradition is shared with another individual there becomes a common bond between two individuals; a collective consciousness. Another example of a shared memory, key to the existence of a nation, is that of ancient Israel; Steven Grosby explains: There would, for example, have been no nation of ancient Israel had there not been memories about the past, such as the exodus from Egypt, Moses and his bronze snake (which was kept in the Jerusalem Temple until the reign of King Hezekiah (714-686 BCE)), and the reigns of David and Solomon. (Grosby, 2005, p.8)

Whether these memories are accurate does not matter. A memory or myth, both contributes to an understanding of the present that ‘often defines and differentiates nations’. As a final example, I will quite fittingly refer to Scotland. The Scottish tartan kilt is widely regarded and portrayed as an ancient emblem of Scottish culture. There is the iconic image of a Scottish warrior, battling on the field of Bannockburn; flowing red hair, claymore in hand, and tartan kilt wrapped around the waist. The tartan kilt has long been the most recognisable cultural tradition of the highland Scots. Therefore, it often surprises most people that many of the most recognisable features and traditions associated with wearing of the kilt have, in fact, been developed in the nineteenth century, not by Scottish Highlanders, but by the Nobles of England and Scotland. (History of the Kilt in Scotland, 200?, Tour Scotland)

This invention of tradition does not matter, as the tartan kilt in the present day is a symbol of the nation. Whether it’s perceived origins are accurate or not, it remains a tradition that unites the people of a nation with a common bond, thus creating a shared myth and symbol.

Banal Nationalism It is important to discuss Michael Billig’s concept of Banal Nationalism, as noticeable links and parallels can be drawn between his concept, and Smith’s theory of Ethno-Symbolism. Smith’s theory shows that nationalism draws on the pre-existing history of a group or society, which then culminates to create a common identity or shared bond; a nation is therefore created from the memories of its past. Billig’s concept of banal nationalism does not argue this theory, in fact he uses these ideas to build upon his own concept. He reinforces Smith’s argument that a nation is built by common bonds and a national solidarity, but explores this in a ‘banal’ manner. What Billig refers to is the myths, symbols, stories and values that represent the nation, but in the everyday lives of its citizenry; thus creating an ‘imagined togetherness’ - a bond of solidarity between the nation and its people. As mentioned earlier (in the introduction), the concept of Banal Nationalism refers

to the ways in which a nation is represented everyday; building an imagined sense of national solidarity and belonging. This can be presented in many public forms including flags, songs, symbols on money, stamps, language, and the implied ‘togetherness’ formed by media (i.e. “our boys” in Iraq or Afghanistan). The concept refers to the symbols and flaggings, or reminders, of the nation; immersed within a society’s culture. Many of these symbols are most effective due to their repetition, and somewhat subliminal nature. Billig writes: In so many little ways, the citizenry are daily reminded of their national place in a world of nations. However, this reminding is so familiar, so continual, that it is not consciously registered as reminding. (Billig, 1995, p.9)

Nationalism and Design After analysing the relationship and parallels drawn between the theory of EthnoSymbolism and concept of Banal Nationalism, it is now possible to explore the relationship between nationalism and design. Taking in to account the theory and views of Ethno-Symbolism, and Billig’s concept of Banal Nationalism, it is possible to argue that design is fundamental to the understanding of the term nationalism, and it is design itself which creates the nation. Firstly, it is important to establish what design is. Over time, it appears and is perceived that design has become something insignificant. Like Banal Nationalism, design has slipped in to peoples every day lives, somewhat hidden from recognition. However, this should not be the case. Whilst recognising the banal manner in which design is perceived, and has consequently allowed design to become something hidden, I argue that this is what gives design its importance. It is naïve to think that design is merely the packaging of an object, the clothes on a cat-walk, or the poster in a shop window; it is the shaping and construction of our whole human environment. Blatant or hidden, design shapes our existence. Professor of Design and author, John Heskett writes: Design is one of the basic characteristics of what it is to be human, and an essential determinant of the quality of human life. It affects everyone in every detail of every aspect

of what they do throughout each day… design, stripped to its essence, can be defined as the human capacity to shape and make our environment in ways without precedent in nature, to serve our needs and give meaning to our lives. (Heskett, 2002, p.4 & p.7)

Taking in to account Smith’s theory of Ethno-Symbolism, and Billig’s concept of Banal Nationalism, it is possible to define nationalism and the nation as a product of design. The primordialist theory that the nation is a natural phenomenon is widely disregarded and dispelled by theorists - this would indicate that the nation must be man-made. With this in mind, Smith’s theory that ‘myths, memories, symbols and values’ define and differentiate nations; common mythologies, common identities, shared traditions and shared beliefs - all man-made. Finally, Billig’s concept of banal nationalism, referring to the every day representations of the nation within a society’s culture, from flags and songs to symbols and language are also, all manmade. John Heskett explains: …observing the environment in which anyone may be reading these lines – it might be while browsing in a bookstore, at home, in a library, in an office, on a train, and so on. The odds are that almost nothing in that environment will be completely natural – even plants will have been shaped and positioned by human intervention and, indeed, their genus may even be a considerable modification of natural forms. The capacity to shape our world has now reached such a pitch that few aspects of the planet are left in pristine condition, and, on a detailed level, life is entirely conditioned by designed outcomes of one kind or another. (Heskett, 2002 p.7 & p.8)

It is important to recognise that the most widely regarded and respected modern theories and theorists of nationalism are all in agreement that the nation is not a natural phenomenon. The nation is born from nationalism. Nationalism draws on the pre-existing history of a group or society, which then culminates to create a common identity or shared bond; a nation is therefore created from the memories of its past. These memories create an understanding of the present, they need not be factually accurate, but still create a common bond. These bonds are created by man, and therefore design, I argue, creates the nation. Designer and author, Victor Papanek (1927-1999) writes:

All men are designers, all that we do, almost all of the time, is design, for design is basic to all human activity. The planning and patterning of any act toward a desired, foreseeable end constitutes the design process. Any attempt to separate design, to make it a thingby-itself, works counter to the fact that design is the underlying matrix of life. Design is composing an epic poem, executing a mural, painting a master-piece, writing a concerto. But design is also cleaning and reorganizing a desk drawer, pulling an impacted tooth, baking an apple pie, choosing sides for a backlot baseball game, and educating a child. (Papanek 1985 p3)

METHODOLOGY

To gather the relevant and desired information needed to fulfil my aims and objectives for this dissertation, I will use a number of methods. These methods include: submersive and observational research in and around the city of Edinburgh, the reading and critical analyses of published writings regarding my dissertation topic, gathering relevant and most recent news articles regarding my dissertation topic, contacting relevant and notable sources, discussion / focus groups, and reliable web-based sources. I have chosen these methods of research because I believe they will provide me with the most useful and relevant information regarding my dissertation topic. Submersive and observational research in and around the city of Edinburgh, provides first hand, primary research. It is my findings and my information, therefore totally reliable and accurate. The same can be said, regarding the contacting of relevant sources and discussion groups; my own questions, and therefore reliable, relevant, and most up-to-date answers. My secondary based research will be the reading and analyses of relevant published writings, the gathering of news articles, and reliable web-based sources. My secondary research will provide me with the necessary information and material to critically analyse; providing the necessary information to base my primary research, and gather my own findings.

SCOTLAND

The Road to Devolution Nationalism plays a major role within Scottish society today. In 2007 the Scottish National Party (SNP) were elected to government, and are currently the largest party in the Scottish Parliament; their primary objective, attaining Scottish independence. As the SNP Minister, Kenny MacAskill (MSP â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Cabinet Secretary for Justice) writes: Independence is essential if the dreams and aspirations of the people of Scotland held at the outset of the establishment of the Parliament and before are to be achieved. (MacAskill, 2004, p.15)

It is important to analyse why the Scottish Parliament came to be, how Scotland gained a devolved government, and why nationalism rose to popularity in the process. Firstly we must briefly explore the modern history of Scotland; the road to devolution. It is difficult to choose a precise moment to begin a brief history of Scotlandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Government. However, I believe the 1707 Acts of Union presents a convenient starting point. In essence, the Acts of Union saw the formation of the United Kingdom; a united Scotland, England and Wales. Until this point, Scotland had been an Independent nation (although sharing the same monarchy), with its own Parliament and legal system. The Acts of Union brought the Scottish and English Parliaments together, merging as one government. This concept of one Kingdom, one government was to remain the status quo for almost 300 years. Of course many historical events occurred throughout this time, but with regard to the United Kingdom and its government, little changed. However, this does not address Scotlandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s desire for the re-establishment of its own Parliament, a devolved

government. The resurgence of a Scottish Parliament, in my opinion, derives from the Conservative era of the Thatcher and Major Governments. During the 1970’s and 80’s, Scotland felt the brunt of Tory economic policy, with rising unemployment levels. As a result a major proportion of the Scottish population grew dissatisfied with Conservative rule from Westminster, feeling that the ruling government did not have Scotland’s interests and concerns at heart. This anger and resentment led to a rise in support for Scottish Independence, and reinvigorated the nationalist cause. The angered and dissatisfied majority turned to the Labour Party. Labour’s leftleaning ideals were the escape route from Tory rule; the working-class majority of Scotland’s population agreed with Labour’s devolution agenda. The Labour Party had an important support structure in the West of Scotland (the working-class, trade unions, etc), and thus support for devolution grew. John Smith, leader of the Labour Party (1992-1994), famously referred to devolution as Labour’s “unfinished business”; as an earlier attempt in 1979 had failed. In 1997, Labour’s return to power saw the beginnings of a new Scottish Parliament. Tony Blair was elected as Prime Minister and set out his plans for the formation of a devolved Scottish government and held a referendum on the matter in September that year. An overwhelming majority (74%) voted in favour of a Scottish Parliament; the new devolved parliament was established in 1999. Kenny MacAskill writes: The years following the re-establishment of the Scottish Parliament have been difficult ones. The defeat of Thatcherism left a legacy of an embattled and embittered land. Eighteen years of Tory rule left a country reeling from huge social and economic changes and yet containing a society with an outward swagger but huge inner self-doubt. Scotland was devoid of self-confidence and uncertain of its direction. Devolution offered the possibility of self-government within the safety of the Union for some, and a steppingstone to Independence for others. (MacAskill, 2004, p.13)

This dissertation focuses on nationalism in Scotland, post-devolution.

The Scottish Parliament Building The establishment of a devolved Scottish Parliament gave Scotland the opportunity to build its own parliament building. The importance and necessity of the building held no compromise; the new Scottish Parliament needed a new home. A parliament building can be regarded as a symbol of the nation, an institution that sustains the traditions and common bond between its people. With regard to Smith’s theory of Ethno-Symbolism, the people of a nation have shared traditions and a shared self-awareness, which can be sustained by a parliament building; a symbol that unites a nation. Steven Grosby explains that the distinguishing, shared self-awareness is sustained by institutions such as: ...the Parliament for England, that bears those traditions around which the social relation of the nation is formed. Those institutions provide a structure for the nation. Thus, the nation is formed around shared, self-designating beliefs that have such a structure. (Grosby, 2005, p.10)

I believe that the parliament building is not only inspired by nationalism, but is a symbol that creates nationalism; thus building the nation. The building has the power to provoke nationalist sentiment. It is for these reasons it is important to analyse the design of the building. The construction of the Scottish Parliament building proved extremely controversial. At almost every step of the process during the commissioning and construction of the building, decisions and choices were heavily criticised by opposition parties, journalists and the general public. Whilst important to recognise these criticisms, an in depth analysis would distract from the main focus of this study. More important is the design of the building, and the relationship that the design has with nationalism. The Scottish Parliament building was designed by Catalan architect Enric Miralles. Construction began in June 1999, taking 5 years to complete, with the official opening ceremony held on the 9th October 2004. On the 24th of June 1997 the White Paper, ‘Scotland’s Parliament’ was published, setting the objectives of the new parliament building. The paper states: The building the Scottish Parliament occupies must be of such a quality, durability and

civic importance as to reflect the Parliament’s status and operational needs; it must be secure but also accessible to all, including people with special needs and it must promote modern and efficient ways of working and good environmental practice… It will be an important symbol for Scotland. It should pay tribute to the country’s past achievements and signal its future aspirations. (Scotland’s Parliament, 1997, Chapter 10)

The White Paper confirmed that the parliament building was to reside in Edinburgh. After a lengthy consultation period it was decided that Holyrood would be the site of the new Parliament. This decision proved fundamental in influencing Miralles’ vision for the design of the building. Its location at Holyrood provided panoramic views of Holyrood Park, Arthur’s Seat and Salisbury Crags. The main aim of Miralles’ design focused on integrating the building with its surrounding landscape. He was keen to ensure that the new building and surrounding complex would reflect the natural landscape and geology of Holyrood Park. In Miralles’ proposed building concept he put forward his objectives: The Parliament sits in the land because it belongs to the Scottish Land...We don’t want to forget that the Scottish Parliament will be in Edinburgh, but will belong to Scotland, to the Scottish Land. The Parliament should be able to reflect the land which it represents. The building should originate from the sloping base of Arthur’s seat and arrive into the city almost out of the rock… The building should be land… built out of the land. (Miralles, 1998, Building Design Concept)

The complex is a collection of several buildings and spaces, providing office space for MSPs and their staff, a debating chamber and committee rooms, a public hall, library, and garden space. To fulfil his objective of creating a parliament ‘built out of the land’, Miralles’ design incorporated organic shapes and natural materials. Observing an aerial image of the Parliament, it is clear to see that a number of the buildings are shaped like leaves. The structure also starts at a low level, gradually gaining in height; creating the impression of a building which has emerged or grown from the earth. To further reinforce this concept, many of the structures have been coated in turf, flowers and trees. The garden space surrounding the building is filled with plants, grasses, and flowers gathered from the local vicinity of the Parliament buildings; trees were also collected from all across Scotland, and planted within the surrounding gardens. These design details reinforce the concept that the parliament

is a representation of every part of Scotland, and all its citizenry. The building is able to reflect not just the urban Scotland of the central belt, but also a much more natural and rugged Scotland. The idyllic image of Scotland as a wild country of ‘highlands and heather’ is one that many people associate with Scotland. It is however, a reality for very few Scottish citizens. It is evident that placing so much emphasis on natural and organic forms when designing the parliament buildings, Miralles was influenced by this idyllic and mythical persona of Scotland. However, this is not to argue that Scotland’s landscape does not contain highlands and heather, but rather, it plays little part in the lives of a vast majority of Scotland’s population. The building is designed to emerge from the earth, “arrive into the city almost out of the rock”, be at one with the soil and land that it is built, a product of Scotland, a symbol of the nation.

1. Aerial View of the Scottish Parliament Building at Holyrood

Another crucial element in the design of the building was the choice and use of materials. Miralles was keen to use, whenever and wherever possible, materials sourced within Scotland. This further enforces the notion that the Parliament

2. The Public Restaurant during the first live test day of the new Scottish Parliament complex at Holyrood. Abstract Saltire design on ceiling

3. Window Seat in MSP Office at the new Scottish Parliament at Holyrood 4. Reverend Robert Walker (1755 - 1808) Skating on Duddingston Loch

building, whilst based in Edinburgh, is a representation of the whole of Scotland, and its people. The use of Scottish oak in the central debating chamber, and throughout the rest of the complex, was a specific procurement of the parliament. The Kemnay granite used on the facades of the building and the external and internal floor surfaces was sourced from a quarry in Aberdeenshire. In addition, an important design feature is the Canongate Wall, situated under the façade of the Canongate building. The wall contains over 30 different types of stone incorporated into the building - each from different locations across Scotland, and each engraved with a quote from well-renowned Scottish individuals. The locations from which these stones originate include, Glasgow, Mull, Ullapool and Argyll, to name a few. The purpose of this wall is to represent the people of Scotland; the parliament is designed for all Scottish citizens. This feature evidently shows that the design is inspired by nationalist sentiments. The very fabrics of the building, the materials used, and the foundations on which it was built, are sourced from the nation itself. Whilst the design is clearly, and deliberately, inspired by the nation, the building also has the power to provoke and inspire nationalist sentiment to its visitors. On arriving at the Canongate wall, any citizen of the nation should be able to find a representation of their home region of Scotland. This helps to create a feeling of a united nation, a shared and common bond. Upon a recent visit to the parliament, I found various specific design features clearly inspired by Scottish nationalism. One of the most prominent features is the shapes moulded into the ceiling of the Main Hall. The ceiling is made up of three vaulted sections, each presenting abstract designs, clearly representing the Saltire flag of Scotland. The official Scottish Parliament building website confirms, Miralles’ abstract design is based on that of a St Andrew’s cross. Another prominent feature is the windows of the MSPs Office Building. Each office contains a bay window designed specifically for, as Miralles suggests, ‘contemplation’. This contemplation space contains both a window seat and shelving area. As there are 114 of these windows seats, they have become an iconic and important symbol of the parliament building. It is widely acknowledged that the shape of the windows was inspired by the famous Scottish painting, ‘Reverend Robert Walker skating on Duddingston Loch’; thought to be by Sir Henry Raeburn.

Comparing a photograph of both the window and the painting, it is clear to see why these comparisons have been made. The image of the Reverend Robert Walker is one synonymous with Scotland, and more specifically Edinburgh. A silhouette of the Reverend was for many years used as a logo for the National Gallery of Scotland, situated in the centre of Edinburgh. It is considered by many to be one of the most famous works of Scottish art, and remains an iconic image of Scotland. Gathering inspiration from this art-work, Miralles is very subtle in his adaptation of this famous painting. When designing the windows of the MSP building he forever embedded the iconic image into the walls of the new Scottish parliament. This iconic image, a somewhat ‘national treasure’ and symbol of Scotland (particularly Edinburgh), has quite evidently inspired the design of the parliament building. This therefore is an example of nationalism inspiring design. When the objectives were set in the White Paper ‘Scotland’s Parliament’, it stated that the parliament building: …will be an important symbol for Scotland. It should pay tribute to the country’s past achievements and signal its future aspirations. (Scotland’s Parliament, 1997, Chapter 10)

Taking influence from many iconic Scottish symbols, Miralles was successful in incorporating Scotland’s history and traditions into the very foundations of the building. By abstracting images such as the Saltire and the Skating Minister, he was able to subtly hint to Scotland’s past whilst maintaining and providing her with a thoroughly modern parliament building to take into the 21st century. It is clear to see that the design of the building is inspired by nationalism and the Scottish nation. Smith’s theory of Ethno-Symbolism argues that a nation is built upon common mythologies, symbols, and shared traditions. Miralles has taken these symbols and mythologies and integrated them into his new design; reinforcing, and creating a common bond and shared traditions between the people of the nation. A parliament building is a symbol of the nation, an institution that sustains the traditions and common bond between its people. The people of Scotland have shared traditions

and a shared self-awareness, which can be sustained by a new Scottish parliament building; a symbol that unites a nation.

The Scottish National Party The Scottish National Party defines itself as a left leaning political party which advocates secession from the United Kingdom. Founded in 1934, they have continuously campaigned for Scotland’s independence from the rest of the United Kingdom, and represent the interests of the Scottish people within the Scottish Parliament, United Kingdom Parliament and European Parliament. Support for the SNP Party has wavered over the years, as has their general campaign for an independent Scotland. However, since devolution, they have seen a massive resurgence in support. Lead by prominent Nationalists Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, the SNP won a majority 47 of a possible 129 seats in the 2007 elections; forming a minority government. The SNP’s rise in popularity is linked to two main factors; the fall in popularity of the Labour Party, and the fact that people are more willing to vote for a nationalist party in a Scottish General election as opposed to a UK election. The remainder of this study will look at key initiatives the SNP government have taken since elected to power.

The Re-Branding of the Scottish Executive On the 2nd September 2007, the newly elected Scottish National Party re-branded the already existing Scottish Executive to The Scottish Government. Legally, under the Scotland Act 1998, the Scottish Government remains the Scottish Executive by name (legal documents and contracts), but is widely referred to and adopted as The Scottish Government. The SNP not only re-branded the name, but also the ‘government’ logo; the original logo consisting of The Royal Arms and the text Scottish Executive underneath. The Royal Arms was removed (as was the text), and replaced by the Scottish Flag

– the emblematic Saltire of Scotland. The Scottish flag stands alone, with the text, Scottish Government underneath. This re-branding sparked wide criticism within the Scottish parliament, mostly from Unionist supporters and Opposition Parties. These criticisms were not directed at the change of name or logo as such, but rather the un-compromising way the SNP dealt with the changes. There was little consultation between the SNP and other Parties, and was deemed to be en-forced upon parliament and its members. The reported cost of this re-branding is widely perceived to be in the region of £100,000. Whilst the re-branding of the Scottish government is widely accepted by Parliament and Opposition Parties, there is the underlying notion that the SNP made these changes for their own benefit; using the design to promote and provoke nationalist sentiment. Although referring to SNP plans to re-paint Scotland’s trains ‘in blue and white Saltire livery’, Lord Foulkes, the Labour MSP said it was, “independence by creep” and followed on to the SNP re-branding of the Scottish Executive as the Scottish Government, he added: They know they can’t have a straight forward fight on it because they would lose hands down, so they try to brainwash people into independence instead with a strategy of incremental changes. (Dalton, A., 2008, The Scotsman)

Recently I contacted SNP Minister Kenny MacAskill regarding the subject of rebranding the Scottish Executive (see Appendix A for full transcript); asking how he and the SNP members felt about the accusations of “brainwashing” the public, and using it to their own advantage. Not only this, I questioned him regarding a passage from his book: ‘Building a Nation – Post Devolution Nationalism in Scotland’. The passage states: When the Irish Free State was formed, post-boxes were painted a different colour and the motif changed to show the passing of the Crown and the establishment of a new order… Such changes now are neither necessary to create a modern Nation, nor applicable where EU and other directives are opening up postal deliveries and a range of other public services to international not just private competition… The existence of a Nation State is no longer dictated by leitmotifs on a variety of services or a different name or

colour for some organisations. (MacAskill, 2004, p.27)

I asked Kenny MacAskill if he felt this statement (given that his book was first published in 2004) somewhat contradicted the SNP’s actions, with regard to the changing of name and logo of the Scottish Executive; MacAskill argues, I see no contradiction whatsoever. We are a Government. That is not a trapping but a fact. The re-branding as such is minor cost, but important symbolically. Some symbols do have logic, even if post boxes don’t… So in a nutshell, do our actions contradict my logic? No. The intention in the book was regarding other matters, such as the post office. This Government has sought to work collaboratively with a variety of Governments pan UK. Some things are symbolic, some things fundamental. We are a Government. (MacAskill, 2009, Appendix A)

With regard to Opposition Party comments, he writes: …some in the opposition should really realise that Ireland is at ease with itself by being confident in its Irishness, symbols or not, and not obsessed about denying your identity or perceiving it as threatening. (MacAskill, 2009, Appendix A)

It should be noted, however, that the concept of changing the name of the Scottish Executive to the Scottish Government was first proposed in 2001, by the then Labour First Minister, Henry McLeish. McLeish was quoted in an article in The Independent, on the 11th of January 2001 as stating, the Scottish Executive had to move on from “being like a Whitehall department to being a Scottish government with all the responsibilities this entails”. His plans however, were vetoed by Downing Street, fearful that it would represent a symbolic move towards Scottish independence; fuelling nationalist sentiments. I believe this demostrates how aware politicians are – regarding design as a powerful tool to provoke nationalist sentiment among a nation’s people. So worried were the London based Labour party, fearful of ‘stoking the flames’ of nationalism, they cowered at the thought of changing one word; Executive to Government. This further reitterates the point made earlier, a majority of Scottish people felt the Scottish Labour Party were unable to govern with Scotlands interests as their priority, constantly having their ideas and initiatives

curtailed by Westmister.

5. Scottish Executive Logo, 2005

6. Scottish Government Logo, 2007

According to the official Scottish Government website, the reasons for the rebranding were as follows: The change is intended to help the public more clearly understand the role and functions of the devolved Government in Scotland…The decision was taken to adopt the new identity because research showed that the term Scottish Executive was confusing or meaningless to many members of the public….The term Scottish Executive, as defined by the Scotland Act 1998, will continue to be used in formal legal documents such as legislation and contracts. (The Scottish Government, it’s official, 2009, The Scottish Government)

Upon a critical analysis of the differences between these two logos, from a designer’s perspective, there are stark contrasts between the two. The original Scottish Executive logo was made up of the Royal Coat of Arms; the official coat of arms of the British Monarchy. This is a symbol synonymous with British-ness, representing Scotland within the United Kingdom, and as part of the Monarchy. It is a symbol not instantly recognisable to the majority of Scottish citizens, especially as an emblem of their home nation. In complete contrast to this is the new logo; a simple Saltire flag. This is the most recognisable symbol of Scotland, and has the power to provoke strong emotions and sentiment amongst many Scottish people. Also, rather cleverly, the Saltire of the new logo seems to glow from within, by clever use of shading. I feel this is implemented as a symbol of hope for the future, and a positive outlook. The use of fonts on the two logos is also in complete contrast. The Scottish Executive logo uses a Serif font, giving an old fashioned, very formal and austere perception; very much reinforcing the sentiments of British-ness and Royalty. This is further implied by the use of navy blue colouring. In contrast, the Scottish government logo uses a Sans-Serif font, much more modern, friendly and amicable; dispelling the connotations of an implied hierarchy. In my opinion, through the re-branding of the Scottish Executive, the SNP party have attempted to break the Scottish Executive away from being just another ‘London lead arm’ of the UK government; and thus establishing it as a separate body, completely independent in the eyes of Scotland’s citizenry. In doing this, they have used an explicitly Scottish nationalist image to create their design. This is an example of Nationalism inspiring design. However, I argue that this design, originally inspired by nationalism, can in turn

inspire nationalist sentiments to those who encounter it in their daily lives. It is an example of Michael Billig’s concept of Banal Nationalism. The new Scottish Government logo has been changed on the six main government buildings in Edinburgh and Glasgow, as well as all Scottish Government stationery, publicity material and public documents. Any time a member of the public has dealings with the publicly funded Scottish body or institution, whether it be visiting the National Museum, contacting their local police force or applying for student funding, they encounter the Scottish Government logo. As discussed earlier, Billig’s concept of Banal Nationalism refers to the symbols and flaggings, or reminders, of the nation; immersed within a society’s culture. Many of these symbols are most effective due to their repetition, and somewhat subliminal nature. The new Scottish Government logo is a nationalist inspired symbol used in a banal manner, reminding citizens of their nation with a somewhat ‘hidden’ approach. This is an example of a design inspiring nationalism. This neatly demonstrates the cyclic relationship of nationalism and design. A nationalist inspired design should in turn inspire nationalist sentiments.

St Andrew’s Day Following eighteen months in Government, the Scottish Nationalist Party had fully established itself as a confident leadership within the Scottish Parliament; clearly setting out its objectives for the future of Scotland. Evidently, a priority for the Scottish Government was the promotion of St Andrew’s Day, the official national day of Scotland; celebrated on the 30th of November. In the weeks prior to Scotland’s national day, the Scottish public were, in my opinion, subjected to a level of promotion and publicity never seen before. Contrary to this, Margo MacDonald, Independent MSP and self-proclaimed ‘independent voice of independence’, wrote: Maybe I’ve missed it, maybe the Scottish Government has a fantastic celebration all lined up for Sunday, St Andrew’s Day. But if I haven’t, and if the Culture Minister and the Education Minister have fallen down on this job, shouldn’t they be considering their positions? After all the brave talk of last year, about introducing ourselves to the world, is it any wonder that the Unionists think they’ve won the war? (MacDonald, 2008, The Edinburgh Evening News)

She must have ‘missed it’. In my opinion, the Scottish Government promoted its plans for St Andrew’s Day celebrations rather heavily in the weeks prior to the event. In the referred to edition of the Evening News, every reader was provided with ‘a free St Andrew’s Day glossy poster’ (advertised front page), funded by the Scottish Government. Other examples of the promotion of St Andrew’s day included the flying of two giant Saltire flags from Scotland’s iconic Forth Road Bridge, and the projection of a Saltire flag onto the face of the Balmoral clock; situated on Edinburgh’s Princes’ Street. The build up to St Andrew’s Day 2008, and the subsequent celebrations, marked a clear change in the way the Scottish Government approached Scotland’s National Day. Whilst important to recognise St Andrew’s Day, I argue that the publicity and promotion was not only for Scotland’s National Day, but also for Scotland’s Nationalist Party. Before discussing St Andrew’s Day 2008, it is important to recognise the symbolic importance of Scotland’s patron saint. I will first discuss, briefly, the history of St Andrew, and his mythical relationship with Scotland; relating this to Smith’s theory of Ethno-Symbolism. St Andrew, one of the twelve Apostles, is believed to have died (in Greece, 30th November 60AD) on a diagonally transverse cross; used by the Roman’s as a form of execution. It is this cross which inspired the Saltire flag; widely accepted as the national emblem of Scotland. Incidentally, St Andrew never set foot upon Scottish soil when he was alive. However, legend has it, three hundred years following his death, the Romans ordered the movement of St Andrew’s remains across Europe. Before this order was carried out, a monk named St Rule claimed to have a vision. An angel told him to take St Andrew’s remains and hide them for safe keeping. He collected what relics he could, and legend has it, found himself shipwrecked in St Andrews, Scotland. From this moment on, Scotland and St Andrew has had a lasting relationship; St Andrew officially named the patron Saint of Scotland following the battle of Bannockburn (1314). It is thought that the Saltire flag was adopted earlier, after the Pictish King Angus (in 735AD) claimed he saw a Saltire appear in the blue sky; following his prayer for deliverance during battle. When the English surrounded his camp the terrified Picts, thinking their end had come, begged the intercession of St Andrew, the king promising the saint one tenth of his kingdom if he obliged. In a vision a cross appeared in the sky while Andrew intoned that

he was the protector and defender of the Picts. At the height of the battle a white cross appeared in the blue sky. In the subsequent victory the English were routed and Athelstan slain. (Salmond, A., 2007, St Andrew’s Day)

With regard to Smith’s theory of Ethno-Symbolism, the story of St Andrew and the emergence of the Saltire flag are based on shared stories and shared myths. Smith argues that a nation is built and defined by ‘myths’, ‘memories’, ‘symbols’ and ‘values’; Scotland’s patron Saint and National flag are formed by such myths and memories. There are no facts, only stories. However accurate, they are shared beliefs that are passed down through generations, therefore forming an understanding of the present. St Andrew and the Saltire, in the present, are symbols of the nation. It is these common mythologies, and shared beliefs that define and differentiate nations. As mentioned earlier, St Andrew’s Day 2008 was highly publicised and promoted; certainly in the city of Edinburgh. One such example was the projection of the Scottish Saltire onto the four faces of the Balmoral clock. The Balmoral clock is situated at the east-end of Princes’ Street (Edinburgh), towering above the capital’s main shopping street. The Saltire is internally projected onto each clock face (using coloured lights), measuring eleven metres in circumference. The creators of the design said: For proud and patriotic Scots, St Andrew’s Day is a celebrated occasion. The Balmoral Hotel allowed The Leith Agency and Sound & Vision to collaborate, on behalf of the Scottish Government, to creatively transform the appearance of the historic hotel with an innovative idea to form a Saltire on each of the four face of the clock. (Latest News, 2008, Sound + Vision)

Another example of the Scottish Government’s St Andrew’s Day ‘awareness’ campaign was the flying of two giant Saltires, hoisted to a height of over 500ft on the bridge towers of the Forth Road Bridge. Unfortunately, I was not able to witness this myself as the 15ft flags had to be taken down due to bad weather; after only two days. As a final example, the promotion and awareness of the St Andrew’s Day

7. Balmoral Saltire, 2008

celebrations were widely advertised throughout the media; such as adverts, posters and newspapers. As mentioned earlier, on the 26th November, four days prior to St Andrew’s Day, every reader of the Evening News received a free, A3, St Andrew’s Day glossy poster, funded and endorsed by the Scottish Government. A year previous to this, the SNP Party were widely criticised for the distribution of over 2,500 Saltire flags to universities and schools across the country. Similar to this year, it was in a bid to boost the celebration of St Andrew’s Day. President of Edinburgh University Student Association, Josh MacAlister believed the flags (last year) were a waste of time, and branded them as SNP propaganda. He said: Sending out propaganda to education institutions? I’m not sure it’s the best use of money… If the Westminster government sent union flags to every school, college and university in Scotland, would the SNP support it? Most students know that any national identity is about a lot more than a piece of cloth. (Traynor, P., 2007, The Journal)

The distribution of flags was not only criticised by Josh MacAlister; the SNP received wide criticism from opposition parties, also perceiving their actions as

an attempt at nationalist propaganda. The distribution of Saltire flags this year did not appear to create the same up-roar, but if properly considered, the Edinburgh Evening News is Edinburgh’s best-selling paper, with an average daily circulation of 49,208 (according to ABC Jan - June 2008); a far larger number of Saltires distributed than last year. These forms of nationalist inspired design, and symbols of the nation, are certainly intended to provoke nationalist sentiment. Their primary purpose, according to the Scottish Government, is to raise awareness and celebrate Scotland’s national day. It can ofcourse be argued that the designs were used as nationalist propaganda, the repetitive nature and somewhat banal manner in which the Saltire was distributed throughout the city - with the sole intention of provoking nationalist sentiment, to the benefits of the SNP. Whilst it can be argued, it cannot be proved; it is merely a matter of opinion. I asked SNP Minister Kenny MacAskill his thoughts regarding the repetitive nature, and brandishing of the Saltire in the weeks prior to St Andrew’s Day, and his response to accusations of nationalist propaganda. He replied: I have no knowledge of flags and the Evening News, that would be a matter for Johnston Press… I have no knowledge of Saltires on the Balmoral clock. If there was, so what? Seems important to raise the profile of St Andrew’s Day… Opposition members would say that, but where is the evidence. (MacAskill, 2009, Appendix A)

It appears Kenny MacAskill has ‘no knowledge’ regarding the recent publicity and promotion of St Andrew’s Day. This seems strange as all the examples I have proposed are firstly, very public, and secondly, all funded and endorsed by the Scottish Government. I am also confused by his use of the term, “where is the evidence”. This suggests to me a somewhat secure and confident response; accusations of nationalist propaganda can be argued, but not proved. However, it could also be perceived as defensive. There is no evidence, fact. Whether intended as nationalist propaganda or not, the Saltires have the power to provoke nationalist sentiment. It is the fundamental symbol of the nation, the national flag, and the nation’s identity. The Saltires flown from the Forth Road Bridge, and the projected Saltire on the faces of the Balmoral clock, could be regarded as examples of Banal-Nationalism.

Whilst they are a novelty and on display for St Andrew’s Day only, they are still observed and play a part within the every-day lives of many people; if only for a limited time. Building an imagined sense of solidarity and belonging to the nation. Banal nationalism or Blatant nationalism, the Scottish Government’s promotion and publicity prior to St Andrew’s Day was a powerful tool. Not only for the promotion of Scotland’s National Day, but also Scotland’s Nationalist Party. Whether the Scottish Government and the SNP use nationalist inspired design to their own advantage and for their own benefit is a matter of opinion. Whether these designs have the power to provoke nationalist sentiment is fact.

CONCLUSION

The focus of this dissertation was the study of the relationship between nationalism and design within post-devolution Scotland, in particular the city of Edinburgh. The main aim of the dissertation was to explore how nationalism can inspire design, and as a result, argue that design has the power to inspire nationalism and provoke nationalist sentiments. Other objectives included an exploration of how nationalism plays a vital role within Scottish society, in both a banal and blatant manner. Analyse how design is used in a conscious and deliberate manner, provoking nationalist sentiment, and used as a tool for a nationalist goal. In conclusion to my study, does design have the power to inspire nationalism and provoke nationalist sentiment? Yes. Throughout this dissertation I have provided sufficient evidence to show this to be the case. The Scottish Parliament building, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;emergingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; from the earth, built from the nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own materials, history built into its very foundations; a symbol of the nation, an institution bearing the traditions around which the social relation of the nation is formed. Institutions such as this provide structure for the nation; the structure of the nation is therefore formed around these shared beliefs. The Scottish Parliament building is only one example. I have presented evidence to show the importance of nationalism within postdevolution Scotland, and evidence to suggest design is used as a tool for nationalist goals. I have explored and analysed the theories of nationalism, and in result, provide sufficient evidence to suggest, not only is design fundamental to the promotion and utilization of nationalist ideology, but it is design that creates the nation.

REFERENCES

Billig, M., 1995, Banal Nationalism, London: Sage Publications Ltd. Bridgland, F., & Woolf, M., 2001, McLeishâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Executive re-branding infuriates Millbank, The Independent Online , [Internet] 11th January Available at: http://www. independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mcleishs-executive-rebranding-infuriatesmillbank-696941.html [Accessed January 2009] Dalton, A., 2008, All Scotlandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s trains to get Saltire livery, The Scotsman Online, [Internet] 1st August Available at: http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/latestnews/AllScotland39s-trains-to-get.4348049.jp [Accessed January 2009] Gellner, E., 1983, Nations and Nationalism, Oxford: Blackwell. Grosby, S., 2005, Nationalism: A Very Short Introduction, New York: Oxford University Press. Heskett, J., 2002, Toothpicks and Logos: Design in Everyday Life, New York: Oxford University Press. MacAskill, K., 2004, Building A Nation: Post Devolution Nationalism in Scotland (Viewpoints), Edinburgh: Luath Press Ltd. MacDonald, M., 2008, Saints Alive!, The Edinburgh Evening News, 26th November. Miralles, E., 1998, Building Design Concept for Scottish Parliament Building, Edinburgh: EMBT Architects Associates & RMJM Edinburgh

Papanek, V., 1992, Design for the Real World, Human Ecology and Social Change, 2nd ed. London: Thames and Hudson. Salmond, A., 2007, St Andrew’s Day, addressed at the National Days Conference, Glasgow Caledonian University, [Online] Full transcript available at http://www. scotland.gov.uk/News/This-Week/Speeches/First-Minister/standrewsday07 [Accessed January 2009] Scotland’s Parliament White Paper 2004. Edinburgh: The Scottish Office. Smith, A., 1986, The Ethnic Origins of Nations, Oxford: Blackwell. Sound + Vision, 2008, Latest News, [Online] Available at: http://www.savav.co.uk/ news.htm [Accessed January 2009] The Scottish Government, 2007, The Scottish Government – it’s official. [Online] Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2007/09/31160110 [Accessed January 2009] Tour Scotland, 200?, History of the Kilt in Scotland. [Online] Available at: http:// www.fife.50megs.com/kilt-history.htm [Accessed January 2009]. Traynor, P., 2007, Political furore over flags, The Journal Issue 1, [Internet] 18th November Available at: http://www.journal-online.co.uk/article/2664-political-furoreover-flags [Accessed January 2009]

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

1. Elders, A., 2007, Aerial View of the Scottish Parliament Building at Holyrood, Edinburgh. [Photograph] (© Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body) 2. Elders, A., 2004, The Public Restaurant during the first live test day of the new Scottish Parliament complex at Holyrood, Edinburgh. [Photograph] (© Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body) 3. Elders, A., 2004, Window Seat in MSP Office at the new Scottish Parliament at Holyrood, Edinburgh. [Photograph] (© Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body) 4. Raeburn, H., ca. 1795, Reverend Robert Walker (1755 - 1808) Skating on Duddingston Loch. [Painting] (National Gallery of Scotland) 5. Anon, 2005, Scottish Executive Logo. [Logo] (© British Crown) 6. Anon, 2007, Scottish Government Logo. [Logo] (© British Crown) 7. Ness, A., 2008, Balmoral Saltire. [Photograph] Available at http://www.redbubble. com/people/nessie/art/2132125-3-balmoral-saltire [Accessed January 2009]

APPENDIX

Appendix A: A full e-mail transcript of Q&A with Kenny MacAskill

12 January 2009 12:40:37 Kenny MacAskill (kenny.macaskill.msp@scottish.parliament.uk); Linda Fabiani (linda.fabiani.msp@scottish.parliament.uk); Scottish Ministers (scottish. ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk) Dear Cabinet Secretaries and Ministers, My name is Sean McFarlane and I am currently a student at Napier University Edinburgh, studying Product Design (4th Year). At the moment I am writing a Dissertation, titled ‘Nationalism and Design: A Study of the Relationship between Nationalism and Design in Scotland and Northern Ireland’. I am writing this e-mail with the hope that it will be passed on to the relevant Minister, with regard to a question I have. Any kind of response or answer - however vague or ‘in depth’ - to my question would be of great help to my Dissertation. I recently read the book: ‘Building a Nation - Post Devolution Nationalism in Scotland’ by Kenny MacAskill MSP (2004). I thoroughly enjoyed the book and found it very interesting, and as James Mitchell wrote, I found it “challenging and provocative in the very best sense”. My question is then, particularly aimed at Kenny MacAskill MSP, or perhaps Linda Fabiani MSP - being the minister for culture, architecture, built heritage and events strategy (all design ‘related’ posts). Within the book, page 27, there is a passage that reads:

“When the Irish Free State was formed, post-boxes were painted a different colour and the motif changed to show the passing of the Crown and the establishment of a new order... Such changes now are neither necessary to create a modern Nation, nor applicable where EU and other directives are opening up postal deliveries and a range of other public services to international not just private competition... The existence of a Nation State is no longer dictated by leitmotifs on a variety of services or a different name or colour for some organisations. It is defined by representations in the Institutions that matter and control over functions that are essential to the economy and a distinctive society.”

I wonder if (given that the book was first published in 2004) after four years the SNP or Kenny MacAskill MSP would say, or question, that the SNP’s actions contradict this statement? Given that the SNP announced in September 2007 that the ‘Scottish Executive’ would be re-branded and re-named as the ‘Scottish Government’ (with the cost of re-branding at an estimated £100,000). With this, the newly established Scottish Government adopted a new logo, replacing the ‘Royal Arms’ with the new one, the Flag of Scotland. I also read an article in the ‘Telegraph’ (1st August 2008), which states that the SNP have/or plan to re-brand Scotland’s trains - “by painting trains in blue and white Saltire livery”. Again, do you think that this perhaps contradicts the statement made in 2004? It would also be of great help if you could send me a response to recent accusations that the ‘brandishing’/’over-use’ of the Saltire - with regard to the build-up to St Andrew’s Day (Saltire on the face of the Balmoral Clock, Saltires flown from the Forth Road Bridge and the distribution of free Saltire flags to every reader of the Edinburgh Evening News on 26th November 2008), the re-branding of trains - and also the upcoming ‘Homecoming Scotland 2009’ are acts of Nationalist Propaganda; provoking Nationalist sentiments and promote the SNP, rather than Scotland.

Subject: RE: Question Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:23:18 +0000 From: Kenny.MacAskill.msp@scottish.parliament.uk To: sean_mcfarlane@hotmail.co.uk I see no contradiction whatsoever. We are a Government. That is not a trapping but a fact. The re-branding as such is minor cost but important symbolically. Some symbols to have logic even if post boxes don’t. R.E. trains: that is for the train operators not Government. I have no knowledge of flags and the Evening News that would be a matter for Johnston Press. Homecoming Scotland was commenced by the past Executive and is important for a variety of reasons. I have written extensively on the Scottish Diaspora and comments for the need are contained in there. Moreover, in terms of tourism alone it’s massive. I have no knowledge of Saltires on the Balmoral clock. If there was, so what? It seems important to raise the profile of St Andrews Day. So in a nutshell do our actions contradict my logic? No. The intention in the book was regarding other matters such as the post office. This Government has sought to work collaboratively with a variety of Governments pan UK. Some things are symbolic, some things fundamental. We are a Government

From: Kenny.MacAskill.msp@scottish.parliament.uk Sent: 12 January 2009 17:34:51 To: sean_mcfarlane@hotmail.co.uk Really a matter of balance and Scotland coming to terms with itself. Taking pride in who we are and not being obsessed with who we are not. Being willing and confident enough to jettison some baggage and equally not being afraid to be proud of what have. Other nations manage it. Ireland didn’t get there overnight. I am just back from a break in Dublin with my son. 1916 given due deference and rightly so but now you pay in Euros as well. Balance as I said and also them now being confident in their Irish identity and not hung up about being West Brits. The Euro is fine but so is respect at the Collins barracks to the martyred dead.

From: Sean Mcfarlane (sean_mcfarlane@hotmail.co.uk) Sent: 13 January 2009 15:23:28 To: Kenny MacAskill (kenny.macaskill.msp@scottish.parliament.uk) I agree that there is a need for a balance in the creation of a nation state; a country needs to adapt to the ‘modern’ world. I am unsure of what you mean when you refer to Scotland as ‘being willing and confident enough to jettison some baggage’, what ‘baggage’ do you refer to? When you refer to Ireland, do you draw comparison/parallels between Scotland and Ireland? Would you then regard Scotland as being ‘hung up about being Northern Brits’? I am unsure that a comparison between Ireland and Scotland can be justified, as the ‘want’ and ‘need’ for Independence/Self-Government are under completely different circumstances. Ireland’s want and need for Independence was due to hundreds of years of oppression due to British rule (in which Scotland played a major role), with the aim of social reform throughout the country. I don’t believe these are similar circumstances in modern Scotland, and I question what changes an Independent Scotland would make to the ‘people’ of Scotland. I would tend to disagree when you say that the re-painting of post-boxes and ‘the passing of the crown’ are not important symbols, or have no logic. To me, symbols such as the British post box, the British Telephone box, British Street names, etc, are hugely symbolic, if not more symbolic than anything else, as they would play an integral role in the every-day lives of the Irish people. A constant reminder of ‘British Rule’ - banal nationalism - throughout their country. The changing of these symbols are fundamental to the emergence of a ‘free’ nation and its people, even more so than the changing of a government logo, in which very few people in Scotland will ever see. Which may be “minor cost”, but the estimated £100,000 re-branding could go a long way in helping or bringing relief to 10 or even 20 people/families in the poorer areas of Scotland. As you said, and I agree, it is important to raise awareness of St Andrews day. But, I have read that opposition members believe that the SNP use this for their own benefits, as somewhat an ‘excuse’ to provoke Nationalist sentiment - and at high costs. And, in the case of ‘Homecoming Scotland 2009’, I agree that in terms of tourism it could be and has the potential to be massive, but I believe that it is only being

advertised in Scotland? The new advert is only shown in Scotland? Opposition politicians claim it’s aimed at Scots who have to vote on Independence next year. “The SNP Scottish Government has failed to enlist Foreign Office help to promote the 2009 festival...” according to Jim Murphy, Scottish Secretary in the UK Government.

Kenny.MacAskill.msp@scottish.parliament.uk Sent: 14 January 2009 08:41:28 To: sean_mcfarlane@hotmail.co.uk The baggage is a lack of self confidence and a consequent chip on the shoulder. Scotland and Ireland have different histories but there can be some comparisons made re attitude and cultures. Of course how independence will come around is vastly different as has been the experience of union but the perceived inferiority complex applied there for many a year as it does here. I was also not criticising Ireland for its actions in painting post boxes. After all a civil war in which more died then in the Anglo Irish war was fought on an oath to the crown as well as six counties. The parallel I was drawing was that what a nation state is varies from era to era. Hence a motif and post office were sacrosanct. Baltic States in the 90s sought national airlines. The Royal mail is being privatised and the winds of EU deregulation will hit the republic as here and many Baltic States have seen their airline become part of SAS. Ireland now is in the Euro without the punt; Aer Lingus may very well be bought by Ryanair if O’Leary has his way. It’s still a nation state even if under De Valera a currency and airline were seen as vital. Hence the comparison is that what matters is dependent on the time. Now its representation in EU and UN etc. Symbols whether the Saltire or the tricolour are still important but these things are a matter of balance and Ireland has been on a journey of fretting over being West Britain to becoming confident in being Irish and European. I wish Scotland to make a similar journey. Opposition members would say that but where is the evidence. Though I also remember little criticism of them of Cool Britannia etc under Blair. The cost is limited. The advert is going out in the US. I myself am doing three Immortal memories and a lecture in Eastern Canada. All a matter of balance and some in the opposition should really realise that Ireland is at ease with itself by being confident

in its Irishness symbols or not and not obsessed about denying your identity or perceiving it as threatening.

EDINBURGH NAPIER UNIVERSITY, JANUARY 2009 A DISSERTATION SUBMIT TED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF PRODUCT DESIGN