SLIDESHOW | Paint it red: what Labour's emblem will say about Muscat's party

Amended with reference to technical committee short-listing four designs.

Labour’s 25,000 members will be having a democratic say on choosing one of four short-listed emblems from some 56 variants of the torch, which still reveal a lot about the anthropology of Malta’s socialist party.

For Labour it’s going to be a choice from variants that range from ice-cream shaped torches, to some even depicted like the Holy Grail on fire, which could as well symbolise Labour’s elusive quest to find a winning formula.

While the 56 emblems will be on exhibition, a technical committee will short-list up to four designs, which will then be presented to members for choice by SMS voting.

Ironically, the re-branding of Labour’s torch mirrors a similar exercise by the UK Conservative Party back in 2004, when the its old torch had an arm added to hold the torch, to symbolise “unity and strength.” The emblem proved to be short-lived, with David Cameron opting to dump the traditional torch for the fuzzy, green and blue oak tree.

But while the British Tories hired PR firm Saatchi, Labour has gone to the grassroots in a competition which might be all too revealing of the anthropology of new and old Labour.

And while the Tories were criticised of using communist iconography by adding an arm firmly holding the torch, most of those designing Labour’s new identity would like to do away with the whole idea of having an arm holding the torch. In fact only a small minority of aspiring emblems depict an arm holding a torch.

The arm is only fisted around the torch in one emblem, which stands out as the most ‘old Labour’ of them all. Some of the circular emblems display a Mintoffian element, more akin the national coat of arms of yore, than party logo. Adopting the armless variant would be a symbolic evolution for Labour: less proletarian brawn (no muscles or anatomical features, and an end to the socialist hammer) and more progressive brains.

Surely the artists’ choices were already limited by party instructions to include the torch and the colours of the national flag in the proposed emblems. In this way artists could not borrow symbols from nature like the Italian “ulivo” (olive branch), David Cameron’s oak tree, or the internationally recognised socialist rose or carnation.

Neither could they embark on the ultimate act of simplification carried out by most European socialists. One case in point is that of the Spanish Socialist Workers Party whose emblem consists of the party’s initials PSOE, written in white on a red rectangle. Another example of the beauty of simplicity is the emblem of the Party of European Socialists which consists of the PES initials written on white on a rectangular quotation box.

Only a few of the proposed emblems for Labour put more emphasis on the name than on the torch. These simplified logos tend to affirm ideological identity through the use of red, but without giving any allowance to socialist folklore. Significantly the major clash in the choice of emblem will be between circular emblems, reminiscent of old Labour times, and rectangular and more corporate logos – some just like car symbols – reminiscent of Sant’s new Labour.

A few have an idea of a dynamic movement, synonymous with Labour’s winning days in the mid-1990s. It seems that the latter are still winning the day: less than half of the proposed emblems are circular. Only five emblems adopt the shield format adopted in Malta by the Nationalist Party.

The choice of colours is also revealing, with red, orange and yellow prevailing in most colour schemes. In most of the proposed emblems, orange and yellow hues seem intent on mellowing down the full impact of a red logo, and only a few used a blood orange shade of red.

But none of the artists adopt a softer pink or purple option which would have enhanced the party’s gay appeal.

One interesting variant has a traditional torch firing a black and red flame – the colours used by no global activists which in Malta are synonymous with Moviment Graffitti.

Only one of the proposed emblems capture Joseph Muscat’s attempt to transform his party in a wide coalition by including all the shades of the rainbow, including green and blue, even if the end result is not so attractive.

While the colours of the flag prevail in most emblems, only one includes the George Cross.

Surprisingly despite the party’s new found love for Europe, none of the proposed emblems include any EU stars. All emblems include the party’s name while one specifies that the party actually post-dates the birth of Christ by including “AD 1920” in the circle surrounding the torch.

All in all Labour deserves kudos conducting its own strip show of conflicting identities… even if the omission of more blatant demonstrations of Mintoffian identities raises the suspicion that the preliminary process has spared us the worst excesses of socialist realism. By limiting the choice to the torch, Labour seems keen on sending the message that it is only fiddling with its identity, rather than changing it completely, giving heed to former general secretary Dominic Fenech that if a good product doesn’t need an identity change.

At the same time Muscat is giving the party grassroots a democratic say on the harmless issue of choosing one torch from a shortlist of 65. The same party members which were not allowed by delegates to choose the party leader, will now have a chance to choose their  favourite torch.

On the other hand unlike Labour, the Nationalist Party manages to obscure conflicting identities by retaining an emblem and anthem whose symbolism harks to the days of religio et patria, when at the same it has no scruples to redefine itself as GonziPN on the eve of a election. That’s a recognition that people vote for faces, rather than emblems.