The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Comments on Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-05-2011, 02:13 PM
NuclearNemesis NuclearNemesis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Stars on US flag if we have 51 states

Cecil makes some errors on the answer here. He seemed upset over the 33 stars on the flag over Ft. Sumter, even though there were 34 states in 1861. However, Kansas came into the Union in January of 1861; the flag act of 1818 said the star wouldn't be added until July 4 following admission, so the Ft. Sumter flag properly only had 33 stars. As far as the design of the flag, it wasn't until an executive order was issued in 1912 that the proportions of the flag and arrangement of the stars was formalized. Before that, there were some very interesting arrangements.

He missed that the flag over Ft. McHenry had 15 stars (and 15 stripes, but that's another story), even though there were 18 states by that time. And he wants to quibble over just why a state admitted in January wasn't on the flag by April? The next flag after the 15 star flag of 1795 was the 20 star flag of 1818.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 07-05-2011, 02:18 PM
Giles Giles is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Newcastle NSW
Posts: 11,560
The column in question is How will stars be arranged on the flag if the U.S. ever has 51 states?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-05-2011, 10:03 PM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Diogenes Club
Posts: 38,576
He's also wrong about the Ft. Sumter flag being ugly, although of course YMMV. I think it's kind of cool: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Sumter_Flag

He'll get little argument from me about the Guilford Courthouse flag, though - it is freaky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilford_Courthouse_flag
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-05-2011, 10:16 PM
etv78 etv78 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
I saw a flag on "How the States Got Their Shapes", of people advocating D.C. as #51, and their idea is mine: alternating rows of 8 and 9 stars.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-05-2011, 10:25 PM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Diogenes Club
Posts: 38,576
A 51-star flag on the cover of Jeff Greenfield's alternative-history book Then Everything Changed has the stars in that combination: http://www.amazon.com/Then-Everythin...9922654&sr=1-1
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-09-2011, 10:32 AM
fredricwilliams fredricwilliams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
While Cecil slept.

While I would not go so far as to argue that "vexillologists" might be the best designers of flags, and admit that Cecil is correct in saying they study flags, he appears to have been sleeping in both the spelling and the meaning of tessellation.

The term "tessellate" (with double L) is the fancy way of saying "tiling" -- which is why it is associated with mosaics. In mathematics, it is filling a form completely by repeated use of a single shape with no gaps or overlaps -- something that can be done with some shapes (squares -- the origin of the term) and not with others (pentagons). Clearly the US flag is not an example of a tessellated form.

According to the international federation of vexillological associations (FIAV in the French lingo), the proper term for flag designers is vexillographers. Since the original term was only invented in the 1950s (to distinguish flag study from heraldry and its coats of arms) maybe we should stick with "flag designers."
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-09-2011, 10:56 PM
John W. Kennedy John W. Kennedy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Chatham, NJ, USA
Posts: 4,514
One or two ls is acceptable, and the problem of putting stars on the flag is equivalent to tesselation with larger polygons in which the stars are embedded.
__________________
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. Taliessin through Logres: Prelude
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-14-2011, 07:11 PM
Peter Morris Peter Morris is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: ___\o/___(\___
Posts: 8,461
In a previous discussion of this subject, some people said that neither major US party will accept just one state being added to the union. They would only agree to two states added, one with a majority of the population favouring the Democrats, and the other Republican. It is therefore highly unlikely that there will ever be a 51 star flag, though there might plausibly be a 52 star one.

I don't know anything about US politics, so I can't say if that's right or not. But it's what I've heard.

Last edited by Peter Morris; 07-14-2011 at 07:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-14-2011, 10:53 PM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Diogenes Club
Posts: 38,576
Something similar was done with the near-simultaneous admissions of Alaska in 1959 and Hawaii in 1960, with the balance of power in the Senate being the issue. Ironically enough, ISTR that Alaska was considered Democratic at the time, and Hawaii Republican; the states have since gone in opposite directions ideologically.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-18-2011, 07:59 PM
Nametag Nametag is online now
Atheopoiesist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Posts: 7,514
A fifty-one star field can also be constructed in circles; a center star surrounded by circles of five, ten, fifteen, and twenty stars will display a sort of five-rayed pseudo-symmetry, with what looks to me like decent spacing.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-18-2011, 08:15 PM
Peremensoe Peremensoe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
He'll get little argument from me about the Guilford Courthouse flag, though - it is freaky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilford_Courthouse_flag
See here and scroll down for some more fort, naval, or unit flags. These were not meant as national flags.

Last edited by Peremensoe; 07-18-2011 at 08:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-19-2011, 11:10 AM
Nars Glinley Nars Glinley is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
He's also wrong about the Ft. Sumter flag being ugly, although of course YMMV. I think it's kind of cool: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Sumter_Flag
The Digital Representation looks like something out of Space Invaders.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-12-2012, 03:15 PM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Diogenes Club
Posts: 38,576
Bumping this thread, since Cecil's article is back on the front page.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-12-2012, 04:03 PM
Wheelz Wheelz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
My google-fu isn't finding it (which is probably just as well), but when I was a kid and there was talk about adding Puerto Rico, one of the proposals I recall seeing was a field of 51 stars arranged in the shape of the actual number "51". Even as a child I knew that was lame.

The circle design mentioned above by Nametag looks pretty darn cool, actually. I also sort of like this pentagonal one, just for something different.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-16-2012, 06:10 AM
terentii terentii is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Another reason the Ft. Sumter flag might have been out-of-date is that you can properly fly a US flag with any number of stars indefinitely, until the thing is just plain worn out. It then should be disposed of "in dignified manner."

When I was growing up ('60 and early '70s), you could on occasion still see 48-star flags hung out by homeowners. Noooooooo problemo! (I doubt if any are still around today, 40+ years later.)

I'm not saying that was the reason the flag was missing a star. I'm simply pointing out it wouldn't have been improper if it were.

Last edited by terentii; 06-16-2012 at 06:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-16-2012, 10:12 AM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Diogenes Club
Posts: 38,576
About 30 years ago I visited a small Ohio high school that, in the auditorium, still displayed a relatively rare 49-star American flag. Those were the "current" flags for only a year, 1959-60, between the admission of Alaska and Hawaii.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-16-2012, 10:27 AM
Rico Rico is offline
The Mod you can look up to!
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Utah's Dixie
Posts: 4,679
If you are so inclined, you can still buy historical flags. Elks Lodges around the USA just had their Flag Day ceremonies, in which historical flags are presented. One source for those is here, it's interesting to see the designs.

One that stuck out for me was the 33 star flag. President Lincoln refused to remove the stars for the Confederate States that broke away.
__________________
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.

Proud Member of the SDMB "99'ers"!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-16-2012, 12:56 PM
John W. Kennedy John W. Kennedy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Chatham, NJ, USA
Posts: 4,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
About 30 years ago I visited a small Ohio high school that, in the auditorium, still displayed a relatively rare 49-star American flag. Those were the "current" flags for only a year, 1959-60, between the admission of Alaska and Hawaii.
...which was apparently the result of Influence on Congress by the flag industry.
__________________
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. Taliessin through Logres: Prelude
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-16-2012, 01:10 PM
cochrane cochrane is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
Something similar was done with the near-simultaneous admissions of Alaska in 1959 and Hawaii in 1960, with the balance of power in the Senate being the issue. Ironically enough, ISTR that Alaska was considered Democratic at the time, and Hawaii Republican; the states have since gone in opposite directions ideologically.
I realize this post is a year old, but I feel that I must correct it. Alaska and Hawaii were both admitted into the Union in 1959, Alaska on January 3, and Hawaii on August 21. Alaska got its star first, resulting in a 49 star flag with seven rows of seven stars. Hawaii, although having become a state in 1959, didn't receive its star on the flag until July 4, 1960.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-16-2012, 09:23 PM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Diogenes Club
Posts: 38,576
nm

Last edited by Elendil's Heir; 06-16-2012 at 09:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-17-2012, 11:23 AM
John W. Kennedy John W. Kennedy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Chatham, NJ, USA
Posts: 4,514
Quote:
Originally Posted by cochrane View Post
I realize this post is a year old, but I feel that I must correct it. Alaska and Hawaii were both admitted into the Union in 1959, Alaska on January 3, and Hawaii on August 21. Alaska got its star first, resulting in a 49 star flag with seven rows of seven stars. Hawaii, although having become a state in 1959, didn't receive its star on the flag until July 4, 1960.
The law says the flag changes on July 4. Therefore, the 49-star flag came in on July 4, 1959, and the 50-star flag on July 4, 1960. This was intentionally arranged as a favor to the flag industry.
__________________
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. Taliessin through Logres: Prelude
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-19-2012, 10:30 AM
Powers Powers is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Rochester, NY, USA
Posts: 756
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rico View Post
One that stuck out for me was the 33 star flag. President Lincoln refused to remove the stars for the Confederate States that broke away.
Hardly surprising, given that the whole premise of the thing was that they weren't allowed to break away in the first place. It'd look pretty weird to be killing people to "preserve the union" under a flag that acknowledged the sundering of said union.


Powers &8^]
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-19-2012, 11:31 AM
Skammer Skammer is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Music City USA
Posts: 11,671
When I was a teenager I worked at a small conference facility and once day there was a home auction going on. One of the items was a medium sized box with some old clothes and an American flag. No one was bidding, so I raised my hand and won it for about $15.

When I got home and unfurled the flag, it was huge - at least six feet from top to bottom and longer from side to side -- and it only had 45 stars. I later took it to college and it covered the entire wall of my dorm room. I still have it in a box in my attic. It has a few tears and one or two patches, but I've always meant to get it appraised and have never gotten around to it.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-19-2012, 01:12 PM
Blakeyrat Blakeyrat is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by terentii View Post
Another reason the Ft. Sumter flag might have been out-of-date is that you can properly fly a US flag with any number of stars indefinitely, until the thing is just plain worn out. It then should be disposed of "in dignified manner."
The 34 hours of artillery bombardment before they surrendered might have had something to do with it...
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-19-2012, 01:35 PM
lance strongarm lance strongarm is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Morris View Post
In a previous discussion of this subject, some people said that neither major US party will accept just one state being added to the union. They would only agree to two states added, one with a majority of the population favouring the Democrats, and the other Republican. It is therefore highly unlikely that there will ever be a 51 star flag, though there might plausibly be a 52 star one.

I don't know anything about US politics, so I can't say if that's right or not. But it's what I've heard.
It's pretty good analysis. Each state gets two Senators, so adding a state can mean a significant political power shift.

It's similar, I'm ashamed to say, to the practice of adding one slave and one free state in our earlier history to preserve that political balance.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.