introvert.net

Here in Chicago, the Chicago Outdoor Film Festival has become a tradition. Another tradition is me, comparing the current selection to that of previous years. I’ve completed my analysis.

Previously, I wrote about my travails finding appropriate winter boots which both didn’t look stupid and also kept the rain and snow out. Since it’s rain-and-snow time here in Chicago again, I think it’s time to revisit this question. Also, I’ve been thinking a lot about wardrobe and footwear lately, under the influence of Flusser. As always, I’ve consulted the internet crazies on this topic. This time, the men’s traditional fashion crazies: here and here.

I’ve given a little thought to it, and I’m thinking now that my 6″ Bean boots are slippery simply because they’re worn out. So, I’m going to bow to the pressure of my Connecticut birth and stick with the made in Maine stuff. Here’s the plan:

L.L. Bean 8″ Bean Boots with Thinsulate/GoreTex lining. The best of the traditional leather/rubber boot with the added benefits of modern science.

The July issue of the Flagwaver appeared on the internets recently, containing an editorial response to my complaints about their depiction of the Chicago Flag in their December 2000 issue. They’re dismissive of my originalist argument, preferring some combination of strict constructionalism and textualism. Clearly, some legistlative action is called for. Update: Loyal reader S.G. points out more Chicago flag related action in the soccer arena, relating to the third uniform design worn by the Chicago Fire.

I’ve posted my in-progress annotated bibliography of the Chicago Flag. There’s a lot of things I need to add, but it’s relatively complete, at least as far as the timeline of events goes.

Where I am in my research:

The Tribune article expressing Rice’s discontent with the plan to make the stars five-pointed led me to look in 1928’s council proceedings to find what action, if any, was taked on the proposed ordinance. I assumed, since the current flag sports lovely six-pointed stars, that the ordinance was shunted off to committee or never introduced.

Some time with the indexes to the proceedings revealed that it did indeed come up for a vote on February 15th, 1928 — and the ordinance passed. Which means that the City Clerk should have made the appropriate changes to the city code. However, all the printed and bound editions of the code that the Municipal Reference department can produce all have “six in number” language. I didn’t make careful notes on the exact dates of the volumes, so I can’t be sure the changes were never applied.

However, I’ve yet to see a picture of a flag from the 1928-1933 era, between the time the change was made and the third star was added. Also, the only reference I’ve found to “five-pointed” stars (and what I assumed was a typo) is from a typewritten page by Frederick Rex, one of the municpal librarians. It’s an excerpt from the “Quarterly Bulletin” of the Municipal Employees Society from Sept. 1930.

I’ve checked the indexes to the City Council proceedings from 1928-1939 for further changes to the flag (perhaps undoing the five-to-six point change), but the only actions I could find were the adding of stars. The 1939 ordinance adding the fourth red star for Ft. Dearborn contains the “points, six in number” language, both in the section to be modified and the text to be added.

So, at some point between 1928 and 1939 (or possibly 1933, since I’ve seen three-star flags with six points) they changed the language back, and this action didn’t get picked up by the indexer of the proceedings. It’s also possible that the six-to-five change was never made, which opens a whole other can of worms — what happens when ordinances pass but never make it onto the books?