Thanks for Lori Allen's comments.  I think Lynne Ranieri's summary is cogent
and thoughtful--as were others.  Indeed, the ownership of the flag in
question was a relevant and neglected issue.  Who had the "right" to decide
its disposition?

The issues of flag etiquette which have been brought up raise additional
questions, although not all directly related to the primary concern.  Having
done no research whatsoever in this area, I can only guess (and anyone with
solid information is welcome to refute my assumptions).  The term "flag
etiquette" implies that there are no official "rules", merely procedural
guidelines based on the symbolism inherent in flag display--since etiquette
is a matter of custom, not law.  I would guess that these ideas are fairly
old and widespread.  It would be interesting to hear if people from outside
the U.S. are aware of similar attitudes toward their own countries' flags.
It may be that Americans are more flag-conscious than other nationalities.  A
friend from India told me that Indian flags are rarely displayed anywhere in
her country--mostly at government buildings--despite the Indian nationalism
which accompanied its independence, before and after.

The notion that a flag MUST be burned if it is ever "desecrated" by touching
the ground seems to me an overreaction.  While an American flag is supposed
to have great symbolic value and is due respect, so that logically it should
not be allowed to touch the ground, I have never heard that such
"desecration", even by accident, automatically requires that it be consigned
to burning.  I'm sure unavoidable mishaps have occurred when raising or
lowering a flag in windy weather.  Reverence for the flag is one thing, but
considering it a holy object which is ruined forever by accidental or clumsy
contact with your country's soil (which some might also consider sacred)
seems extreme.

The point of most flag etiquette seems to relate to active display on a pole
or wall as a symbol of your country, and you handle it with care to
demonstrate respect.  You don't display a soiled or ragged flag in normal
circumstances because it looks bad and sends the wrong message--it implies
that you think any old flag will do and you're too cheap to buy a new one.
It's hard to fly a damaged flag "proudly."  On the other hand, carrying a
damaged flag into battle because it's the only one you have might be
different.  If a damaged flag has historical associations, you shouldn't run
it up a flagpole any more, but you can collect it and/or display it as an
historical artifact--as in a museum, e.g., the Smithsonian's Star-Spangled
Banner.  Other flags from the past, such as any flag with less than 50 stars,
have value as historical evidence, and I don't think you automatically burn
them just because they're outdated.

Here I'll confess a youthful indiscretion.  When I was a Cub Scout, our group
came into possession of an old flag with, I think, 45 or 46 stars.  We burned
it with reverence in some sort of private little ceremony, thinking that was
the proper thing to do.  I don't recall that it was in poor condition, just
that it seemed ancient.  Years later it occurred to me that it might have had
some collector or historical value and that we had been a bit hasty in our
patriotic zeal.

As misguided as I think a law or constitutional amendment against
flag-burning would be, I assume lawmakers would be smart enough to exclude
the burning of flags in poor condition.  But that means the language of the
law would have to prohibit only specific types of flag-burning, which would
be tantamount to prohibiting the anti-government demonstration or rhetoric
which accompanied the conflagration--a shaky prospect, I think.  (It would be
impossible to simply outlaw ALL flag-burning per se if burning a damaged flag
is considered proper disposition, so proposals presumably would need to
outlaw only the burning of flags in good condition within the context of an
"appropriate" public demonstration.  I can envision a trial in which
witnesses would be called to testify about the prior condition of the
destroyed flag.)

These discussions certainly have veered off-topic as far as museum issues are
concerned, but the underlying theme remains the question of whether a flag,
damaged or not, can be retired from active use and become a museum object.  I
say yes.

David Haberstich

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).