25 Days of Ad-vent, Day 4: You like him, he likes you

I've never been a big fan of 7Up, but there's something tremendously evocative about this ad. Between the vividness of the colors, the clear night sky, and the smoke swirling lazily up from the snow-covered chimneys, you can almost feel the crispness in the clear cold air. Even having lived in the South for a few years, this is still how Christmas should feel to me.

I'm confused about one thing, though - I always thought Coca-Cola was Santa's favorite soft drink!

25 Days of Ad-vent, Day 3: When Christmas meant sacrifice

Christmas during the war years was somber; with most families having loved ones in the line of fire overseas, not having many presents under the tree was the least thing to be concerned about. (By the way, don't you think her pose was supposed to bring to mind the famous Betty Grable pinup?) Nevertheless, one of the things that I think has been missing during the "War on Terror" has been this sense of shared sacrifice; it's hard to appreciate the gravity of the situation when the response to the enemy is not a call to sacrifice, that we're all in this fight together, but instead urging us to buy more, to show that the terrorists can't bring our economy down. There's something very wrong about that...

25 Days of Ad-Vent, Day 2: Throwing some light on the subject

I don't much care for GE products nowadays; I think they're overpriced and not as good as the competition, and I don't have a lot of time for the company itself. But when it comes to Christmas, I still have warm feelings, thanks to ads like this.  General Electric was, of course, the initial sponsor of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, and used the animated special's characters in their seasonal ads. They also made the Lighted Ice lights, which probably give me the warmest nostalgic feeling. Perhaps I'll have an ad for them up later.

25 Days of Ad-vent, 2018

Once again this year, we're doing "The 25 Days of Ad-vent," looking back at vintage Christmas ads that show us an America that bring back warm, wonderful memories of Christmases past, from an America that perhaps isn't as innocent as it was back then. But for a few minutes, let's allow ourselves to take a vacation in the past!

Hey, kid, you'll shoot your eye out!

Seriously, you have to like this - a remnant of America's pioneer spirit - the idea that children should be comfortable with the feel of a gun in their hands. Not a bad sentiment for today, if I do say so myself.

Flashback Friday: You have to draw the line somewhere

Originally published September 12, 2014

NFL Cracks Down on Domestic Violence; Affirms Nightclub Brawls, Strip Joint Shootings and Other Random Violence Still OK 

Flashback Friday: The problem with corporate suits

In these days of corporate ownership, the Commissioner has become of particular importance to the hustler. Corporate ownership brings company men, company policy, and company cards with little holes in them. Corporate ownership, in short, brings committee-think, and with ComThink comes the banishment, discouragement, and attrition of colorful characters. The hustler is dependent upon colorful characters, because color is what is salable. Corporations don’t want to be regulated. They don’t want a Commissioner with any powers … The hustler needs a Commissioner who will throw his weight against the stuffiness, the routine, the deadly boredom of the executive suite. He needs a Commissioner who will help baseball, in spite of itself."

- Bill Veeck, The Hustler's Handbook, as quoted by Charles Pierce.  

Notice how easily you can substitute so many different things for "Commissioner [of baseball]" -  just about anything that the suits of Corporate America touch, in fact.  Capitalism is a great model for economic diversity and success, but as Whittaker Chambers once pointed out, it's an ideology the same as Communism and Socialism, and if it lacks a moral foundation, it's no better than they are.

Originally published July 1, 2014

Flashback Friday - On owning your soul

Until you guys own your own souls you don't own mine.  Until you guys can be trusted every time and always, in all times and conditions, to seek the truth out and find it and let the chips fall where they may - until that time comes, I have the right to listen to my conscience, and protect my client the best way I can.  Until I'm sure you won't do him more harm than you'll do the truth good.  Or until I'm hauled before somebody who can make me talk.

- Raymond Chandler, The High Window

Originally published September 15, 2014

Happy Thanksgiving!

For me, Thanksgiving has always been a special time of the year, something more than just the beginning of the Christmas season. Thanksgiving often gets short shrift; by tomorrow, any sign of the holiday will have disappeared, covered by snowmen and Santa and all the trappings of the Yuletide. And as much as I love Christmas, I'm in no hurry to see today fade to the background.

This blog has been around for many years now, and it's even given birth to a larger, more successful website about television, but I still keep it alive, because there's a need for all of us here to have a chance to express themselves from time to time. Increasingly, I've relied on others to carry the burden here: David, Bobby, Steve, Drew. We'll have a period of a month or so here as the year begins to wind down when I'll be writing regularly again, but for the most part if you're looking for me, it's best to check out It's About TV! first.

But on this day I'm back here to take a moment, on behalf of all of us here at In Other Words, to thank you for your years of reading, and for having given me a chance to change my life by discovering things I never would have otherwise, both here and at It's About TV, by taking a chance on thinking that someone might be interested in what I write. For that, I have much to be thankful, and so it is my wish for you all that you have a Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!

Opera Wednesday: Deseret, by Leonard Kastle

Back in 2017 (and at the TV blog), I mentioned Deseret, the made-for-TV opera by Leonard Kastle, which aired on NBC in 1960, and has seldom been performed since. The opera tells the story of a woman who, against her will, finds herself engaged to marry Brigham Young, the leader of the Latter-day Saints. Deseret received mixed reviews on it's premiere; even so, I wish it would pop up somewhere. One of my complaints about the rash of new operas in the last couple of decades is that we ought to be paying more attention to the underperformed operas of the past, rather than spending money on new ones that may only be performed once or twice themselves. (It also says something about the days when operas were seen, at least occasionally, on broadcast TV, but that's a discussion for the TV blog).

I'm told that a video copy of Deseret exists at the Paley Center in New York, but I was quite pleased to discover, quite by accident, an audio recording of the opera as it was broadcast back then on NBC. Check it out sometime, if you're so inclined.

Classic Sports Thursday: In Memoriam, David Gene Pearson

We just received word that Spartanburg NASCAR legend David Gene Pearson has died at 83 Monday.   The 1976 Daytona 500 winner is one of seven drivers to have been recognised as a winner of all four majors.

Here was that 1976 Daytona 500 finish where he defeated Richard Petty by over one lap (under NASCAR rules, Petty's last lap did not count because the crew pushed the car to the finish line).

Opera Wednesday: Don Giovanni, by W.A. Mozart

From Mozart's magnificent* opera Don Giovanni, here's the great Ferruccio Furlanetto as the Don's sidekick Leporello, reciting the names from the Don's little black book (which isn't so little).  It's "Madamina, il catalogo è questo" – "My dear lady, this is the catalogue". The performance is at the Metropolitan Opera; the conductor is James Levine

*Magnificent except for the ensemble ending, that is. I've always complained that after someone is dragged down to Hell, anything that follows is an anti-climax. Up to the early 20th Century, this scene was almost always omitted (the opera was written in 1787) - I don't know why producers think it needs to be done today. Oh well.

Paying $30 for the final episode of a season?

In college, we had a group of friends that went to the student centre and organised pay-per-view watch parties for fake fights (aka "Professional Wrestling").  I learned from them that professional wrestling was a femme genre of television, the daytime serial drama, for a male audience, in effect each week's episode was a continuing story as we see with the five-day-a-week dramas that appear in the afternoon aimed at women (and it's proven that way;  Pop TV reairs all Sony dramas in the prime-time access hour).  As I researched the importance of pay-per-view in the fake fighting industry, whether it was WWE, New Japan, AAA, or Sinclair's Ring of Honor, which is the current squabble as Fox affiliates in many markets -- including mine -- air Ring of Honor, as it is owned and operated by the station, I learned that a wrestling pay-per-view is designed as a tie-up to end numerous storylines or keep extending them into another season.  In essence, they are season finales and a new season starts with the first episode after the pay-per-view event.

With that fact, I wondered what would happen if network television shows such as the NCIS franchise had a similar angle.  At the end of the 22 to 25 episode season, the season finale is aired not on network television but on pay-per-view at a cost of $30 for the final episode.  What might viewers think if those season finales, which may be double episodes, are pay-per-view shows after the other 21 to 24 episodes aired on network television?

That is how professional wrestling "seasons" are organised.  While Royal Rumble is a "season finale" for one season, it starts a story arc that will run to two seasons (No Escape* and WrestleMania).  Viewers pay for the pay-per-view that ends the first "season" and again for the end of the second "season" in this story arc.  Just imagine if Dallas had "Who Shot J.R.?" as a pay-per-view and then the opening of the next season on network television began the investigation, and the next pay-per-view episode determined who was the shooter.  That is exactly how professional wrestling works.

The 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month

One hundred years ago today, the War to End All Wars ended.

Television prophetic?

As I drove up US 378 to the area near the start line of Saturday's half-marathon that ended in complete disaster (disqualified at the sixth mile), I saw a sign promoting a play by a local theater company in the area.

Angrily after the disqualification I had thought of suicide and hearing "Suicide is Painless" in my head afterwards came (see "The Pain of Losing" for references). That theater sign was the problem.  And that's because of that sign from the theatre promoting a play based on a 1970 movie and later a television show that even to this day is known for its ratings shares that are higher than any Super Bowl could ever have. What show was it?

Opera Wednesday: Duke Bluebeard's Castle, by Bela Bartok

I've often been critical of contemporary opera, frequently with good reason, but there are some masterpieces out there from the 20th Century - some of my favorite operas were written post-1900.

Here's one of them, for instance: the controversial, often brutal but frequently magnificent Duke Bluebeard's Castle, written in 1911 by Béla Bartók, and filmed here for West German television by Michael Powell.  The Metropolitan Opera did a stunning adaptation of Bluebeard's Castle a few years ago, one that turned me into a beleiver, but Powell's production, rich in symbolism, is every bit its equal.  Don't be afraid to give it a try!

Let's all sing some Pumpkin Carols!

I don't know; perhaps if you're of a certain age - my age, for example - you'll recognize this. I came across this typewritten sheet (which alone may tell you how old it is) in the archives of Thomas Jefferson University, from 1967. It would have been about that year that I first saw this, when I was in grade school.

Nowadays we'd use the term viral, as in "This went viral," but back then things like this were just copied and shared, until more or less everyone everywhere had them. So it's quite possible that this song sheet of Halloween "Pumpkin Carols" is the exact same sheet that we had in school in Minneapolis; and if not the same, then very much like what we had.

Pumpkin Carols, of course, come from the Peanuts cartoon It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown, and, like A Charlie Brown Christmas, it was popular right away. Hallmark came out with a book of Pumpkin Carols, which I suspect is where this came from, again back in the day where plagiarism wasn't that serious if you didn't profit by it. Anyway, here are some that I remember quite well - do they seem familiar to you? If so, you might want to click on that link above and look at all of them - and maybe get together tonight with your friends and sing some. I'll be looking out the window, waiting for the Carolers to come.

Opera Wednesday

This week the Church celebrates two of the year's greatest feasts: on November 1, All Saints; and on November 2 All Souls. All Souls in particular is a poignant commemoration, as we pause to remember friends, relatives, loved ones; those deceased souls who have no feast day of their own, no moment in which they are remembered by all, but as one philosopher put it, those "known only to God." It's a perfect occasion to meditate on Verdi's Requiem, which although not an opera, is often categorized in the operatic canon because of its length and style. Here is the beginning - the Kyrie, containing some of the most lovely music Verdi ever composed. It's performed by the Vienna Symphony and the Friends of Music Choral Society of Vienna, and conducted by Herbert von Karajan.

1968, here we come?

As you may recall if you read my interview with Joseph Benti over at the TV site, 1968 was a pretty bad year. I've long had a fascination with '68, and a frustration with it as well. I don't go much for the music or the clothing or the hair; I don't care for the drugs or the sex or the Haight Asbury lifestyles of the times. It is, however, an intensely interesting time historically; the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy; the civil rights and antiwar riots sweeping the country; the chaos of the Democratic Convention in Chicago, the comeback of Nixon in Miami, the cliffhanger election night.

As we see our world seem to collapse before our very eyes, you hear 1968 brought up a lot in comparison. Patrick Buchanan, who was there in 1968 working on the Nixon campaign, asks the question: is it worse today than it was in 1968? The answer may surprise you; read it and see what you think. And if we're not there yet, is it where we're headed?

Wish I'd written that...

Life is hard. It's even harder when you're stupid."

- Attributed to John Wayne, but actually from George V. Higgins in The Friends of Eddie Coyle. It just sounds like something The Duke would have said.

Flashback Friday: The perversion lobby is out of control (social media attacks)

Writing this column days after being slapped with a social media suspension for saying the truth of the Kardashian-poisoned Bruce Jenner's appearance on Tucker Carlson Tonight refusing to answer Mr. Carlson's question has allowed me to see the true form of “Bay Area Values” being imposed by elites on anyone who opposes their feelings.

During the episode of the Fox News program, Mr. Jenner (I refuse to use his Daytime Serial Drama for Men* gimmick) said he could not find any advantage of having men who claim to be women participating in women's sporting events, despite the contrary to incidents in New Zealand with weightlifting (man claiming to be a woman won national title), a mixed martial arts incident (man seriously injured woman in a woman's mixed martial arts event), and the previously mentioned incident we posted here regarding a lawsuit against CrossFit where the organisation's counsel sent a letter .

*In college, a few friends would get together and watch The Monday Night Wars every Monday night at the student union;  I had no idea of its popularity, but I learned they had called it a “soap for men”. A few times there was a pay-per-view  As we have referenced here in the past, the last “soap” went off the air in 2010, when the last daytime drama produced by a soap company ended.  These shows are daytime serial dramas, and “professional wrestling” would be called a male daytime serial drama, a derivative of these afternoon serial dramas being aimed at a feminine crowd.

The first I had heard of such stupidity was a 2002 movie filmed in Metrolina*, “Juwanna Mann,” where a man in a professional basketball league tries out in a women's league. Now we have seen the elimination of gender verification tests, and what standards are there next to be removed?

*Metrolina denotes a sixteen-county area around Charlotte.

In contrast to Mr. Jenner's spin doctors on Mr. Carlson's show, we must remember this:  Mr. Jenner was born with an X and Y chromosome, and the anatomy of a male of the human race. Notwithstanding hormone therapy or even surgery, he still has an X and a Y chromosome.  Sir, as the CrossFit letter to the competitor who sued to be in a women's division states evidently, he still has a genetic makeup that confers both physical and physiological advantage over women. No “sex reassignment surgery” will change any discussion. That's the genetic advantage CrossFit's attorney notes, Mr. Jenner and many supporting the perversion movement refuse to understand in order to advance an agenda.

Of course, the perversion movement takes advantage of elite cities and judges out of touch with an entire country to force their way when it was rejected, sticking their tongues out in front of everyone, and working to demolish any organisation (especially churches, Fox News, anyone with a Biblical worldview) that refuses to submit to their agenda. It is why Ted Cruz called out the Stonewall Values (which he referenced that drew the ire of New York City newspapers) being pushed at everyone else's expense. And after I answered Mr. Jenner by saying he is a male, and referenced that men should not be in women's events, I was reported probably by a perversion lobbyist and banned from social media for saying the truth.

Is there any truth left when the sexual perversion and humanist lobbies can dictate what can be said in society today?  Why is referencing CrossFit's letter to a male who claims to be a female wrong?  Why is saying the truth of Mr. Jenner wrong?  Why can a tiny group of crybabies impose their way as a CCCP Dictatorship?  I do not submit to these perversion lobbyists.  Why do we have to make their kayfabe be mandated as a “gospel” when the anatomical truth is banned?

Originally published April 27, 2017

Stupid is as stupid does

Earlier this month I posted a brief quote, usually (but incorrectly) attributed to John Wayne, that "Life's tough. It's even tougher when you're stupid."

Let us now welcome to the world of the stupid the Kimberly-Clark company (stupid number 1), which has caved to a social media campaign (stupid number 2) to rid the world of the sexist term "Mansize," as in "Mansize Kleenex."  I don't know that Kleenex, mansize or not, ever harmed anyone unless it was used to stuff the mouth of a kidnap victim, and even then it would take a lot of mansize to accomplish the deed.

I try not to be stupid, though, or any more stupid than I normally have, so I'll let Joe Bob Briggs do the heavy lifting on this critique.

Classic Sports Thursday: Literature class in a sports broadcast!

Going back to literature class!

In this well-known 2017 clip at the Watkins Glen 355 Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series event, MRN's Mike Bagley (on loan to NBC for selected races) made what many race fans called the call of the year, and NBC had fun with it in their notes the next week.  But in analysing the call, we learned Mr. Bagley had referenced one of the greatest authors in literature and his work.  Can you spot the literary reference in this call?  Those who appreciate reading classics that the modern Left wants removed from schools will see it.

Opera Wednesday

The news has been anything but positive lately, so let's have something a little more lighthearted. I've probably done the Overture to "The Barber of Seville" before, possibly with its Bugs Bunny tie-in, but here it is straight, performed by the St Petersburg Philharmonic Orchestra and conducted by Yuri Temirkanov. It's one of Rossini's most charming pieces, and considering his lifetime output that's saying a lot.

Flashback Friday: Economics and technology

Courtesy of 2Blowhards, here's some very interesting stuff from Tom Wolfe on the cause of the current economic unpleasantness:

The whole thing, starting with the subprime, is the fault of the computer. I was just talking to a banker the other day, and not that long ago, 20 years ago, an investment banking house, let’s say, Lehman Brothers, when it got a package of mortgages, they would go through every mortgage, every single one, and they’d throw out the ones that just seemed absurd, they just wouldn’t accept them. Things used to arrive on paper. Today things arrive on a screen, and a screen is back lit, and one of the biggest pains in the neck is trying to read something dully written and complicated on a computer screen. It will drive you nuts—I mean, try it sometime. Now they say, ‘Oh, to hell with it,’ and they just accept the whole package. And if it hadn’t been for that, they’d be going over each loan. What’s happened is the backward march of technology.

"The backward march of technology." In an era where we too often think that all progress (like all change) is good, that's refreshing to hear. It also suggests just how lazy technology has made us. . .

Originally published October 16, 2008

Aerosmith - again?

The awful "hair band" called "Aerosmith" is back in the news again.  We remembered how Mr. Tyler did awful National Anthems at major events that caught those of us who sing.

But this time, one of their songs is in the news.

In Los Angeles, at the StubHub Center complex, the women's track cycling UCI World Masters Championship has drawn the ire of many as a college professor -- a man who claims to be a woman -- won the Women's 35-39 group.  

This time, that awful song from Aerosmith, "Dude (Looks Like a Lady)," rings true.  The winner was a "Dude (looks like a lady)," and the real ladies lost.  This is Obergefell's "right to dignity" at its worst again.  Remember Dale Saran's warning in Jonsson v. CrossFit, which the Dude (Looks Like a Lady) won primarily because of Obergefell and the Exxon Mobil Payback.

"The fundamental, ineluctable fact is that a male competitor who has a sex reassignment procedure still has a genetic makeup that confers a physical and physiological advantage over women."

What gives?  Avery Brundage and Dale Saran were right.  How come a few judges reminiscent of that book in the Bible where they do what feels right in their heart have rights nobody else has?

Flashback Friday: Wish I'd written that...

Today's horoscope, courtesy of The Onion calendar:

"You will be jolted as if hit by a brick when receiving bad news next week, but only partially because it arrives wrapped around a thrown brick."

Originally published March 11, 2016

Opera Wednesday

Drew here, pinch-hitting this week. It's been awhile, so I might as well do something easy, and what could be easier than going with one of the best? Here's the great Leontyne Price singing "Pace, pace, mio Dio" from Verdi's La Dorza del Destino on a 1967 broadcast of The Bell Telephone Hour. Donald Voorhees is the conductor.

Flashback Friday: Here come da judge

SAMMY DAVIS JR. IN ONE OF HIS CLASSIC COMEDY ROLES

I realize we're constantly being admonished nowadays to be non-judgmental; "who am I to judge?" should strike a familiar tone. But what exactly does that mean, and how does it fit in to our modern culture and lifestyles

You could write a book on that question alone, and probably more than one person has by now, but I'll simply remark that I've always understood the Biblical injunction against judging to be aimed more at one's soul than at their actions. "Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get." (Matthew 7:1-2)

In other parts of the Bible, we're told not to worry about what others think of us as long as we act in righteousness for the Kingdom of God.* The suggestion behind it all is that the only opinion that really counts is God's, and He will judge each and every one of us based on what is inside us and how that has manifested itself in our thoughts, words and actions. As humans lack the ability of divination when it comes to reading a man's soul (with the exception of some extraordinary saints), I read this as telling us we should not judge one's character, one's soul, one's state of sin.

*Though we're also reminded not to engage in scandalous behavior which can cast aspersions upon our sincerity, or that of Christians in general. We may see this come into play in the next few paragraphs.

At the same time, however, we're also told to admonish our brothers and sisters who have fallen into sin (first making sure, of course, that we are not guilty of the same thing). For that to happen, it follows that we have some authority to draw conclusions about what a person does, based on that person's external behavior. We don't know for sure whether or not a person is in a state of grace, for example, or if they're possessed by truly evil thoughts and desires, but if they go around acting like a jerk, being impolite, doing nasty things to people, I think we could quite rightly infer from that behavior that this person, regardless of the condition of their soul, has some problems. And if we're that jerk, behaving that way with other people, we should expect that those kinds of conclusions are drawn. If we're a professing Christian, then this becomes cause for scandal, because by our own faults we encourage people to draw such conclusions. Again, being a jerk doesn't mean you're going straight to Hell (do not pass Purgatory, do not collect 500 indulgences). We don't know that.

But when we say someone is loathsome, when we deplore their actions and call into question the sincerity of their expressed values, what we're most often speaking of is this process of making a conclusion based on observed behavior. I think most of us are aware of that, and we aren't literally pronouncing judgment on someone's soul by saying something like that. "I find him grotesque, repulsive, etc." may be an inelegant use of language, it may be intemperate, but most reasonable people know what they mean when they say it, and most reasonable people know (or used to, anyway) what it means when they hear it. It means, "I find this person's actions to be [insert adjective of your choice]."

What I'm getting at with all this is that there's a lot of nasty behavior going on in social media, and in the circles which I frequent much of it is coming from the internecine conflict which our beloved Holy Father seems to have instigated, or at least brought to a head. Austin Ruse wrote about this very well in a recent article with reference to several Catholic bloggers who like to make grand pronouncements about people with whom they disagree. The question arises: how should one behave when finding themselves faced with such a person? Well, perhaps the best thing is not to find yourself in that position in the first place, which is why long ago I deserted the Catholic blogosphere in favor of the much more civilized world of classic television. I still run across these people, though; one can hardly keep up-to-date with current Church events without doing so. The political blogosphere is even worse. And as far as Catholics talking about politics - don't get me started.

It is not an exaggeration for me to say that I do, indeed, find the behavior of such people to be loathsome. In doing so, they transform themselves into loathsome individuals, and to draw such a conclusion based on what they've said is, in many cases, fairly temperate when compared to what these people themselves say and do. But am I judging them? Am I consigning them to the nether regions, where it's very hot even in wintertime? Of course not, and when they use the typical rhetorical tactic of attempting to turn the tables on anyone who disagrees with them by saying, in effect, "So's your old man!" they should be resisted.

What do I mean by that? Well, in fact, there often is no moral equivalence involved; calling someone loathsome is not the same as saying they're going to Hell. These people often are passing judgment on others, accusing them outright of sin, of not being true Catholics or even Christians. If they want to call someone names, then that's their right, and I'm not going to stress over it - except, as I suggested earlier, to advise them to by a thesaurus or something else that can help them expand their vocabulary. Their behavior certainly can be described as scandalous, and to the extent that they provoke intemperate responses in others, they deserve the lion's share of the blame. If one voices a negative opinion of this person's behavior - well, what other conclusion can you draw?

In the end, I don't know if I've accomplished anything with this. I vowed to write a certain number of words at this site this month, and this is part of it. I haven't engaged in any of these verbal fisticuffs, nor do I intend to, but I get highly put out when I read it, and I do think the people who do this are - here's that word again - loathsome. Am I judging them? No, and I'd thank you not to accuse me of that if you're tempted to. Am I drawing conclusions based on what I've seen, heard or read? You bet I have - and as long as such people continue to act that way, I'm going to continue to draw those kinds of conclusions.

For those of you out there who are like these people - don't you have anything better to do? For all that we moan about social justice warriors and how everyone's too sensitive and the world is filled with rage, it really is difficult to drive most people to anger. Mainly, they want to be happy and to be left alone. If these people worked half as hard at doing something good (or at least something benign), they might find their own world to be a much nicer place.

Originally published on August 10, 2016

Retro TV Friday

Wink Martindale's site is known for posing classic television clips, especially in relation to appearances on quiz and game shows.  Recently, he posted the pilot for a television show that ended up much differently than what was originally envisioned between him and and Merv Griffin that led the show to lasting just one season.  But note the names referenced in the pilot for "Headline Chasers" that was sent to the National Association of Television Programming Executives in the mid-1980's for the concept he had developed for production.  In the first round (which became the third in the final version that made it to air), note the clues referenced in the first question.  In the third round (which became the first in the final version that made it to air;  eventually letters were added to the headline when clues were later given), note the first headline.  Both the clue in the first cover and the subject of the first headline are back in the news on this very time in the present in 2018.  The first is a mid-30's child of the People cover subject that was referenced in the clue recently tied the knot with an actress that was a model on a Dutch postcode lottery game show franchise.  The other, now 50, is appearing on another European game show franchise starting next week, and I personally met 28 years ago!

So what indeed goes around comes around, as we saw with the headliners referenced in the pilot for a show that Mr. Martindale admitted was ruined by Mr. Griffin's own staff.

What Pope Francis hath wrought

Lightning striking the Vatican on the night of Pope Benedict's abdication announcement

And he said to them: I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven.

-Luke 10:18

Was America always great? Was America ever great?

The topic seems to be a question much in the news lately, thanks to comments made both by New York Governor Cuomo and at the funeral of John McCain, of unhappy memory.*

*And by the way, since when did funerals become occasions of settling scores? I always thought the purpose of a funeral was to pray for the soul of the deceased, rather than to speak out against people you didn’t like or agree with. Silly me.

Let’s first start with the proposition that America was always great, and didn’t need to be made great again, and do our own little fact check. (Personal opinion as always, of course.) After some reflection, it would seem to this writer that the following statements can be accepted as more or less true:

America was always great, except when the early settlers passed laws repressing Catholics.

America was always great, except when government officials reneged on treaties signed with American Indian tribes.

America was always great, except when blacks were legally deemed to be property and owned as slaves in the South.

America was always great, except when its laborers were treated brutishly and inhumanely, exploited by businessmen and denied the dignity that is inherent in work.

America was always great, except when rights of free speech were taken away from opponents of World War I.

America was always great, except when half the population—females—were denied the right to vote, as well as other rights, in many states.

America was always great, except when blacks had to fight for common civil rights, from voting to home ownership, and Jews were frequently the target of discrimination.

America was always great, except when politicians sent young soldiers off to fight wars without giving them clear direction on what they were fighting for.

America was always great, except when it sanctioned the murder of unborn children in the womb, and the sick and elderly based on their quality of life.

America was always great, except when it persecutes those citizens who desire freedom to pursue their religious beliefs regarding fundamental precepts on things such as marriage and abortion, through a combination of legal oppression and social approbation.

I could go on, I suppose, but I think you get the point.

Let’s look at the opposite viewpoint, though, the idea that America was never great. How does that stand up? These statements would seem obvious:

America was never great, except when it fought overseas to free people from tyranny and oppression.

America was never great, except when it contributed billions of dollars in financial aid and massive numbers of volunteers to help nations stricken by natural disasters.

America was never great, except when it provided ordinary people with the means to improve their lives without being held prisoner of a class system.

America was never great, except when it served as the crucible of innovation for doctors, scientists, innovators, inventors, and entrepreneurs who improved the quality of live for people around the world.

America was never great, except when it mounted efforts such as the Berlin Airlift to support people fighting for their freedom.

America was never great, except when it accomplished the unthinkable and landed men on the moon.

America was never great, except when it became the source of hope and inspiration, for people whose greatest dream was to come here (legally) and become, in every way, Americans.

Again, you get the point here.

From these lists, I think one can be allowed to draw a conclusion, or perhaps an observation, which might provide us with an answer to this question.

The greatness of America often is the result of intangibles—freedom to act, a spirit of creation—that in turn provides the means to accomplish great things. The lack of greatness, on the other hand, often manifests itself in specific acts, either sanctioned by the government (formally or informally) or as the result of what could be called evil in the hearts of its citizens.

The logical conclusion, therefore, is that America is mostly a great nation, but not always a good one; that its titanic accomplishments can be offset by the darkness in the hearts of its citizens; that we are torn between our better angels and the demons that seek to posses us. The eradication of disease is a great accomplishment; the promotion of eugenics is an evil one.

Greatness and goodness can both be lost. A nation that oppresses its citizens or doesn’t allow them to succeed is no longer great. A nation that legally sanctions immorality or pursues immoral ends is no longer good. We needn’t see this as unique; it’s a contradiction that exists in all nations, because it exists in all humans. It’s why, for all our kvetching, things never seem to change—because people never change. It’s why we can’t achieve perfection in this life; if we could, we would have had no need for a Savior.

There has been, perhaps, a tendency for Americans to conflate greatness with goodness, perhaps more often than people from other countries. They do have one thing in common, though, which is that the pinnacle for each is something unattainable: perfection. We can, and must, always strive for it, with the knowledge that we will never achieve it but every step in that direction is a good thing.

But make no mistake—there is a difference between goodness and greatness. And sometimes a lack of one can make for a lack of the other.

"Thou Shalt Not Lie"

That's the translation of this week's cover of the liberal German magazine Der Spiegel, which in the past has been a strong supporter of Pope Francis. They're talking about the ongoing homosexual sex scandal, of course, and at the same time are painting a vivid picture of life inside today's Vatican. Said one Vatican cardinal, understandably speaking only on condition of anonymity, “He preaches mercy, but in reality he is an ice-cold, cunning Machiavellian, and, what is worse – he lies.”

Being accused of being a liar used to be, as they would say in the Old West, fightin' words. And yet all we get is the pope comparing himself to Christ, vowing he will remain silent while he, in fact, continues to slander his accusers.

Yes, the pope fiddles while Rome burns. Where have we heard this story before?

Stars - do I even know them?

Scanning over the cast of Dancing with the Stars' Series 27, I had to think how old most of us have become when we could not even identify most of the "stars" on the cast list.  The three stars who would fit more into a PGA Tour Champions field based on age than a ballroom dance competition are three of the four names I remember a bit from my childhood.

Nancy McKeon, 52.  "Jo" from The Facts of Life, she is the third cast member to appear in the Auntie Beeb franchise (Cloris Leachman in S7 and Kim Fields in S22).  Of course, one recurring character in that show ended up as one of Hollywood's leading men in George Clooney, and Lisa Welchel actually caused a firestorm when she refused to allow her character to have premaritial sex and forced Embassy to rewrite an entire episode in the final season.

John Schneider, 58.  Oh to remember the days of a young film star who was a teen, jumping a 1970 Dodge Charger across Georgia through rivers, bridges, and the rest.  He wasn't meaning any harm, of course, but Sheriff Little would bust them for crossing the county line.  Of course, we later remember him as Superman's father, but he has proven faithfulness over these years.

Mary Lou Retton, 50.  America knows her as a 16-year old gymnast whose 10 made her a legend and the matriarch of US gymnastics.  For me, it's my 14-year old self seeing her speak locally and sign my program from her speaking engagement, along with a kiss.  For today's generation, she is the mother of two LSU gymnasts.

The fourth name of the cast I could recognise is Demarcus Ware, 36, a former NFL player who ate quarterbacks and running backs for a living.  Other than those four, who are these stars?

A decline in "local" media: radio station owner asks why

D
uring Hurricane Florence coverage (we escaped, but many local churches cut and ran on a drizzling Sunday morning with little, if any, local damage by closing their doors while bars were open on Sunday for Premier League, La Liga, and NFL games on the screens all day), it caught my attention when I was informed a while back about weather alerts that local schools are now requiring parents' mobile phone numbers for the sole purpose of sending text messages to announce school closings.  Back in the day, we had local radio stations listed to do the same thing.

The consequences of media consolidation to smaller markets reared its ugly head.  The area is down to three radio stations, two of them owned by one New York state chain that under the former owners of those two radio stations, they yanked local news and both state and national talk radio programming.  Our market is now one of the "dark" areas of the state where no access to news is possible.  The third station was sold from a local family to a Sacramento chain, and has no community presence.  The consequence was because schools have no access to the auto-tuned from New York or Sacramento programming, they could not post weather alerts or school, church, and factory closings.

Keven Cohen, the owner of WQXL Radio, noted the frustration of larger radio stations.  In 2012, iHeartMedia fired him from the afternoon time slot.  After a year off to comply with his contract, he developed a radio startup and today is one of the better radio stations in the market, airing local morning and afternoon programming, Saturday night programming, and national shows such as Brian Kilmeade, Laura Ingraham, Dave Ramsey, and Michael Weiner, Ph.D., on his station.

In a recent column, he noted Cumulus Media (which provides him with national radio news on the hour) let a popular radio host go, though he will now be remaining on the station through a syndicated program which they are the flagship station for sports produced by another company.  He also cited a popular newspaper writer and then a well-established television broadcaster being let go -- all in a few weeks.  The fact longstanding reporters are released quickly forced him to ask what has happened to media, especially since he's seen it from both a host's side and an owner's box.  After seeing the lack of local coverage of Hurricane Florence and the schools now going to alternative sources to inform parents, what has happened to "local" media?

Never, ever forget

“Tribute in Light 2016”, Photo by Howard Sherman, September 11, 2016.

Flashback Friday: The fatherless church

From time to time I’ve had occasion to talk with friends about what life was like in our families while growing up. I myself grew up without a father, my parents having gone their separate ways prior to my birth, but that is not quite the same thing as having a father who shirked his responsibility, which is the case with several of my friends.

The culprits were the usual ones, booze being at the top of the list. And so while the father was around, his presence was almost spectral; there but not there. Depending on the strength of the mother, the family was held together with varying degrees of success, but what remained the same in all cases was that a spectral father left a void every bit as gaping as having no father at all. The children managed, for the most part, adapting to their circumstances (as children often will), and with few exceptions they turned out to be stellar adults, though they also bore the wounds of childhood. But one thing that they almost all agreed on was that something was lacking, that even though they managed without an active dad, there were some gaps that could not be filled, some absences for which there was no compensation. And almost all of them were filled with regret, to one extent or another, at the things they missed, the memories that never were, the guidance that should have been but wasn’t. Life may have turned out exceedingly well for them, but it was still incomplete.  In the drama that was their lives, there was a role that had been cast, but had not been filled. There was something missing.

Which brings me to the state of the Catholic Church today.

We’ve just passed the first anniversary of the election of the current pope, and it’s a fair assessment that he’s thrilled some, angered others, and confused many. Depending on who one talks to, he’s either Machiavellian in his cleverness, Christ-like in his gentleness, or Ted Baxter-ish in his cluelessness. Even now I’m not sure which of the three he is, though I haven’t ruled out the possibility of them all being valid.

As I’ve written before, I would not consider myself to be a “fan” of this pope. I’ve ceased reading much about him, for the choices often seem to be either fawning obsequiousness or slanderous contempt; either one would be enough to make my blood pressure rise. In the event, I try to avoid much about him whenever possible, lest I expose some latent, simmering rage.  I still avert my eyes whenever his picture scrolls into view - again, an effort to avoid a proximate cause of sin. (Like many, I found something disturbing about his initial appearance on the balcony, a feeling which remains with me still.) As you may have noticed, it’s still an effort for me to even use his name – an effort I generally don’t try to mount. It would be very wrong to think that I hate him; that's too personal a feeling for me to have toward him.  Indifference, however, can be just as damning.

A commenter at another blog mentioned that after a year he still mourned the end of Benedict’s pontificate.  “Mourned” seems a strong word to me, not the kind of word I generally use, but also it doesn’t quite summarize my attitude.  It’s too gentle, too sentimental.  Were I to select a word of my own, it would perhaps be “bitter.”*

*Putting me in mind of one of my favorite poems, Stephen Crane’s “In the Desert”:

In the desert
I saw a creature, naked, bestial,
Who, squatting upon the ground,
Held his heart in his hands,
And ate of it.

I said, “Is it good, friend?”
“It is bitter—bitter,” he answered;
"But I like it
“Because it is bitter,
“And because it is my heart.”

***

The origin of bitterness, if such exists, is because in converting to the Catholic faith it sometimes seems as if, in Whittaker Chambers’ words, I’ve joined the losing side. What makes this more frustrating is that this side – the Church – has all the correct answers. What it lacks is someone to articulate them.

Someone has pointed out that prior to last year’s Conclave, it would have been inconceivable to suggest that it “didn’t matter” who the pope was. Yet for many Catholics, it seems that this is exactly what is called for today. And when the best way to avoid anger is to ignore the pope and what he says, that’s not a good thing. It’s true that the faith of the Church is constant and unchanging – the truth, after all, is the truth – and in that sense it’s also true that when the tracks run straight and true, it isn’t that important who the engineer is. But the pope also has a role with regard to the faithful – to care for their souls, to instruct them, to correct them when necessary, to lead them.  Just as the father is head of the family, the pope is head of the Church’s family. And what we have today is a fatherless Church.

It operates; Mass is said, confessions are heard, souls are saved, the Eucharist is received. The Catechism spells out exactly what the Church believes, and why.  It functions, as the fatherless households of my friends functioned.  But there is something missing.

Think of the paternal figure teaching a young boy how to be a man. There is the wise comforter wiping tears from a daughter's eyes. There is the husband who is the rock of the family, who helps out when help is requested - and, even as important, when it isn't. This is what the father provides a family, what my friends were unable to experience.

Think of the tireless advocate for the unborn who hears from her pontiff that she may be "obsessed" with single issues. Think of the defender of the Church's teachings who feels dismissed with not even a how-do-you-do to show for it, while his pontiff lavishes attention on those who don't even seek it. Think of the believer of tradition, the unbroken line of some two thousand years that unites the Church militant to the Church triumphant, only to see those beliefs under attack, while the pontiff scarcely raises his voice. Abortion. Euthanasia. Homosexual marriage. The authority of the Magisterium.  Precisely the kinds of things that a father stands up for within his own family.

Crickets.

***

I'm reminded of another poem*, this one by T.S. Eliot, an Anglican who likely would have converted to Catholicism had he lived to see the meaninglessness into which his church has descended, a meaninglessness of doctrine, a lack of teaching, a foundation that looks like nothing more sound than quicksand.

*I don't mean to turn this into Poetry Corner, by the way.

According to the always-reliable Wikipedia, "The Hollow Men" deals with post-World War I Europe under the Treaty of Versailles, the difficulty of hope and religious conversion, and possibly his own failed marriage.

We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats' feet over broken glass<
In our dry cellar

The Bishop of Rome assures us that he is a loyal "son of the Church." A son, of course, suggests a father, and I've no doubt that the pope draws great strength and comfort from his Heavenly Father; but he must also know the importance of an earthly father. After all, Christ's earthly father, St. Joseph, is the protector of the Church.

It is time for the Holy Father to be an earthly father to that Church. Let's not forget how "The Hollow Man" closes, with one of the most famous stanzas in literature, lines that even those who don't read poetry are likely familiar with:

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.

Today we are The Fatherless Church, and though we continue to function it is often without a hand on the tiller, and even if we keep on course we are acutely aware of what we are missing. We are The Fatherless Church, and we fear that we're being led by Hollow Men, headpieces filled with straw. We wonder when the father will start to act like a father, to fill the gap that only he is capable of filling - indeed, which he has been charged with filling.

Will it be too late? Or will it all end, not with the banging of the doors of nearly empty churches, but with whimpering from their nearly empty pews?


Originally published March 14, 2014

Sacred music from the Bible!

I've had it with Casey Kasem (or now Ryan Seacrest) and his American Top 40 charts being sung in churches, often with karaoke or rock bands.  It's worse now nationally than when a generation ago when I first began noticing the corruption in churches myself.  Add to that seven years of vocal training and eleven four-week series of Summer Chorus singing in the past ten years, and you can see where I've tilted heavy classical in my vocal chops, refusing to support the karaoke and feelings songs that have rampantly ruined churches.

If I'm in a certain city on Sunday morning, after run, spin, or barre class, I'll stop at a friend's church for services since I have a rule to never skip church even if I'm out of town.  Typically, I'll carry my Bible study book since it's the same book as used back home, but the service music is what I call in the "Kyle Larson line" where a slide job is done and a run in the high line is used instead of the low-hanging fruit of alleged church music that is doctrinal malpractice and man-centred that many churches have chosen to sing thanks to the cooperation between Universal Music and every notorious cult-like false teacher of Hillsong, Bethel, Elevation, and the ilk.

David Schwoebel (1957-) wrote "Ascription of Praise," which is often used as a benediction in churches.  I heard this when in one such city with their church.  This from the local junior college in Laurel, Mississippi, and performed at a major church there, is Mr. Schwoebel's setting of Jude 24-25.  Now Laurel just happens to be the hometown of both a legendary opera singer and also a singer that those who have read this blog will know very well because that 40-year old Laurel native and now mother of three taught me to sing.  Enjoy this setting of the last verses in Jude to music.  There is a place for good church music set from the Bible, not a Top 40 feelings song.

New books from Mitchell Hadley

Now I finally have something to show for the silence I've been observing this summer: not one, but two new books.

The Electronic Mirror: What Classic TV Tells Us About Who We Were and Who We Are (and Everything In-Between) is my collection of essays on classic television—how the programs of the '50s, '60s, and '70s illustrate the development of American culture in the second half of the 20th Century. These essays examine how this most personal form of mass communication reflects the culture of its time, how it has fulfilled (or failed to fulfill) its initial promise, and how TV has—intentionally as well as unintentionally—predicted the future, with sometimes disturbing results. As I write in the book, "Television is our history, no matter when we were born, for it tells us not only who we were then, but who we are today, and how we got there."

My new novel, The Car, is the story of Winter, an ordinary man living an ordinary life, it will not end until he learns what has happened to the car’s owner and why the car has been left abandoned and ignored on a city street. As Winter’s curiosity turns to obsession, his search for the missing owner intensifies and he finds the car taking him on a journey that he never expected, one of dreams and reality in which nothing–and no one–is what it seems. Not even him. And it asks a question: how do we measure the worth of a life lived?

These two books, along with my first novel The Collaborator, are available through Amazon now, and through other online dealers in the weeks to come; I'm hoping to have e-book versions available next month. You can find out more about my books, along with upcoming events, by going to my new and improved author page.