Saturday, August 31, 2013

As Obama Considers Attacking Syria - The "Truth" Behind Bush White House and Iraq


First appeared on Blogcritics.
cone 3 whitehousemuseum.orgAs President Obama and his advisors contemplate action in Syria, many of us worry that some of the same issues that plagued the Bush administration are coming into play here. However, a “source” contacted me and promised to reveal the truth behind what led to the drive to invade Iraq and take down Saddam Hussein.

This source, who claimed to have intimate knowledge of the inside workings in the Bush White House, wished to remain anonymous as he told the troubling truth concerning “a major problem” with decision-making in the Oval Office. He told me on the phone, “This stunning information, while surprising, will lay to rest any of the American public’s concerns about how their country was being run at the time.”

When I met with the source at a local Dunkin’ Donuts, he wore thick sunglasses, a black hat tilted over his face, and a thick scarf wrapped around his neck. Despite the intense heat of the late summer weather here in New York City, no one in the store seemed to take notice of us. Of course, a man and woman respectively dressed as Uncle Sam and The Statue of Liberty were enjoying coffee and bagels at another table.

I asked him, “What shall I call you?”

He sat down and replied with a scratchy voice, “You can call me ‘Deep Throat’ or ‘Michael Douglas.’ Your choice.”

I decided to call him “sir” after that and I went to turn on my recording device.

His heavy gloved hand came down on mine and he said, “You may only take notes.”

I nodded, took out my pad and pen, and prepared to write. The following is the text of my interview with the source:

VL: When did you become aware there even was a problem?

Source: Around the summer of 2001, Mr. Bush let it be known that [he] was very concerned with tactical security in the White House, specifically inside the Oval Office. Wise in ways of the red tape in other departments, Mr. Bush called in Dick Cheney and charged him with the task of handling the matter.

VL: What did Mr. Cheney do?

Source: Initially, Dick talked to covert experts within the administration, but then expanded his research to outside individuals, most notably an outfit out in California.

VL: What were the results of Mr. Cheney’s efforts?

Source: It seems that the breakdown in security existed right in the Oval Office, so to better serve the president, Mr. Cheney went with the California outfit’s initiative.

VL: What did this entail?

Source: A high-tech security device was installed in the Oval Office. Apparently it had passed the outfit’s strictest measures of testing and protocols, and it had apparently been used numerous times by one of our security branches, which will remain nameless.

VL: When did Mr. Bush first use the device?

Source: Unfortunately, Mr. Bush didn’t get to use it until weeks after 9/11. At that time he decided to employ it for conversations with those most important to him: Cheney, Powell, Rice, and Rumsfeld.

VL: Can you reveal what the device was?

Source: It consisted of two circular clear bubbles connected by a passageway to redirect voice patterns. It was lowered over Mr. Bush and the other party before they began speaking.

VL: You wouldn’t be referring to something called The Cone of Silence, would you?

Source: Well, you said it; I didn’t.

VL: So, this California outfit wouldn’t happen to have been a television studio?
cone 1 wikipedia.orgSource: My lips are sealed.

VL: Are you aware of the television show Get Smart that featured this device?

Source: Certainly, I was aware of it. That only enhanced our interest in the product.

VL: Okay, so you claim that you witnessed these conversations.

Source: Yes, my job was to create a transcript of the conversations for…how did Dick put it? Consistency.

VL: Hmmm. Interesting. So, what is your evaluation of the security device’s effectiveness?

Source: It worked as expected. Mr. Cheney was pleased that it eased the president’s concerns about security. It also facilitated the invasion of Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein.

VL: Can you recount any specific conversations between the president and others?

Source: Of course. (he produces papers with excerpts of transcripts). You may copy notes from these, but I must retain them.

cone 2 kirbymuseum.orgVL: Understood. (I started copying from the first page).

TRANSCRIPT 1: Invasion of Iraq (Device is lowered over Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush’s heads)

Cheney: Hey, George, I feel like an astronaut.

Bush: Yes, Dick, it’s very hot.

Cheney: George, I said…

Bush: Who’s dead?

Cheney: Mr. President, about invading Iraq…

Bush: There will be an imminent attack?

Cheney: Uh, yes, that is right (Nodding).

Bush: Do we have any intelligence to back this up?

Cheney: Herbal Essence is a fine shampoo, sir.

Bush: So there is concrete evidence?

Cheney: No, there is nothing of the sort.

Bush: We will take who to court?

Cheney: Mr. President, we must embark on a pre-emptive enterprise.

Bush: Dick, I’m not sure I am hearing you correctly.

Cheney: Yes, Mr. President, there are weapons of mass destruction there.

Bush: I know, that Saddam is a pain in the derriere.

Cheney: So, should we go ahead with our plan?

Bush: (pulling on collar) Yes, go ahead and install a fan. It’s too hot in this bubble.

TRANSCRIPT 2: Condolezza Rice and Mr. Bush Discussing Her Planned European Trip. (Device lowered over their heads)

Rice: What is this thing? (pointing to the plastic device over her head)

Bush: It’s the latest in our quest for greater security.

Rice: Oh, how odd. Anyway, I am concerned about how to handle France.

Bush: No, I don’t like to dance. Besides, you know Laura gets jealous, Condi.

Rice: Should I try to bring up the Oil for Food Program and their apparent lies?

Bush: Yes, tell them we’re still calling them Freedom Fries.

Rice: What about the Germans? Should I emphasize the strategic importance of our bases on their soil?

Bush: Let them know we don’t want any Iraqi oil. Nunca. Nada. None.

Rice: Should I take a hard line with the Russians, sir?

Bush: What was that, Condi?

Rice: Should I be unyielding with the Russians?

Bush: No, Condi, no white Russians. I don’t drink anymore.

Rice: Mr. President, in all honesty, I am concerned about this trip.

Bush: Yes, of course: nice slip, and nice legs too, I might add.

TRANSCRIPT 3: Colin Powell and Mr. Bush Discussing Mr. Powell’s Appearance Before the UN (bubbles are lowered over their heads)

Powell: With all due respect, sir; isn’t this device from a TV show?

Bush: I am not sure what I know, Colin. That’s why I pay you.

Powell: I’m concerned about my appearance before the UN.

Bush: I’m not sure we can count on Sean Penn.

Powell: Those aerial photos of the weapons labs…

Bush: Labs are fine dogs, but I like poodles too.

Powell: Sir, I wonder if there is a chance the intelligence could be wrong?

Bush: My favorite song? Let’s see now…

TRANSCRIPT 4: Donald Rumsfeld and Mr. Bush Discuss Mr. Rumsfeld’s Image

Rumsfeld: (glancing up as the bubble is lowered over his head) What the hell is this thing?

Bush: (laughing) Yes, I like to sing too, Rummy.

Rumsfled: Mr. President, I honestly don’t think I have an “image problem.” I take offense.

Bush: The White House fence is quite secure; I assure you that.

Rumsfeld: Sir, I am talking about the way the media is portraying me here.

Bush: True, I would like a beer, but I gave up drinking. No cheating with mother around.

Rumsfeld: Sir, I am baffled as to the possible function of this device we have hanging over our heads.

Bush: No, Laura never makes the beds. I’m used to it by now.

Rumsfeld: I think I should respectfully hand in my resignation.

Bush: I love this nation too, Rummy. It’s the greatest.

Rumsfeld: Oh, and about those troop levels in Iraq…

Bush: (looking at watch) Yes, yes, just go and start the attack. I promised Jeb I’d watch Wheel of Fortune with him.

Rumsfeld: (chuckling in a sinister way) Got to love that girl, Vanna White.

Bush: Yes, out of sight; out of mind. Goodnight, Rummy.


I sat back and looked up from the transcripts at the source. “So, sir, you are telling me that a device from a TV show caused all these problems and led to the invasion of Iraq?”

He took the transcripts and stuffed them in his attaché case. “Absolutely. Everything was going fine until he showed the contraption to his old man.”

“What did George H. W. Bush think of it?” I asked.

Sir sighed. “The old man found he liked the bubble so much he absconded with it in order to protect all his future conversations with Dan Quayle and Barb. That old rascal!”

I nodded. “I see.”

Sir started for the door and looked back at me. “My advice would be for Mr. Obama to get his hands on it. His conversations with Biden and Holder would benefit considerably, I am sure.”

I stared at my notes and felt like I had nothing. “That is all that you have to share with me?”

He looked at his watch. “Yes. I have to run. I’m having lunch with Mel.” “Mel?”

I asked. "That wouldn’t be director Mel Brooks?”

Sir shook his head. “No, it’s a former Spice Girl. Good luck, son.”

My source then left the store and I stared at my notes. While this shed some light on what happened in the Bush White House, it seemed too far-fetched and would do nothing to help the current administration. There really was no story here, and Uncle Sam and Lady Liberty had already left to take their position up near the park, so it seemed that I was out of luck.

I went out into the hot morning, started going along the street, and saw actor Alec Baldwin walking two little dogs down the block. About twenty feet away from him were a few photographers. A smile came to my face as I lifted my pen and paper; it looked like I would have a story after all.

Photo credits: oval office-Whitehouse museum.org; cone-Kirby museum.org; don adams-wikipedia.org

Obama Should Not Rush Into Military Action in Syria


First appeared on Blogcritics.
syria 1 reutersThere are UN inspectors on the ground in Syria doing their jobs. United Nations chemical experts are in villages where attacks apparently took place, and they are amassing evidence. Of course, there are also those bodies of the dead in hospitals and living victims who are in agonizing pain from the attacks. The question then is not whether or not chemical attacks took place, but rather if these attacks can be connected directly to President Bashar-al-Assad and his regime. Right now there appears to be no direct connection.


syria 2 npr.org

President Barack Obama should learn from what has happened before. How can we not forget the faulty intelligence that led up to the Iraq war? How can we not remember that President Bush and his administration seemed ready to get Saddam Hussein and his regime changed long before any evidence was credible?


If history does indeed repeat itself – and it seems an awful lot like Iraq all over again here – then are we destined to make the same mistakes or can we try to take a different path? It seems as if President Obama is being pushed into attacking Syria. We hear that the U.K. wants it and France and other nations, but it is always the United States that gets put into the policeman of the world role. Why exactly is that? President Obama cannot afford to get involved in another war in the Middle East (or anywhere else for that matter).

The American public – while certainly outraged by something so evil as a chemical attack – has wearied of being forever at war. Our military has been engaged in conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq for over a decade, and many believe there is little to show for it. How can Mr. Obama think that we can handle yet another conflict in that part of the world? The answer is that – even if President Assad is connected to these despicable attacks – it is not up to us to facilitate a military response.

syria 3 wikimediaThe UN is on the ground now, and after a report is made, and if there is tangible evidence of Assad’s connection, then let the UN decide on sanctions or joint military engagement that involves the U.S. as a partner in a coalition. It should no longer be the United States’ responsibility to shoulder the burden of these kinds of attacks when the rest of the world has as much at stake as we do.

President Obama has a chance to define his presidency at this time, just as President Bush did with Iraq. How he chooses to proceed will set the course for the rest of his time in office and be utilized by both parties in forthcoming elections. This is Mr. Obama’s chance to show the world that we are putting down the big stick in favor of discourse and patience. It is time for the United States to heal wounds – at home and abroad – from two wars in the Middle East not create more wounded.

Photo credits: un inspectors-reuters; map-npr.org; planes-wikimedia.org

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

New J.D. Salinger Works Will Be Published - Catcher in the Why?


First appeared on Blogcritics.

salinger 2 npr.orgA report in USA Today indicates that “a trove of unknown Salinger works will be published.” For fans of books like Catcher in the Rye and Franny and Zooey, this may be very exciting news, but it could be disappointing if the “works” prove to be less than what we hope them to be.

salinger 3 pinkmafia.ca










Salinger by David Shields and Shane Salerno, a new biography set to be published September 3, 2013, has created this buzz. The authors claim that the new stories will be released over a period of time between 2015 and 2020. The prospect of new stories about Holden Caulfield will make Catcher fans dance with joy, and there are also works about the Glass family of which Franny and Zooey were members, and a World War II “counterintelligence agent’s diary,” said to be “based on Salinger’s relationship with his first wife.”

salinger 4 wkipediaAll of this is quite compelling stuff to contemplate, especially considering Salinger’s self-imposed exile that took place in Cornish, New Hampshire, in the decades leading up to his death at 91 in 2010. Over the years before he died, there were many rumors about his writing during his seclusion. Images of the elderly Salinger going in and out of the post office provoked sympathy for the recluse, who usually reacted angrily to photographers who camped out waiting for a glimpse of the famous author. I recall images of him acting defensively, including what seemed to be the case of him attacking one photographer in his car.

Still, when one thinks of great writers, it is always the work that wins out in the end. When a writer creates an iconic figure like Holden Caulfield, and that character inhabits a seminal piece of fiction like Catcher in the Rye, it sets the tone for the rest of that writer’s career. How do you top a book like that? Writers learn that you probably do not, as Ernest Hemingway did with The Sun Also Rises and F. Scott Fitzgerald with The Great Gatsby.

Salinger and Salerno claim that Salinger didn’t want these new works to be published while he was alive, so we already question the motivations. It could have been that the notoriously private Salinger simply didn’t want more publicity that new works would bring; however, it could be he suspected that they may not have been up to the incredibly high standards he set for himself.

Of course, once someone is dead all bets are off it seems as long as the estate allows things to happen. We have seen fragments of Hemingway’s work, for example, taken and “reworked” by editors, much to his fans’ unhappiness. These kinds of works tend to be derivative, trying to capture the glory that faded long ago. The fear is always that the writer will be like an older actor trying revive a famous character with little success. Sylvester Stallone comes to mind here, and fans who didn’t wince in pain when he last played Rambo or Rocky just don’t understand what I mean.

So the good news is that new works from J.D. Salinger are on the horizon; therefore, that is also the bad news. We cannot be sure if Salinger’s self-imposed exile came from inherent wisdom, but consider the author's words from Franny and Zooey: “I’m sick of not having the courage to be an absolute nobody.” Maybe the author knew something we didn’t know, and I kind of feel that Salinger preferred to be nobody in the end because it was infinitely easier than being somebody. Wouldn’t it be nice if we all had a chance to find that courage when we needed it most?

Photo credits: catcher-wikipedia; salinger-npr.org, elderly salinger-pinkmafia.ca

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

TV Review: Breaking Bad – “Confessions” Are Bad for Your Soul


First appeared on Blogcritics.

confessions 2What some viewers have been waiting five seasons to happen seemed on the verge of happening in episode 11, titled “Confessions.” Walt (Bryan Cranston) sits in front of a video camera and says dryly, “I am Walter Hartwell White. This is my confession.” Of course, in keeping with Breaking Bad tradition, nothing is ever what it seems, as Walt’s “confession” becomes a warped look into the twisted mind and soul of Walter White. He’s just so damned good at this breaking bad stuff that even the viewer who knows that he is lying gets almost convinced Walt is telling the truth.

The episode really revolves around three key confrontations – Walt and Skyler (Anna Gunn) meet her sister Marie (Betsy Brandt) and her DEA officer husband Hank (Dean Norris) in a restaurant; Walt has a father-son talk with Walter Junior (RJ Mitte), and Walt has another father-son conversation with Jesse (Aaron Paul). These are the three key scenes around which the entire episode pivots.

When Walt learns that Walter Jr. is heading over to see Marie, he calls his son back and sits him down. Walt opens up about his cancer being back, that he is fighting it, feels good about his chances, and so on. Of course, the loving son Walter Junior is now hooked, and he isn’t going anywhere. Score one for Walt.

The scene in the restaurant features the warring family sitting down but they never manage to break bread. The conversation is indicative of the fine writing that has been a factor in every episode, but here the characters have at each other with such tempered ferocity that it is a joy to watch. If they had not been in a public place, things could have gotten very ugly. As it is it was uncivil and heated, with Marie at one point telling Walt to ‘just kill yourself.” It is amazing how her character has evolved, and she has become as protective and diabolical as her sister Skyler, but one thing about these sisters – they stand by their man. At the end of the restaurant scene, Walt gives Hank a DVD and walks away.

confessions 4Of course, Hank and Marie race home to watch it. While the tape starts promisingly with Walt say it’s his “confession,” within moments he has spun the tale to implicate Hank as Heisenberg and that Walt has been merely a pawn, dragged into drug dealing because he had no choice. The expressions on Hank and Marie’s faces are no doubt meant to mirror the viewer’s, but in truth Walter’s story is so convincing, especially the part about how he paid all of Hank’s medical bills (over $170,000 worth). Hank knows the truth (he has missed his chance to arrest Walt and his career is over) and says to Marie, “That’s the last nail in the coffin.” Obviously, if Walt is going down he’s taking the in-laws along with him. Score another for Walt.

While that scene is important, the even more crucial one occurs with Walt and Jesse in a remote desert location. Saul (Bob Odenkirk) has brought Jesse there to meet Walt, who now knows Jesse had been in jail, met with Hank, but was released. When Hank went into the interrogation room, Jesse had no intention of speaking to him, but Saul arrives quickly and ends things. Now, as they wait in the desert, we wonder if Walt has a gun and is going to dispatch Jesse as he has so many others.

confessions 6Here there is a new Walt angle to be played. He asks Jesse to leave town and start over. It will be good for him to have a fresh start. Jesse begs Walt, “Would you just for once stop working me?” And, of course, the viewer knows how Walt has already worked his biological son and Hank that day. Here Walt goes the paternal route and hugs Jesse. More than anything Jesse has sought this fatherly connection with Walt, one he so desperately needs and wanted from Mike (Jonathan Banks) before his departure for Belize (meaning Walt killed him). Walt's ploy works and Jesse accepts the idea of going far away. Score yet another for Walt.

As Jesse is waiting for the person to come who will erase his identity and give him a new one, he realizes that Saul has arranged for his weed to be taken as well as the ricin cigarette. Jesse surmises that it was used to poison Brock, and he races to Saul’s office where he beats up the lawyer, takes his gun and keys, and storms out. Saul calls Walt who goes to the car wash to get his hidden gun from the soda machine.

Meanwhile, Jesse has gone to Walt’s house and has commenced pouring gasoline all over the place. The episode ends with an impending confrontation between Walt and Jesse and, as has been the case all season, we viewers are left on the edges of our seats until next week. Perhaps the most important thing to happen in this episode is for Walt’s façade to finally crumble. He is no mild-mannered man who has been forced into doing evil things – he is the devil incarnate. Walt is willing to destroy anyone, and it is clear that Jesse may have been going off to certain death, that Hank is being left to go to prison, and that even Saul is expendable.

Walt does protect his nuclear family, but they are also paying a price. Skyler has basically sold her soul to that devil, and she is dragging her kids into damnation along with her. By siding with Walt she has discarded her sister and Hank, and basically figures that she will sink or swim with Walt. The problem is she is treading water near Scylla and Charybdis, so chances are the outcome is not going to be pretty.

With five episodes to go we are getting the best we could possible expect from series creator and executive producer Vince Gilligan, from an amazing cast, and powerful stories from terrific writers. As we imagine what will transpire when Jesse and Walt collide next week, it seems to me that there can only be one outcome – the surrogate father will be mourning his wayward son.

Photo credits: AMC

Monday, August 26, 2013

50th Anniversary of Dr. King’s Speech – Why the Dream Can No Longer Be Deferred


First appeared on Blogcritics.

king 1 nytimesThis Wednesday, August 28, 2013, marks the 50th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s iconic “I Have a Dream” speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. All across the nation people are celebrating the occasion this weekend, and thousands turned out in Washington D.C. to return to the place where Dr. King spoke so eloquently. Many speakers honored the man and the moment, as well they should, because that day was one of the most important events in the history of the United States.


hughes poets.orgAs a college English instructor, I have used Dr. King’s speech in my freshmen writing classes because it is one of the best examples of persuasion and argument ever written. I could stop right there, but it is also one of the most meaningful and important pieces of American literature ever written. I must stress that this speech is inherently American in nature. It could not have been written by a black person in Europe or Africa because it addresses specifically the plight of black people in this country. When I have taught this in my classes, foreign students have been amazed by “how American” the speech is but also its “universal” nature because, by addressing the issues that needed to be overcome in 1963 America, Dr. King also highlighted human rights of people all over the world.

Usually when I used Dr. King’s speech in class, I also would include the amazing poem “A Dream Deferred” by Langston Hughes. This poem is the perfect companion piece, and it examines what happens when “the dream” is not realized because others stand in the way. His last line has resonance to this day when he asks, “Or does it explode?” This has touched my students over the years because after reading Dr. King’s speech, they can analyze its power in a different perspective, one which echoes King’s concerns but also raises new ones.

king 2 APThis is the essence of what happened on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on Saturday, August 24, 2013 . To see Dr. King’s son – Martin Luther King 3rd – standing there, following in his father’s footsteps, was a welcome and emotional sight. It also provided a connection to the very words Dr. King used fifty years ago when he said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Dr. King’s son reminded the crowd, “The task is not done, the journey not complete.”

People only have to look at recent events to confirm this to be true. In the country’s – and I humbly say the world’s – most famous city, a policy called “stop and frisk” targets people of color, most especially young black men. In Brooklyn the statue of Jackie Robinson is defaced with racial slurs and swastikas. A football player named Riley Cooper uses a deplorable word for blacks with arrogance, and a world away in Switzerland even the famous Oprah Winfrey is denied the right to shop because of the color of her skin. Maybe most importantly, black people (and many whites as well) in this country see the “not guilty” verdict in the killing of unarmed Florida teen Trayvon Martin as an alarming sign that Mr. King is not at all wrong when he says “the journey not complete.” They rightly wonder at this moment in time if it has stalled or even stopped completely.

Other speakers included Attorney General Eric Holder, civil rights activist Al Sharpton, and Representative John Lewis of Georgia. Mr. Sharpton was especially eloquent as he charged the crowd not to forget the sacrifices of others and reminded them of Medgar Evers, saying that his I.D. should be good enough for everyone to have the right to vote. The fact that the right to vote is even still an issue in 2013 has to prove there is something wrong with the big picture in America. If the huge turnout is not enough to remind people of the significance of what happened 50 years ago at the Lincoln Memorial, it should also be a sign that there is so much yet to do today. The people in that crowd and those speakers made it very clear that there has to be a new dialogue about race in this country.

king 3 navylive.dodlive.milThe way things are now is that race is an uncomfortable topic, with many people wishing it would go away. The truth is that we have to not only open a dialogue but direct the conversation – racism is ugly; it still exists in this country, and it is time to do something more tangible about it.

It is necessary and compelling that the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was honored on the 50th anniversary of his famous speech, but now we have to go about continuing the process. The only way to do that is to not only respect his “dream” but to live it on a daily basis. 50 years ago he started the conversation and it is up to us to continue it, enhance it, and push for the day when silence will mean more than wishing the issue of race would go away, but rather that his dream has been so well realized that there is nothing left to say.

Photo credits: hughes-poets.org; crowd-nytimes; king the 3rd-AP; dr. king-navylive.dodlive.mil

Sunday, August 25, 2013

Linda Ronstadt Has Parkinson's disease and Can No Longer Sing


First appeared on Blogcritics

linda 1 rolling


When I read the article in the NY Daily News that iconic singer Linda Ronstadt has Parkinson’s disease and can no longer sing, I felt deeply saddened about one of my favorite artists losing her precious gift. On a more personal level, I felt like another page had turned in my life, and as I age it seems that loss is more overwhelming each time it is experienced.

Linda is loved by her fans for many reasons, but mostly for that amazing voice that could rise and fall across the spectrum and capture moods, feelings, and moments that are still evanescent in their effect. Listen to her sing “I Will Always Love You,” and know that she owned that song way before Whitney Houston probably ever heard it. She could rock you harder than Joan Jett with “Heat Wave” and leave you a shivering mess of tears after “Long, Long Time.” As much as any performer I have ever heard, Linda could take a song and make it truly personal, as if she were singing it just for you in a crowded arena or if you were alone in your room wearing your headphones.

There are indelible moments in our lives, ones that we never forget for whatever reason. One such moment involved Linda Ronstadt and me (yes, I am serious). I was a New York City kid just graduated from high school. I had listened to Heart Like a Wheel and her other albums to date many times before the concert at Radio City Music Hall, and when I got there and walked into that beautiful arena, my heart was pumping as if this were a first date.

In essence it was like a first date because I had never seen Linda in person before. That year she had won a Grammy for “Hasten Down the Wind,” and I had seen her perform on television a number of times. I had a picture of Linda on the wall in my room sporting roller skates and wearing shorts and a T-shirt. To say this teenager was “in love” with her was no stretch of the imagination.

I got into my seat in the balcony and my friend sat next to me, and as the concert began I was caught up in swirling emotions. One song after another registered in my mind, but almost as if I were floating on some cloud, the ethereal nature of each expressive note lifting me on angel wings. And then, just as Linda finished singing a heart wrenching version of “Blue Bayou,” as her last syllable echoed in the rafters, something welled inside me, and in the second or two of silence that seemed incongruous at that moment in a hall filled with people, I screamed out, “Linda, I love you!”

I was mortified even as the words left my lips, wishing to grab them and suck them back inside me, but they were shot across time and space and I felt like everyone heard them and was looking at me. Linda, far away on the stage, smiled and didn’t miss a beat. She stared out into the abyss, the darkness of the hall and its thousand faces, and said, “I love you too!” The crowd applauded wildly, and I started clapping too. My friend slapped my shoulder, and as she began singing the next song, tears were falling on my cheeks.

linda 2 APOn the subway ride home I was still shaking, almost as if I finished the first date and got an unexpected kiss before I left the girl at her front door. I had some kind of exchange – however public and initially humiliating it seemed – with the girl of my dreams. I went home, stood on my bed, and kissed that poster of Linda goodnight. Let’s just say that I went to bed with a smile on my face that night.

Now all these years later to hear that Linda is sick and can no longer sing is like a little death. How can the world lose such a voice and not mourn the silence? Linda tells AARP Magazine interviewer Alanna Nash that she was shocked to learn that she had the disease and noted, “No one can sing with Parkinson’s disease. No matter how hard you try.”

I am sure many other fans share my concern for the singing legend, whose memoir Simple Dreams will be released next month. Despite the inevitable feeling of loss we may feel about Linda never being able to sing again, one thing we all have is the legacy of music that she has left us. There is a body of work that I believe will stand the test of time, making Linda one of the most enduring voices in the history of rock and roll. Personally, I wish Linda all the best and will keep her in my thoughts and prayers. Of course, Linda, I must say, even now after all the many years since that teenager screamed out to you across the expanse of space between upper balcony seat and stage, “I will always love you.”

Photo credits: rolling stone, radio city-ny daily news; award-AP</

Saturday, August 24, 2013

Common Core Wars: Education Official Mimics Babe Ruth – Chances Are She Will Strike Out


First appeared on Blogcritics

tisch daily newsAs what I like to call “Common Core Wars” continues to play out across the United States, here in New York State and City things remain volatile. New York City parents have every right to be alarmed about state assessments that were linked to the Common Core State Standards, ones that were supposed to bring uniformity and stability to education across the country. The results of those tests in this first year were abysmal – only 30% of city students passed the math exam and 26% passed the ELA (reading and writing).


ruth brentjackson52Parents still want answers, as do teachers whose evaluations were tied to the success of their students on the assessments. This came courtesy of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, he of the big soda bans, stop and frisk, and red light cameras. If Bloomberg somehow managed another term in office, I am sure he would have found a way to install bathroom cams in every residence to make sure we are brushing our teeth, but I digress. Parents and teachers are still not getting answers as to how the city could poorly prepare teachers in the CCSS and then expect them to “prep” students in exams linked to those standards.

Now we get an incredulous story in The New York Daily News about one Merryl Tisch, who happens to be New York State Schools Chancellor. She has the bravado to compare herself to New York Yankees legend Babe Ruth during an educational meeting in New York City. She said that just as Babe Ruth called a home run and pointed to where he would hit it (the story was that the Babe promised a sick kid in the hospital that he would do this for him) that she was predicting a similar feat – next year “test scores are going to go up.”

Chances of Ms. Tisch being right about this remain doubtful. She sounds more like New York Jets head coach Rex Ryan promising a Super Bowl victory than the Yankees icon promising a home run (which he indeed hit), and we all know how well Rex’s promise played out.
monkeys presspartners.org

No, Ms. Tisch joins Bloomberg and New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo in the continuing debacle of testing, CCSS, teacher evaluations, and poor educational policy. I would say this triumvirate is something like the three wise monkeys, unwilling or unable to come to terms with a salient fact – their plan to link CCSS with assessments failed miserably. The public knows it; parents, students, and teachers know it. They are the only ones who still think they are on the right course for success.

There is nothing wrong with the CCSS in theory (getting students to think critically and be prepared for college is a good thing), but the problem with theory is that there are always issues when put into practice. Whether or not Bloomberg and the others thought that this would be successful or not is not important now, but the time is for them to face facts to ensure that the 2013-2014 school year will be a different experience. If things stay as they are and we get more of the same – ill-prepared teachers and test prepped to death students – chance are likely that Ms. Tisch will be striking out instead of hitting that home run.

As more states take on the CCSS and consider linking them to assessments, it would be wise to look at what has happened here in New York. The debacle here does not have to happen where you are, and it will be crucial especially in New York City for education officials to start thinking how they can right the travesty of the 2013 exams. Hopefully, with a new mayor coming in at the end of the year, at least one of the “wise” monkeys will open its eyes and change will happen. We owe it to our parents and teachers, but most of all we must make a change for the better for those who matter most – our students.

Photo credits: tisch-daily news; babe ruth-brentjackson52.com; monkeys-presspartners.org

Friday, August 23, 2013

Sid Bernstein Dies at 95 – Instrumental in Putting Mania and Beatles Together


First appeared on Blogcritics

When I heard the story that legendary music promoter Sid Bernstein had passed away at 95, I kept thinking how this man helped change the culture of the United States. It is no stretch to say this because until Bernstein actually started promoting Beatles, people on this side of the pond thought Beatles were just bugs.

All that changed when Bernstein began his work for the Beatles, and what would follow is the now famous series of appearances in February 1964 that changed the course of history. Note it was not just music history that changed but American history itself – as the British Invasion that was coming would be more impactful and lasting than anything King George and his minions could have imagined before they were kicked across the pond for good by Washington and company.



Bernstein (who also promoted Frank Sinatra, Jimi Hendrix, and the Rolling Stones) had an ear for music. He had a hunch about these lads from Liverpool, and he arranged backers for the Fab Four and pushed to have their records played on the radio. All of this culminated in the arrival in New York City of the Beatles in February 1964. Bernstein engineered the mania that would ensue in the years to come. Though Bernstein got them started, it was their personalities and talent that would make them superstars and foment Beatlemania – thus opening the door for so many more British acts to follow.

I always think of Bernstein and Beatles manager Brian Epstein as the kind of guys who dared to think differently. Epstein took the first chance to think beyond the walls of his Liverpool music store and dream of how big this band could be. Epstein became their manager, got them known outside of Liverpool, and propelled them to fame in the U.K. It was Bernstein who then took up Epstein’s vision and saw what the Beatles could be in America, and before long Beatles would conquer not just the United States but the world.


A year after the Beatles big appearances on The Ed Sullivan Show and at Carnegie Hall, they would return in full vigor for their legendary performances at Shea Stadium. As the tickets and posters clearly reminded everyone “Sid Bernstein Presents,” this sealed the legacy of Bernstein and his work with the Beatles. After Shea Stadium (another first for a band to sell out a major venue such as this) there was no stopping the Beatles juggernaut.

Besides the legendary appearances and the fame that came with them, the Beatles’ legacy was inextricably linked with the city where it all started in America, and lifetime New Yorker Bernstein made that happen. As angels take him off to rest, I suppose John Lennon and George Harrison will be there to welcome him, and no doubt he and Brain Epstein will come together and recall that they were responsible for making it possible that four lads from Liverpool would shake the world.

Rest in peace, Sid Bernstein.

Photo credits: Bernstein-wireimage; Beatles-AP; poster-maccafan.net

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Al Jazeera America Debuts – Why News Network Deserves A Chance


Appeared first on Blogcritics.

al jazeera AOL Are you sick of “news” the way it is being presented today on American television – both broadcast and cable TV? What if there was an alternative, one that would be more hard news and less smoke and mirrors? The new Al Jazeera America debuts today, and it will be available in approximately 48 million households (mine is not one of them). Will Americans give the channel a chance? They should if they have open minds and care anything about freedom of speech.

muggs people



When some Americans think of Al Jazeera, the first thing that they associate with it is the 9/11 attacks, especially with the idea that terrorists seemed to have access to the network at that time. Part of the problem then lies in a perception that AJAM is anti-American, but if you check out the web link above, you can see that is far from the truth. One look at the website offers a glimpse of a “hard” news site, one that provides a great deal of American news (it is, after all, Al Jazeera America), but it also has links for worldwide news. If you are more interested in local stuff, perhaps NY1 or ABC’s Channel 7 here in New York are more your speed, but anyone who has watched these channels long enough can tell that it is mostly “soft” news – meaning local stories with very little impact.

I for one am pretty tired of American news channels. I am sure if the late great Edward R. Murrow came down today and saw what was happening on network and cable news, he wouldn’t believe how far the fine level of reporting he established had fallen. I doubt he would be able to find enough cigarettes to get him through an hour of Hannity or Piers Morgan for that matter, and I am sure Erin Burnett, Greta Van Sustern, Bill O’Reilly, and the rest would leave him hoping for the fast return of J. Fred Muggs of Today Show fame.

No, television news has become a victim to the same thing that every other kind of programming has – it is more concerned with “entertainment” than being informative. We get the ubiquitously lovely female anchor and the handsome male, paired together with as much chemistry as a sock puppet and Carlos Danger. They can smile megawatt smiles, engage in lighthearted banter (it seems “banter” is key to establishing some kind of relationship with one another and the viewers), and stare at the teleprompter as if they have Tyrannosaurus Rex-sized brains in their pretty little heads. Entertainment factor = 100%; substance = 0%.

Even CNN’s Anderson Cooper, who originally seemed to be cut from the Walter Cronkite or Murrow mold, disappoints again and again, especially in his New Year’s Eve gig with Kathy Griffin. If ever there were someone who should not be on a news channel, it is Ms. Griffin (with antics that are not even appropriate for the midnight hour). Sure, she is funny; everyone tunes in to see her go after Mr. Cooper’s “junk,” but there is nothing newsworthy about it. Why not put something like this on an entertainment show? The answer is because news is no longer about news but about getting the biggest audience, which means more entertaining and less informing.

US-MEDIA-AL JAZEERA AMERICA-NEW YORKSo along comes upstart Al Jazeera, and everyone will have a reason not to like it – even before they have watched one minute of programming. My feeling is that you need to watch something in order to critique it. I feel as if those cable providers who have not given AJAM a chance (Time Warmer and Cablevision here in New York) are doing us all a disservice. Why wouldn’t they allow this station to be on the air? One could argue it is the same reason why BBC America is so hard to find as well – perhaps they are afraid of the competition.

In a recent article in The Washington Post AJAM “acting chief executive, Ehab Al Shihabi, said in a conference call last week that the new station will have ‘less opinion, less yelling and fewer celebrity sightings’ than other channels.” I seriously doubt that Ms. Griffin will be darkening the station’s West 34th Street doorway here in New York City, and I think you will have to wait a long time for any Kardashian, Bynes, or Lohan pieces.

I think it is about time that news stations and programs got back to being about “hard” news. We also should find it necessary and compelling to see what is happening in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. People watching the news here probably have no clue about what is happening in the Sudan, Yemen, or Malaysia. A channel that will provide stories about America but also these other places is very much needed in our country right now.

If we can take Mr. Shihabi at his word, we need less opinion in our news. O’Reilly, Hannity, Morgan, and company give too much of their take on the news instead of just presenting it to us. I would like that more removed approach, which I think most Americans have not come to expect or demand because they have gone so many years without a pure news product in this country. There is a place for editorials and opinions, but that should be a separate and distinct section of the news. Right now the way things are, entire programs are opinion pieces – and very biased ones at that. I have come to the point where I change the channels because I cannot stand seeing “news” being reduced to this chattering amongst talking airheads.

So I am willing to give Al Jazeera America a chance, but I cannot get it at this time. I have already gone on their website and requested service from my cable company (AJAM provides a handy link for you to type in your zip code to see if you can access it in your area). While I cannot watch the channel as of now, I am going to hit their website at least once a day. If AJAM is true to what it proposes to do, then it will be a refreshing alternative to CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and just about every local news station. Complain to your cable company, and while you are at it, ask for BBC America as well. Viewers of America unite; we have nothing to lose but the cable and network news chains that have been strangling us for years.

Photo credits: AJAM newspaper ad-aol.com; j. fred muggs- people.nwvn.com; AJAM offices-getty images

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

TV Review: Breaking Bad – Dead and “Buried”


First appeared on Blogcritics

bad 2 There has been so much buzz about this final season of AMC's Breaking Bad (and I believe this to be season 6 even though it is being called season 5 – extended version). So whether you believe this is season 5 episode 10, or as I do – season 6 episode 2 – it really does not matter; the latest episode “Buried” further drives home the power of the story, gives us levels of acting unparalleled on television, and reminds us all that the end is nigh.

bad 4

If you enjoyed last week’s episode – especially the long awaited confrontation between Walt (Bryan Cranston) and his brother-in-law and DEA agent Hank (increasingly superb Dean Norris) – it was nothing compared to two face-offs in this episode: one between Hank and Skyler (Anna Gunn) and another between Skyler and her sister Marie (Betsy Brandt). If these two scenes do not lock in an Emmy win for Gunn, it will be a gross injustice.

After Walt and Hank’s garage showdown (in which Hank clocked Walt so viciously that you realized it was not just for him but for every viewer too), we know that Walt is going to attempt damage control and Hank is zooming in for the kill. Hank accomplishes this – or at least attempts to do so – in a meeting with Skyler at a diner. In this scene Gunn’s acting showed all sorts of ranges, and her facial expressions indicated the simmering emotions that she (and the viewer) has – her loyalty to Walt, her fear for her children, and her own complicity all come into play here. So now that the crystal meth has hit the fan, we question what exactly will Skyler do?

bad 1As Hank offers Skyler and the kids “protection,” we see Skyler get her maternal back up. She realizes the future could very well mean (depending on how this all plays out) that Marie and Hank could wind up with her kids when she and Walt go to prison. Skyler also digs deep for her strength, feeling protective of not just the kids but of Walt – she loves him still even after all that he has done.

So, as Hank desperately tries to record their conversation, Skyler shivers and so do we. We realize that Hank has few options left as well. Once he goes to his superiors, it is over for him too. He tells Marie as much. His career is finished once the higher ups realize that he has had the drug kingpin under his nose all this time in his own family. Hank is doing his own form of damage control, hoping to get the goods from Skyler and then throw the book at Walt (yes, I think I’m channeling Dragnet here). Skyler is having none of it.

When Hank reveals that Walt’s cancer has returned, we see another wave of emotion pass over Skyler’s face. If acting coaches and teachers are wise, they will take this scene and show it to their students because it is truly that incredible. At this point Skyler has had enough. She asks if she needs a lawyer. Hank hadn’t expected this, but she is hardened now. Over these past five seasons she has gone through so much, but she has also learned from Walt, perhaps too well. She wants to escape the moment and screams, “Am I under arrest?” Soon she is beating a path out of the diner and Hank has lost this round. What does he do next?

The second confrontation with Marie is just as powerful. Here Hank waits outside as Marie and Skyler sit on the end of the bed, literally on the edge of their seats. These two sisters share great love, but you can see the betrayal Marie feels and the fear and emotion that Skyler is dealing with. When Skyler manages to say she is sorry (referencing when Hank had been shot), Marie slaps her across the face and we can feel the sting. Marie then attempts to take baby Holly out of the house. Skyler’s instincts are right – they are going to try to take the kids! Hank eventually intervenes and tells Marie to give the baby back, but Skyler knows where this is all heading and so do we.

Meanwhile, Walt is continuing his damage control. He goes to lawyer Saul (Bob Odenkirk), who continues to be like the grave diggers in Hamlet, providing much needed humor in otherwise grim proceedings. He suggests that Walt could send Hank “to Belize,” a reference to when Walt killed Mike (Jonathan Banks), but to his credit Walt rejects this idea because Hank is "family" (once again we see into the convulted mind of Walter White and his warped allegiance to family). When Walt quips that he will send Saul to Belize, we realize that this is about as much humor as we need or can expected in such a grim episode as “Buried,” and then Saul proceeds to get his goons to bring out Walt’s large stash of cash from storage.

Walt drives off in a van containing garbage cans filled with money. It is fitting that Walt is protecting – above all things – what matters most in this equation. Why did Walter White go from a mild-mannered chemistry teacher to super bad drug kingpin? It was all about the money. In what is like a formula that Walt once wrote on the blackboard in the classroom, you can plug in family and legacy but it all comes down to equaling money. All that cash is what Walt worked for, and the only way he succeeds (even after his death) is if that money goes to the kids and Skyler.

Walt goes out into the desert and toils for hours, digging what is ostensibly an enormous grave for the cash. The metaphorical implications of “Buried” are obvious – a walking dead man is burying what he gave his life up for. It is the worst case scenario but Walt is going to protect what he worked so hard to accumulate, almost as an ultimate form of revenge against the cancer in his body, Hank, and any of his enemies. Of course, you know the old saying about wanting revenge – you might as well dig two graves. Walt just doesn’t realize it yet.

When he returns home exhausted and collapses on the bathroom floor, Sklyer runs to him. His physical condition is so depleted, and now she knows the truth about the cancer. It almost seems like he is dying right there, and talk about giving up is exchanged, but Skyler once again stiffens her back and tells him, “You can’t give yourself up without giving up the money.” Of course, that is a deal breaker for Walt, and now it seems for Skyler as well as she advises, “Maybe our best move is to stay quiet.” The “our” confirms what we have suspected all along – Skyler is on Team Walt.

Of course, Walt’s "team" has not always had the best players. When we see Jesse (Aaron Paul) in custody, loyal viewers of the show probably thought why did it take so long? Jesse, Walt’s former student and erratic partner in the meth business, has always been the wild card. We have seen him breaking down as Walt’s been breaking bad, and now Jesse could prove to be Walt’s Achilles’ heel. Hank is almost salivating as he sees Jesse in the holding cell, and as he prepares to enter the room the scene and episode ends. We can only hope next week’s show (“Confessions”) will feature that moment when Jesse cracks, although Hank could once again come up with nothing. My bet is that Jesse has nowhere to turn and nothing left – he will talk more than Whoopi Goldberg on The View.

The end of Breaking Bad is slowly breaking my heart, just as the endings of other shows like 24 and Lost have, but here I think show Creator and Executive Producer Vince Gilligan is truly respecting the fans. He is giving us, step by step, the things we have been waiting for – the confrontation between Walt and Hank, one between Skyler and Hank, Skyler and Marie, and so on. The trajectory of the rising tension and action is distinct and respectful of the fans’ loyalty, and you have to give Gilligan enormous credit for that.

We do not know what will happen between Jesse and Hank, but that’s part of the fun. Will Jesse finally and completely breakdown? Or will he suddenly find some kind of spine and protect himself and Walt? “Buried” certainly answers some questions but also creates many more in the process, and that has been the Breaking Bad formula all along, which proves that chemistry can be more entertaining than we ever realized in high school.

Photo credits: AMC

Monday, August 19, 2013

Common Core Wars – A 1912 Exam Reminds Us How Far We Have Fallen


First appeared on Blogcritics

test 2 web.scott.k12.va.us These days anyone with children or familiar with educational matters has heard of the Common Core State Standards. These are standards adopted by 45 states and the District of Columbia, and they have been met with remarkable resistance from parents, teachers, and many wise voices (including Diane Ravitch) who have questioned the CCSS and the drive to connect them with standardized tests and teacher evaluations. A recent story in The Huffington Post featured a test from 1912 given to eighth graders in Bullitt County Schools in Kentucky. In this rural area, the “final” exam was serious business. According to the article, only students who did very well would get “scholarships” and be able to go on to high school; the others most likely went back to their farms and started working there.

test huff postProponents of the CCSS always talk about “rigor” and “relevance” when mentioning them, but as witnessed recently in New York State and City, students taking standardized tests linked to the CCSS had tremendous difficulties. Since these tests were aligned to the standards without much thought on the part of the state and city, parents, teachers, students, and advocates are all screaming for some kind of accountability. Why were these tests thrust on students and made to count this year? Why were teachers so poorly trained in the CCSS and asked to then “prep” students for tests aligned to them? How could the state and city in good conscience use these scores in teachers’ evaluations and decide whether or not they kept their jobs or were let go based on student performance, which everyone predicted would be substantially worse than in previous years?

I bring all this up because the 1912 test illustrates how far we have fallen. I have a doctorate in English and have been a teacher and school administrator, but the test challenged me. I sat down to take it in part just for fun but also to understand the level of “rigor” that was expected of 13 and 14 year old students in 1912. The test is indeed difficult and time consuming, with each section counting as a sub-test worth 100 points. Spelling, Reading, and Writing sections were dictated by the teacher (today’s standards for “listening” do not even come close to the difficulty found in this 1912 exam). We can only imagine what was expected here (since the dictation is not included), but judging from the listed spelling words the expectations must have been quite arduous.

The other sections are Arithmetic, Grammar, Physiology, Civil Government, and History. Any of these sections would be daunting as a stand alone test, but combined seem almost like a cruel joke; however, this was a reality and there is no indication of how much time students were given for each section. Extensive writing is required in most of the “content” sections, and the Arithmetic questions are not simply answered and require students to write as well as compute (something advocated by the CCSS).

I have to tell you that I struggled with some of the questions, (in part because of the lack of my own preparation), but also because I did not know how to answer some questions in the Arithmetic section. For example, I was unsure of a question 2 in Geography (Name and give the boundaries of the five zones), but I imagine that those Bullitt County eighth graders were well prepared in this and more. Question 1 in Physiology (How does the liver compare in size to other organs in the body? Where is it located? What does it secrete?) not only has multiple parts, requires previous knowledge, but also involves writing an extended response. Rigor and relevance indeed!

grad ndla.orgConsider question 10 in Civil Government (Describe the manner in which the president and vice president of the United States is elected). Sadly, there are many students today who do not even know the name of the Vice President, let alone how he gets into office. This is another extended response and one that will take time and thought to answer. A related question asks students to give the number of electoral votes for each state. All of these questions are complex and their nature qualifies the kind of education students were receiving in those days. This was not rote learning by any means, as is usually depicted in films and books about education in days past. Students were obviously taught to think deeply, to know their grammar, and to be able to write well and extensively.

I too have thought negatively about the “old fashioned” school house and school master in terms of recitation and repetition. I pictured Mr. Gradgrind from Charles Dickens’s novel Hard Times. His type of education was constantly and seemingly mindless drilling. Gradgrind cared little about acquired knowledge and understanding, assuming that memorized facts and figures indicated scholastic accomplishment.

Today we know this is not true, but we also know that people are reacting negatively to the “rigor” of the CCSS because they are difficult beyond what students have been learning in recent years, and it is indisputable that we dropped the ball so often that attempts to bring us back up to speed are going to be met with derision. The true problem is not that CCSS require higher expectations for students, but rather the way they were forced upon parents, students, and teachers without reasonable notice or preparation.

Still, a short glance at this 1912 test indicates not only how far we have fallen but how much we have yet to accomplish in education in 2013. Having taught both high school and college English classes, I can tell you that the Grammar section would be not only difficult but almost impossible for today’s students to pass. I have met only a few college freshmen over the years who know the parts of speech, and almost all of them have trouble finding a noun or verb in a sentence. Question 7 in that section asks students to “diagram” a sentence, but this is not even taught (sadly) anymore. I recall being taught this, and once you knew how to diagram a sentence, you understood parts of speech for the rest of your life.

As we consider the state of education today, we have too many cooks and not enough broth to go around. Students are being test prepped to death in order to meet standards on these exams, and in my opinion this is little better than Gradgrind’s drive for students to remember facts and figures. Most educators know that test prep has nothing to do with true teaching, and teaching to the test is as much of a disaster these days as it was in Gradgrind’s time.

A test like this one from 1912 elucidates the obvious – most high school and college graduates could not pass it, never mind our current eighth graders. I challenge you to take the test (with no checking the answers found in the link provided in the article noted above). See how well you do and start timing yourself. You will be amazed by what those eighth grade students knew, and you will realize what you missed in your own education; more importantly you will understand how far we have to go if we want to rise above the petty differences about CCSS and truly educate our children.

Photo credits: test-huffington post; gradgrind – ndla.org; student – web.scott.k12.va.us

Sunday, August 18, 2013

Major League Baseball to Implement Instant Replay Challenge – Why It’s Not Good for the Game


First appeared on Blogcritics.

ump wikipedia.orgIn a breaking story regarding Major League Baseball, Commissioner Bud Selig announced that starting in 2014 instant replay challenges will be integral part of games. Managers will be allowed to challenge one umpire's call (except balls and strikes) during the first six innings. Managers will have two challenges at their disposal for the rest of the game (seventh through ninth inning or extra innings). Selig called this “a historic day” which was echoed by Atlanta Braves president John Schuerholz, who said it was “an historic moment.” Scheurholz was head of the committee that came up with this idea, and while it is indeed history making, by all means this does not mean it is something good for the game. In fact, this could shake the very foundations of the game and lead to even greater changes in the future. So all of you MLB fans who longed for this moment, be careful what you wished for.

ump 2 lukewarmsports.blogspotSelig, Schuerholz, Joe Torre (MLB vice president), and “advisor” Tony LaRussa (talk about a Gang of Four) presented this proposal to the 30 owners of baseball franchises at their meeting near “historic” Cooperstown. It seems incongruous that this occurred so close to the hallowed halls of the sacred place where fans come to honor the essence of the game and all those who played it with distinction. 75% of the owners will have to vote for this proposal for it too pass, but Selig indicated that the reaction was very positive. Could we expect anything less from the ruling Dukes and Duchesses of MLB who have always been looking for an edge for their teams?

Let us make something clear – being a MLB umpire is a thankless, difficult, and overwhelming job. Besides larger than life guys like the late Ron Luciano or Harry Wendelstedt, they are basically faceless fellows dressed like undertakers on their day off. They get less than necessary support from MLB after training in “umpire college,” and then they are scapegoats for everything wrong under the sun and stars that happens on the field. People forget that they are human and expect them to be robotic – perfect, flawless, yet having the “wisdom” to make the call in their favor. Who the heck would ever want to be an MLB umpire?

As a Mets fan, I have seen probably at least a thousand calls that went against my team over the years – sometimes in very detrimental ways. These incidents include playoff games and the World Series. Whether or not the call was fair (usually determined by instant replay) we have to understand that the umpire is standing closer to the play than we (or the TV camera) are. It is a split-second decision. Old sayings like “the tie goes to the runner” or “it’s a game of inches” always come to mind here, so whenever a play goes against our team we blame the man in black and gray.

What I fear is that we are gravitating away from the way the game of baseball has been played since the beginning. If three challenges are allowed now, doesn’t it seem likely that will be deemed insufficient down the road? Will we reach five challenges one day? Perhaps it will become a game where every play is challenged, or we will get to the place I think no one wants – where games are monitored electronically and every call is done remotely by some faceless Big Brother who deems “fair or foul,” “ball or strike,” and “safe or out.”

If you think I am exaggerating, the idea of “challenges” in baseball a decade ago would have been unthinkable, and look where we are now. Right now games are getting longer and longer. If I take my kids to Citi Field for an evening game, there is a good chance I am going to be getting them home after midnight. How will challenges impact the pace of games already as quick as a tortoise? Also, how will the concept of challenges affect the umpires themselves? Already these fellows are on edge all of the time, but now with the thought of the ominous presence of Big Brother Selig and his minions hovering over the field, what will that do to each and every call? More importantly, how will this affect the integrity of the game we know and love?

These questions are not easily answered, and I think more thought and discussion should be allowed before this is pushed forward. It was noted that the umpiring crew on the field will not make the decision based on the replay, rather it will be an umpiring crew and MLB official in the New York offices who will view the replay and make the call. Talk about Big Brother! This is taking the game out of the umpire’s hands and giving it to faceless bureaucrats to make decisions from far away. How can a crowd in Anaheim “boo” anyone they cannot see?

bud APWhat has always made baseball America’s game is the human factor. Some humans become heroes because their greatness elevates them, and we honor their ability to do things we cannot do. Sometimes humans fail, and every player who has – from Shoeless Joe Jackson to Alex Rodriguez – has felt the wrath of those fans he has disappointed. Umpires are part of the complexity of the game and its human element. Yes, they miss calls, but they also get many of them right. Taking them slowly out of the game (and I fear eventually eliminating their on-field presence totally someday) will change the essence of the game in a significant and very nefarious way.

Commissioner Selig has wanted to get back to the real game – witness his war on steroid abusers. The idea has been, at least I have understood it to be, to get back to the true nature of the game. I always think of Robert Redford’s great baseball movie The Natural because the title says it all – his character Roy Hobbs was by human nature a “natural” superstar. He didn’t need to take pills or get shots in his buttocks to hit home runs. That is the game the way it is supposed to be played, and I felt Selig wanted to get back to that.

Every baseball fan wants the game to be played the right way, and we all want to know that the only thing shooting through the veins of our heroes besides blood is adrenaline – manifested from the love of the game and a desire to do the best job between the lines. Unfortunately, the game has changed over the years. The ball is livelier, the gloves and bats are better, the athletes more conditioned, and everything is under the scrutiny of the evil eye of the camera. We have pitch counts, radar guns, and the designated hitter. We have suffered through artificial turf, retractable domes, and a game that has become mostly played at night. Yes, the game has changed in these ways, but there has been a desire for more traditional approaches from fans and players alike.

These challenges will take away from the game, just as the DH has. If you watch National League games, you get more baseball purity. A manager makes different decisions with a pitcher batting; pitchers pitch differently because they are batting, and strategy is a more integral part of the game. How will challenges change managerial strategy? How will fans react if a manager does not use his challenges at times they believe that he should? How about a manager using up his challenges and then, at a pivotal moment, be left like a gunfighter in the middle of the street without any bullets, while the other manager draws and wins the fight?

I know many fans will like this proposal of expanded instant replay, thinking it will be a way to avoid all the past wrongs and injustices. Players will probably love it too (except those who lose base hits, homeruns, and no-hitters because of it). The problem is that this is like opening a hatch on a submarine; once it’s open, chances are the water will keep on coming in. I fear the change of the game will continue until it looks nothing like the game we know and love, and at that disgraceful moment the game will be ruined forevermore.

Photo credits: selig – AP, umpire robot – lukewarmssports.blogspot.com; umpire – Wikipedia.org

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Why All College Students Should Be English Majors


First appeared on Blogcritics.

shake mit.eduThe new school year looms ominously – and believe me when the calendar turned to August my children got upset, and now they are shivering their timbers every time they see a “back to school” advertisement on TV or in the stores. No matter how much they worry, for them the course of study is elementary, my dear Watsons; they are young enough to have a scholastic year already planned out for them. However, for those students who are embarking on their college careers – or even those who have not yet declared a major, I would suggest rethinking the philosophy, sociology, business, or even education major in favor of becoming an English major. There, I said it, whew!

Okay, I may seem to have a vested interest here with my doctorate in English and years spent as a teacher of writing and reading (at least I have two of the three r’s well covered). The truth is though that I am not advocating that people dive in and get their graduate degrees in English, but I fervently believe that every undergraduate student should be required to be an English major. The reason why is fairly simple and salient – now, more than ever before, writing and writing well is essential in all subject areas, in future careers, and in life in general. Being able to communicate in writing – and to do it very well – is clearly a way to delineate those who will make the greatest strives in this century. And despite texts, tweets, and emails with horrid grammar and spelling, I know that everyone has an inner editor just waiting to emerge from the cocoon. The best way I know for students to blossom as prolific writing butterflies is for them to be English majors.

Now, this is not to say that there are not many other subject areas worthy of major status. I recognize this, and that is why I believe all colleges and universities should mandate that every student declare a dual major – English and something else of their choice. Being English majors will make these students better majors in any and every other subject area. Besides the most essential writing factor that comes along with being an English major, there are many other benefits for the student. English majors will not only get the grammar, punctuation, and spelling that they probably did not get in high school, but the added bonus here is that they are forced to become true readers – and not (and here is the greatest dividend) of just magazines, online minutiae, and text messages: they will find it necessary and compelling to read great works of literature, to be able to respond critically to these readings, and write research papers with essential works cited and not randomly cut and pasted fodder from the Internet.

In short being an English major as an undergraduate prepares you for the real world because one day you will have to be able to generate ideas of your own in response to concepts and assignments from bosses and clients. Of course, back in high school students always wanted to know why they would need to know anything about Hamlet or Jane Eyre or Leaves of Grass in “real life,” but in college it is the instructor’s great pleasure to elucidate a simple and undeniable fact – these works are life itself. Students will recognize all the jealousies, the conflicts, and the rage of today in times past; they will also discover that literature opens a door or window to an awareness they may have never realized they had of self.

fitz neabigread.orgOf course, many of a certain age can remember Woody Allen’s line in Annie Hall about never taking a course with Beowulf on the reading list, but I would contend that the Woodster probably had the wrong teacher who perhaps used the wrong translation of that fine old work. Many other adults will recall English classes with grunts and groans, but that is mostly because of a similar problem. With the right teachers who love the material and teach it with great enthusiasm, students will become enthralled by even more difficult works such as Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury or James Joyce’s Ulysses.

As a student I never really understood the world – the real world – until I got sucked into fictional worlds where problems were faced, conflicts were heightened, and situations were resolved. Most importantly, human nature was explored in all its deep and wonderful complexity. I fervently believe you can get more about psychology from reading the stories of Edgar Allan Poe than you could from any boring three hundred pound textbook. You can certainly learn and understand more about the American Civil War whilst reading Stephen Crane’s Red Badge of Courage, and F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby can teach more deeply about the Roaring 20s than a student would get in a history book.

The most crucial dimension that literature has over textbooks is the human connection. Life is not just an examination of facts and figures but rather an exploration of the soul. We learn from literature that life is worth living through various lenses, that aspects of human nature, even the most repugnant, require deep thought and analysis. It is simply not enough to read a story once and be done with it, and English majors will learn that it is only upon multiple readings that the literary onion can be sufficiently peeled to get to the things that matter.

Students have always been amazed when I start talking about a book (like Albert Camus’s The Stranger) and reveal that I have probably read it fifty or more times. I explain that I always read a book again before I start to talk about it in a course, and with every new reading I find something else. I usually compare this to a movie (some students have seen their favorite one hundreds of times) and how, upon multiple viewings, that you will see something that you missed. I note that this is when we learn to truly appreciate the craft of the writer or director or actor, realizing the depth of effort associated with creating something.

Because of this exploration of depths and appreciation of craft, English majors can find many open doors when they are done with college. Whether the students wish to go into law, medicine, business, or teaching, they are already armed with what matters most: an understanding about life, a unique way to perceive and interpret human behavior, and an ability to write and read well. If nothing else, the communication factor will be the greatest asset for English majors. These days communication is the fiber that connects the fabric of the world, and they will be able to compete in any arena and interact with others with confidence and acuity.

pablopiccaso.orgWe have to remember that “art” (this includes painting, music, performance, and literature) is not just the stuff that dreams are made from, but is the essence of life. Appreciation of art elevates the soul, brings us to heights never dreamt of if our feet had never left the ground but because of the enjoyment provided by the work. By understanding art and appreciating it, students open themselves to the most important aspects of living a full and meaningful life.

The great painter Pablo Picasso once said, “Art is the lie that tells the truth.” I have always used this line with my students as an opening day writing response. Amazingly, over the years many students have been more on target than you would imagine. Many understood that the “lie” is the fiction and the “truth” is the awareness gained. Students have written beautiful responses even about “art” in their own lives, how being either a ballerina or a cellist helped them reach understandings they could never have accomplished without the “art” factor.

So, as your college students start talking about what “major” to pursue this fall, why not nudge them to consider English. Yes, there are a lot of books to read and papers to write, but they should know that nothing worthwhile is easy. One day when they have to fill out a job application or do a project for their bosses, they will look back and thank their English professors for the “lie” that unexpectedly will lead them to the greatest of all truths – being able to read deeply and write well will be the gift that keeps on giving for the rest of their lives.

Photo credits: Shakespeare-mit.edu; Fitzgerald-neabigread.org; Picasso-pablopiccaso.org

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

AMC’s New Series Low Winter Sun – Something Old, Something New?


First appeared on Blogcritics

low 1AMC’s new police drama Low Winter Sun is trying very hard to be the next Breaking Bad meets NYPD Blue, but if you don’t blink twice you could think that you are watching The Shield. That show’s protagonist Vic Mackey, memorably portrayed by Michael Chiklis, was a bald cop who killed another cop in the first episode of that series, setting up an out of control spiral of events that would drive the rest of the story. Here we have Detective Frank Agnew, a bald cop played by Mark Strong, who kills a cop in the first episode in the series. So you can’t help to start thinking, “Here we go again.”

low 2Instead of sunny LA (where The Shield took place), we have the gritty and grimy streets of Detroit, that seem as wasted and barren as they did in the Robocop films. We don’t have any super cop coming to the rescue here, and as Agnew walks into the stationhouse, you are left to wonder how many other cops may be as corrupt, or more so, than he.

Agnew’s problems begin with fellow cop Joe Geddes (Lennie James) who claims that his partner Brendan McCann has murdered Frank’s girlfriend (cutting off her head, hands, and feet). Frank and Joe find Brendan drunk in a restaurant, and faster than you can say, “Take the cannolis,” Frank and Joe are drowning Brendan in the sink. Later they handcuff the body to the steering wheel and plunge the dead cop’s car into the river. By now you are probably thinking this all sounds good, but unlike The Shield, the story starts to get too muddled almost immediately after this.

low 3I know this is a first episode, but so many people are introduced, some of them with little or no substance or background, and then we get Internal Affairs, bad guys, and all Frank’s internal conflicts. Yes, there is a lot going on here, but you don’t just make a delicious stew by throwing a whole bunch of things into a pot and hope for the best. That seems like what is happening here.

It all comes back to the main characters – Frank and Joe. There is an edge in their relationship, something to explore for certain, but we aren’t sure if Joe is lying about everything (though we know he is lying about some things). Strong’s performance is solid, as is James’s , and perhaps in times the other actors will get enough scene time to develop fully.

Right now Low Winter Sun is a mixed bag, and I’m not sure whether it is trying too hard or not enough. If ever a series was crafted to be like another series, this one has, but it seems more like a poor cousin of The Shield. That show caught me in the first episode (where the killing of the cop was necessary for bad cop Mackey to remain on the force) and it never let go, impelling me to watch every episode. The killing of McCann doesn't carry the same weight here (it's more that he was just a bad cop who got killed). I do not feel like I have to come back next week, or the week after that, and that may be the undoing of Low Winter Sun.

Maybe it didn’t help matters that Low Winter Sun came on right after a powerful episode of Breaking Bad, but just as it will not be in the shadow of that amazing show forever, it will also not have that lead in too much longer. Last night Low Winter Sun was like the show on right after the Super Bowl, and sadly it didn’t kick the field goal.

Maybe I’ll give Low Winter Sun a chance next week, but probably only to hang around to get to Talking Bad, which won’t be around too much longer either. I’m not sure, but I think the future for this series is almost as bleak as the Detroit waterfront it depicts, unless something big changes and that means in next week’s episode.

Photo credits: AMC