Saturday, October 04, 2003
A BIGGER BEN
I often wonder if Ole Ben Franklin actually said all the fine things he is credit with having said, or “blamed for” if his often odd way of seeing ordinary things as some uncommon way irks you at times.
He could always blame any troublesome quips on “Poor Richard”, of course. I wonder, too, how his friends viewed him, as a wise cracking busybody or perhaps as a old curmudgeon who was forever examining everything they considered normal and seeing abnormalities therein. Worse yet, finding good in what they were throwing away as useless, and forever talking about whatever it was we were doing wrong.
We need to fashion a bigger slot for Ben - or someone like him - in our lives today. We need to see, hear and revere the Bigger Ben.
For instance, right now when we are going in and out of series of small wars with enemies most of us never heard of before they became our nemesis. Ben once said: “'There is no small enemy.” We have had to learn that in recent decades as we have seen petty, local officials and their military minions take over various parts of the world. The conflicts seem “small” but loom large as they go along. Think about such names as Gadafi, Noriego, Taylor, and a half-dozen other around the world.
Did we, or do we, tend to misjudge our intent from time to time?
Ben Franklin also advised us to : “Beware of a young doctor or an old barber.” We have to make choice in our selection of people to represent us our republic form of democracy, and we do have to choose, quite often, from new doctors who have never even heard of specific troubles we might experience, and older trimmers and cutters who are “sot in their ways” and have not kept up with the latest modes. What guides us in making such selections?
Through the centuries mankind has turned to the mysterious world of maxims, adages. Proverbs, statements and sayings by men and women who have walked this path; lived this life before.
Ben Franklin was such a mentor and, closer to our own time, Will Rogers may be said to have filled that need, and their have been others, as well. True enough,much of what they said may seem far-fetched; even contrived, but it serves to edge me around to asking who might be said to be fulfilling the Ben Franklin-Will Roger role in our culture today?
Andy Rooney, maybe? Anyone else?
We need such a guide and critic.
A.L.M. October 3, 2003 [c463wds]
Friday, October 03, 2003
THEN
In the Fall of the year 1935 – that was sixty-eight years ago, mind you – O. O. McIntyre, in his daily column “New York Day By Day”,was concerned about an inequity which, oddly enough, remains with us today in various forms.
Otis Odd (How was that for a name?) noted that it had come to his attention that a “special assistant in charge of publicity”, scornfully referred to as “a press agent”, was listed on the payroll records of the United States Attorney General's staff at a salary of ten thousand dollars per year.
In 1935 ten thousand was a monstrous mound of American moolah. The thing that disturbed MacIntye was that the Chief of the Department of Justice – a forceful young man by the name of J. Edgar Hoover “who has so expertly rounded-up the crooks”- the “press agent's” boss - was getting $9,000 per year.
The columnist thought the two figures ought to be reversed and asked me, and his other readers :”What's wrong with this picture?”
By and large, I think most of us agreed with him, and those of us who are still around can easily find such inequities in the pay scale tabulations of today. I often felt, when working in the industrial side of our economy for a decade or more, the job listed as “Secretary” was so poorly compensated in relation to the amount paid to the C.E.O. for whom she worked. I never felt that promoting her “Executive Secretary” was eve anywhere near enough. I found, that in many cases, it was the Secretary who, actually, ran the place.
Young people, seeking jobs today use such terms as “25K and 30K” as starting points. Wouldn't newspaper writers such as O. O. MacIntyre have a typing tizzie with today's statistics?
He saw other less disturbing things as well, however, and, overall, presented a happy view of his favorite New York City. That Fall in 1935, he mentioned as being the year of the rotisserie with undulating, steadily spinning racks of golden chicken roasting in restaurant windows. From Sixth Avenue such rotisseries were thriving. He speaks of chorus girls, working in the area, sending out for a snack. They got a baked chicken, fried potatoes and large slabs of fresh bread for a total price of 80-cents. Mac also had a favorite spot along 6th Avenue called “Castle Lake”. They served Oysters on the Half-Shell in beds of hot sand.
Then was a good time, wasn't it?
And Today – come Tomorrow – will be Then, as well.
A.L.M. October 2, 2003 [c476wds]
Thursday, October 02, 2003
CONTINUED STORY
I happen to live in a section of the nation where the Civil War is much more real than elsewhere. Most families assume their ancestors fought on the side of the Confedneracy, but historical records, at times, indicate that such was not the case. Some familes were divided.
I read a book a few years ago which keeps coming to mind, even though it dealt with more times and World War II. It was written by Jack Higgins and it took a twist of the old theme of twin brothers fighting on opposing sides of a war. One wonders what parallels one might find along such lines in own Civil War era.
Such things did happen. I was involved in a search of old records in one actual case where we found we were going to have to inform the family that one of their "solider sons" wore a blue unform rather than a gray one.
One would think just about every twist concerning the switching of twins had been worked by those who compound fiction stories, but this one was a new and different one ...at least for me. I enjoyed the exploits of twin brothers who were war time aces - the one for the RAF and the U S Air Force and the other for the Luftwaffe. It all seems to make good, logical sense, too, and is not at all difficult to understand how sides were chosen and how each man acted according to his feelings.
There must have been a number of families during World War II who were divided in their feelings concerning Axis thinking and that of the Allied nations. This book dealt with one partciular case and did so with amazing temperance and without upsetting anyone violently. The love of flying which both boys exhibited - a trait inherited from their father who had been a "flyer" in World War I, overshadows the "reason" behind the war. The twins are almost robots in one sense and as they flew they expressed their views only in a secondary way.
I think most readers will anticipate that, sooner or later, the brothers are going to meet each other and that they will be forced to make decisions about taking each others lives. They meet several times and, as one might expect, in unusual circumstances. Yet, they remain brothers in every sense of the word and sonmehow it works out well with several unexpected twists along the way and at the very end.
Those persons interested in the aircraft of various nations of the era - the Russians, Finns, British, Germans, and Americans will find this book of special interest. "Jack Higgins" also writes under the name "Harry Patterson." There are also some interesting sidelights on the personal feelings of many Nazi personalities of the time.
A memorable feature of "Flight of Eagles" is a small Teddy Bear dressed as an "aviator". It was an on-craft mascot of the father of the twins in WWI and a passeger on every flight he made. It was also the mascot of one of the boys in World War II. You will find it interesting to follow the adventures of the mascot bear "Tarquin" as a secondary theme of the overall story.
Question: how close did Dwight Eisenhower ever come to being killed?
You find out when tour read "Flight of Eagles" - and you'll wonder if it is fact or fiction. I'm still deciding. Truth and fiction mingle at times.
A.L.M. October 1, 2003 [c583wds]
Wednesday, October 01, 2003
INVENTORS
The older I get the less I believe in individuals who seem to have simply sat down and decided they were going to be “inventors”
I have decided it doesn't work that way at all. We have plenty of examples of both men and women who might be said to been born inventors and can't help making new and exciting new gadgets.
It now seems to me that one does not go about becoming a generator of wonderful, new contraptions which we can buy, sell or trade to each other. It doesn't work that way at all.
People who invent things - both products and procedures - don't just sit down and take pencil and paper and make up something. In truth, inventors don't invent anything at all ...what they do is look at life about them and see where something is yet to be desired and they, then, process what they have in mind in order to meet the need they,or others, might have.
Take this thing of players at a football game going into a “huddle.”. Who, in his right mind, would waste time hunching together to talk while a game was in progress? That “huddle”, as we now know it, was necessity when it was “invented” by a football player at, then Gallaudet College, now University, in Washington, .D.C. Since 1864 that has been a leading educational institution for the deaf. That, you can see, made the “huddle” idea a necessity because the opposition team always knew what the next play was to be as it was “signed” in plain sight.
Hand signals at your baseball diamond came about in pretty much the same way. There was a major league player by the name of William Hoy, unabashedly know as “Dummy Hoy” by his fellow players, and sports writers of that day, who had to have some way of knowing what the decisions were. Fans liked such signals telling them what had taken place and there are, I'd estimate, millions of us today, who would not have any idea of going on down on the actual playing field without such graphic guidance from signaling officials
I can remember when our railroads devised the idea of time zones for the nation to keep their trains from running into each other.
.
Great inventions have come about for the simple reason that they were needed to meet some, specific need.
Inventors are those one-step-ahead individuals who realize such needs exist and rush off hellbent to find the answer to that need. Give a Thomas Edison just a hint that something might be needed which could talk back to us, or light our way in times of darkness, and he was off to the lab afire with ways to try to do it.
So, to solve our problem today in this modern era, need to become aware of our needs and of world about us. Only then can we venture out to take care of whatever it is we find is required to make for a better life for everyone.
Don't just sit there. Think of something that is needed. If you see a way it can be done, you're on your way.
A.L.M. Sept. 30, 2003 [c575wds]
Tuesday, September 30, 2003
NOMINATING GAMES
It has been a while since we have witnessed a group determined to commit suicide.
We like to think that such incidents as the Jonesville mass self-immolations become a thing of the past. We like to believe we have solved that problem. We mumble words about having solved such a severe situation.
Yet. we are currently witnessing a display in which a group of politicians are maligning each other as they seek the nomination of their party to become President of our nation. It seems to be a poor way to go about it.
After all, these are members of one family, in a sense. For them to openly disparage each other would seem to be an error because the very voters to whom they are talking are the same who will be voting for that person nominated by the party. It will demand a great deal of damage control when the actual campaign gets underway.
Some individuals out there in voter-land may be as dumb as their leaders seem to think they are, but most are apt to think twice about voting for any man so openly condemned by the people who work with him and should know him best of all. When Gephart and Deane tell what each thinks of Medicare, for instance, they take opposite views - entirely opposite. One claims Medicare is the “worst” single mistake of all time; while the other contends it has been the ”best” achievement of their party. One or the other, in the mind of the voter, has to be wrong.
To speak disparagingly of the other members of the group would seem to me to harm their own chance. Not only do I feel it to be a political error but it remains an infraction of common rules of politeness. By this time viewers have pretty well sorted out the better candidates and which will best. Most of them have been eliminated long ago. All of them suffer daily just to stay alive. If any last-minute entries - such as General Wesley Clark, Al Gore or Hillary Clinton, make themselves available to “save the party” without having undergone all this fellow-runner criticism they have a marked advantage.
Serious damage is being done daily as contenting nominees malign each other. Much of it is irreparable.
There must be a better way,
A.L.M. September 30, 2003 [c422wds]
Monday, September 29, 2003
BACK OFF A BIT!
You too, have, by this time, seen it in print. That, of course, does not attest to the truth of the statement at all. Be it alleged or real, however, it does cause questioning and comments.
Is it true the item urges us to ask, that Michael Jordon receives much more payment from ”Niki” than the total amount of the payroll of all of their Asiatic employees?
If such a thing is accurate; if it is true, it should shock many people to know such a fact is valid. If it is not true that fact it suggests that it ought to made clear out of simple fairness to Jackson and others.
Initially,, we will think of it as being huge sum, but then, if we look into the average wages paid to Asiatic workers it might not seem quite so excessive Even, then it would seem excessive and wrong to many people. I is, perhaps, unwise to think about a change if which the workers are granted more pay, when we realize that on cannot condemn individual offenders when we know they are not the only ones using such a tactic. In many cases they are paying typical wages in keeping with the economy of the nation in which they are located. To upset that delicate balance would be chaotic in some nations.
The main reason we have moved just about all of our manufacturing capabilities overseas, is based on the fact that they can make such products at far less cost. The unquestioned basis of that cost saving is to be found in the low wages paid workers. There are other reasons for lower production costs: government regulations, work place safety features, and systems of health care and hospital case when needed. If any, or all of these benefits can be cut or eliminated, the production costs can be lowered.
Rather than causing needless commotion on that side, we might do well to study our own needs and desires to see if we actually need many of the things we buy - made by less fortunate workers around the world the world whom we do not even known. We, at times a buy several of such items because they are less expensive than our own versions used to be.
It is time, perhaps, we might worry less about what Michael Jackson might or might not be getting get for advertising such products for us. Higher apparently, but minus, no doubt, far more percentage commissions eating away at such a stated figure than we might imagine, before the eventual payment is made to the entertainer's account. It probably tallies out like lawyer's fees in large class action suits.
It might also be time be time for us to reassess the values we place on such entertainment personalities to advertise such products. For Michal Jackson to receive more than all the Nike workers in Asia, seems a bit too strong, and it may well be it is one of the many such reports put out - some such reports put out - many by Jordon himself, it is claimed - to attract attention by reciting such versions of his weird ways.
Don't be too ready to condemn the foreign worker's ways or be concerned about is poverty and needs. After all, we put many of them in that position. and we, by our purchases, often keep them there.
A.L.M. September 28, 2003 [c540wds]
Sunday, September 28, 2003
READ RAWLINGS
Have you actually read any of the Harry Potter Series of books?
It's been some time since a writer has attracted and held the attention of young people so expertly and parents who have not forgotten how real and demanding their early reading habits were when properly motivated.
British authoress J. K. Rawlings has done all of us a favor in bringing excitement and enthusiasm back into the idea of reading books. Young people today are reading the Harry Potter books with exceptional excitement and enthusiasm. No one can say, for sure, of course, just where this sudden acceptance of books by youth, ,might led us, but it seems to many adults that this is the start of something good for our children. It is most important, I feel, that we parents and grandparents follow though and become personally aware of the series - four volumes thus far and more in the making – which has influenced our children so strongly.
How does Rawlings work this special magic?
She works with amazing simplicity using tried-and true villains and ordinary people do commonplace things, She has great respect for the traditions Mankind has held for many centuries concerning the existence of magical qualities in the world and in certain humans, as well. Readers are not required to develop belief and acceptance of some, supposedly “new” man-made creature involving ultramodern techniques and concepts. She makes active use of our accepted world of commonly accepted concepts of witches, ghosts, goblins, trolls, elves, manifestations by magicians and necromancers among us and around us.. Never does she ask modern readers to believe in something that has not considered in the past by their predecessors. The demonic forces of evil and the redeeming qualities of good are set forth in modern dress. You may find much of it to familiar. Much of seems known to you from innately from your birth. You may well have been taught not to believe in such things; they they were sheer fabrications, yet, perhaps ...some of it could be, well, ...not true, exactly, but possible.
Harry Potter, put upon most cruelly by the circumstances of his birth and early life, and the means by which he matures; by which he grows, we do as well right along with him. We accept the fact that he is a wizard, as were his parents before him. He and we, are charged with combating evil in various forms. He strikes one as being so average that most readers find it easy to align themselves with his way of thinking and wishing for change.
The general pattern is a series of short adventure stories, each complete and satisfying in itself yet resolved in a manner which associates it with the larger theme of the book itself.. Rawlings successful overcomes any reading span problems young people may have. Her writing is a cut above that you may think applies to kid lit. One never gets the feeling she is “writing down” to children, Nor is she ever being smug with older readers - explaining details or pretending she dose not really believe in the magic which she write so well.
All if us might do well to attend a few lectures at her Hogwart's School for wizards and magicians. It is a pleasant way to find out what type of reading has attracted our youngsters intensely. It is not easy reading in the sense that we tend to think books for young people must be.
You may best start your Rawlings reading with the initial volume” “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone “ In that way you will get a firm cocept of the genesis of Harry Potter ,Wizard.
. A.L.M. September 27, 2003 [c657wds]
|
