O.J., Jon Stewart & A Hawk at School It’s Friday, April 12th, the conclusion of week that saw the passing of O.J. Simpson, a performance by Jon Stewart at the Palace Theater in Stamford, and my Thursday English Composition Class at the Norwalk Conservatory of the Arts being interrupted by a red tail hawk. Weaving those disparate events into a culminating reflection is an appropriate writing challenge in the wake of the solar eclipse and earthquake. What can be written (or said?) about O.J. that hasn’t already appeared somewhere? He was an almost constant presence on the American cultural scene from the late 1960’s until the turn of the century --- and then, periodically, like Halley’s Comet, reappeared. O.J.’s evolution from Heisman winning, NFL record-setting football star to omnipresent pitchman, sports analyst, and movie “star” appeared to be a wonderful American Dream crossover story(successful Black man appeals to White audiences). As Nelson George noted: To a great degree O.J. showed a pathway to black athletic crossover success that was followed quite explicitly by Magic Johnson and Michael Jordan. The world O.J. lived in was a seductive one, a place of inclusion where you could make serious money by making white gate keepers comfortable and not offering too many aggressive arguments for black empowerment. Simpson steered clear of racial politics and civil rights activism (he was quoted saying, “I’m not Black, I’m O.J.”) but all that changed with “the trial of the century” that ensued after Simpson was charged with a double murder in Los Angeles in the fall of 1994. What we couldn’t have realized in the moment --- in that pre-social media world --- was that from the beginning of that white Ford Bronco being chased in slow motion up Highway 5 in L.A., a new cultural/media world was emerging --- on the cusp of the technology and dot.com revolution. O.J.’s car chase and eventual trial created the appetite for what has become a seemingly endless variety of Reality TV offerings on broadcast, cable, & streaming platforms. That O.J.’s personal lawyer and confidant was Robert Kardashian is more than ironic in retrospect. The groundwork for all the CSI shows & their ilk was also spawned during that trial, with use of DNA evidence and forensic science playing a prominent role in the proceedings. And, particularly significant in this election year, was how O.J.’s lawyer, Johnnie Cochran, brilliantly manipulated the media and the jury into seeing Simpson as the victim of a corrupt police and judicial system! Keep in mind, the Rodney King L.A. riots were fresh in peoples’ memories. Long before everything went viral, there were very few citizens who had not seen the horrific beating King suffered at the hands of eight police officers, along with their hideous racial slurs about King. The L.A. police department, led by Daryl Gates, was notoriously corrupt and racist --- a factor that played directly into Cochran’s defense of Simpson. As CNN noted: “Simpson took on a new role: He became a stand-in for Black people who had been railroaded by the justice system.” When the jury found Simpson innocent the cavernous fault line that exists between White and Black America revealed itself, as Blacks applauded the verdict over the racist justice system and whites saw it as a travesty, setting a murderer free. In that moment, there was little reflection about what O.J. represented for the Black community --- and that was not simplistic. Here’s a Black man of means, a celebrity --- one who could afford to hire a team of lawyers who were the best at what they did and who could, as those same lawyers did for so many wealthy, privileged white clients --- get their client off. And the prosecution, for their part, fumbled the ball at every opportunity. Worse, the L.A. Police Department botched almost every aspect of evidence collection. Barry Scheck, a classmate of mine at Yale and co-founder of the Innocence Project, the pioneering group in using DNA technology, was hired by Simpson’s team, and told me that the contamination of all the evidence in the case, not just the DNA, made it impossible to unequivocally declare Simpson guilty. The Simpson legal team was able to construct a narrative of “alternative facts,” leading to O.J.’s acquittal. We’re familiar with “alternative facts” and “victimization” being used by politicians today, of course --- and particularly by Donald Trump. It’s reported that Barack Obama said: “Trump is for a lot of white people what O.J.’s acquittal was to a lot of Black folks ― you know it’s wrong, but it feels good.” And that certainly seems to be the case. As we witness the passing of Simpson, a few months shy of his 77th birthday, we should reflect on what a watershed moment his trial was in our cultural history --- and how much of what’s commonplace today, began 30 years ago. That O.J. was only two years older than I at his passing gave me pause, too. It feels too soon, even if he wasn’t a good person. I certainly have noticed I spend more time thinking about mortality these days --- and that was brought home when we went to see Jon Stewart at the Palace Theater in Stamford on Wednesday night. Stewart was wide-ranging and thoughtfully entertaining throughout his (approximately) 75-minute stand-up routine, which started with his reflecting on his own age and noting that he was, at 61, “old.” My immediate reaction was, “Hey, that’s nothing,” but his insights were accurate and certainly hit home. For instance, upon visiting his doctor because of a shoulder “issue,” he asked why his hair had turned white. The doctor’s explanation was straightforward: basically, your body stops producing melanin for your hair. As Stewart noted, it apparently transfers the color to a “new series of irregularly shaped moles all over my body.” As for his shoulder, the rotator cuff is torn (a problem the Lovely Carol Marie shares). Asking whether it could be operated on, the doctor politely sidestepped the issue and asked questions about Stewart’s “reach frequency” --- in other words, “How often to you really need to reach in such a way that is too painful?” Basically, the doctor was telling Stewart what many of us have heard recently: “There’s really no point in operating on someone your age --- there will probably be more complications than benefits.” Stewart, in his inimitable style, translated that as: If I take my car to my mechanic and he discovers that transmission is shot, he doesn’t say, “How do you feel about walking? Yet that is where we, as Senior Citizens, are. It’s a twist on an old adage: “If it’s broke, don’t fix it.” It’s part of this cycle, of course, so I have to accept and integrate into my own thinking that O.J. Simpson, who was in college at the same time I was, has passed on. From this point on, who knows? And that life and death theme presented itself to me in a more concrete way on Thursday, while teaching in downtown Norwalk. The room I work in is a large open space --- suitable for dancing, yoga, performing one-act plays, and, oh, yes, teaching English Composition. We are above a branch of the Fairfield County Bank and have wonderful (almost) floor to ceiling windows that overlook Wall Street. Those windows provide excellent natural light on sunny days and even on overcast afternoons, like yesterday, still illuminate the room nicely. As we were beginning to discuss Strindberg’s short one act play, “The Stronger,” one of my students excitedly pointed to the far window and exclaimed: “Look, a hawk!” at which point we all jumped up, grabbing for our phones, and proceeded to spend the next 5 minutes or so photographing a good-sized red tail hawk who was sitting on a street light pole that had a “Norwalk Conservatory of the Arts” banner suspended on it. It was fun and I began knocking on the window to get the bird’s attention (he seemed to look at us a bit) until he finally decided to take flight --- at which point my students (who are all 18, 19, 20 years old) ran along to see him fly by the other two windows. In all, a wonderful moment. When we re-grouped, before returning to Strindberg, I related to the students how this incident reminded me of James Herndon’s book How to Survive in Your Native Land. Chapter VI is entitled: A Dog at School and it opens with this paragraph, plus: Dogs often wander into the classrooms at schools and always cause an up uproar. Kids cannot contain themselves when dogs appear in the midst of an Egypt lesson, for what reason no one seems to know. Why couldn’t they, the kids, just let the dog be in the class, wandering around, sniffing here and licking a few hands there, quietly moseying about in the style of dogs while the class continued with the most important part of the lesson on Egypt? But no, they can’t. They got to rush the dog, they got to pick him up and drop him, they got to offer the dog candy and pieces of sandwich, they got to yell and scream and act like they never saw any dog before in their whole lives. So the teacher then got to say Get that dog out here! (saying later in the teachers’ room, I don’t mind the dog, I even got a dog at home and like dogs, and if those kids could just have the dog in there without all that fussing during the crucial lessons about Egypt when I just got to get it over to them, what’s the problem? Haven’t they ever seen a dog before?) and nine kids just got to chase the dog around until the teacher got to grab the dog herself and throw the dog out and shut the door and then argue with the kids about the dog in the room (if you could just have the dog and not have to make such a commotion, she says to them, trying to explain, not wanting to be some kind of monster, hating dogs, while all they want is that dog). What’s it all about? Well, of course, that dog is alive, and old Egypt is dead. (pp.52-53) For those who don’t know me, you haven’t been subjected to my going on and on about Herndon and How to Survive. I own a “second printing” hardback edition that was published in 1971, the Spring of my Senior year in college and it is the book that set my course to teaching. There are very few personal items that have survived the 53 years since I first read this book, but the fact that it was what sprang to mind as my students (and I) rushed to the window yesterday attests to the enduring power of the written word. And it also brings me full circle in this reflection. The hawk is alive, and Strindberg is dead (though the students did get back on task and did a fabulous job analyzing and re-imagining the play, replete with directorial and acting choices/decisions) and I recognized that, in fact, I am teaching my final class. While I love the students and believe they have bright futures in singing, dancing, acting, directing, etc., I am too much of an academic (and I can’t believe I’m saying that) for this place to be a “good fit.” Beyond that, though, I’m about to celebrate the 75th anniversary of my birth and years ago, when preparing teachers in Brown University’s M.A.T. program, I often noted that “Teaching is a young person’s game.” It is. And I’m not. There’s a fleeting image of Willie Mays in a Mets uniform, stumbling forward and not catching a routine fly ball. I hear Willie whispering, “Don’t stay a season beyond your career.” I’m glad I gave it a shot and it had its moments but, listening to Jon Stewart’s mechanic, I think I feel pretty good about walking.
0 Comments
Stranger in a Strange Land
In the wonderful documentary “Going to Mars: The Nikki Giovanni Project” the poet likens the initial enslaved Africans --- kidnapped and sent to the American South --- much like humans meeting space aliens. I think the comparison is both brilliant and apt. Imagine those African people, ripped violently from their homeland, shackled, and transported on a vessel like none they had ever seen, by people unlike any they had ever encountered, and then deposited in an environment that was, indeed, “alien.” It conjures all those science fiction stories and urban legends where humans are abducted by space aliens and brought to a mysterious planet. This was, of course, only the first in a long line of traumatic experiences for those Africans. To think those scars haven’t been generationally transmitted would grossly diminish the disruption, the mental and spiritual damage, as well as the societal stigma that we all still live with. I talked about the Nikki Giovanni allusion while teaching this semester --- not only because the class was examining White Privilege and its presence in today’s world --- but also because, on a much smaller scale, I realized I had voluntarily enlisted to join an alien world --- but was slow to recognize it. We are now on Spring Break and I’m here to report on my experience on a mysterious planet --- The Norwalk Conservatory of the Arts. The Norwalk Conservatory of the Arts describes itself as follows: The Norwalk Conservatory of the Arts was founded in 2018 by industry creatives with the goal of creating a space that was equal parts training and opportunity. The Conservatory is comprised of a faculty of the greatest artists currently working in theatre and television. Located in Norwalk, Connecticut, our campus is in the backyard of the biggest theatre city in the world. We operate as a space where the artists of today can train, audition for professional work, and grow simultaneously. The conservatory built the LINK Program which developed into the full two-year conservatory that comprises NoCo today. With many alumni working on Broadway and on Television, a faculty of the most pivotal artists, close proximity to New York City, small class sizes, and a curriculum built for today’s industry, The Norwalk Conservatory of the Arts is Connecticut’s premiere training program for young artists. (website: www.thenorwalkconservatory.org) In December, 2023 I had seen a posting on Indeed that looked interesting. NoCo was looking for someone to teach English Composition to their freshman class. It was local and piqued my interest. I forwarded my resume and got a call to arrange a Zoom interview with the school’s Provost. That interview went swimmingly and, before I knew it, I had been hired to teach English Composition to college freshmen. But these were not your usual college freshmen because they had signed on to experience “a curriculum built to today’s industry.” And that “industry” was Musical Theater, Musical Theater Dance, and TV/Film Performance --- the school’s three curricular concentrations. What’s missing from that curriculum, of course, is “General Education,” which would include English Composition. It seems the school, in applying for accreditation as a legitimate State of Connecticut two-year, degree-granting college, had been informed late in the fall semester they needed to add “General Education” courses to maintain their accreditation and grant degrees going forward. Hence, the need to offer English Composition. As I write this, I’m not sure anyone else applied for the position. Nonetheless, while you may find it hard to believe someone three-quarters of a century old could be naïve, trust me, they can be --- because here I am. If I have a consistent flaw in my adult life, it is charging ahead without necessarily doing as much homework/research as I should prior to diving headfirst into a situation. This is well-chronicled in my memoir (Right Time, Right Places: One Teacher’s School Reform Journey, Adelaide Books, 2020) --- it’s right there in Chapter 30, The Worst Year of My Life. That story relates how I was so anxious to move back to New York City in 2008 I failed to complete my due diligence regarding where I would work or live --- resulting in not one, but two, disastrous experiences --- all in one academic year! Apparently, my 10 years in retirement didn’t bring any wisdom with it because, as the new academic semester got underway, I discovered that both my students and I had been rather seriously blindsided. Don’t get me wrong --- my students are wonderfully talented (some, I would daresay, are “gifted”) and energetic young people. They come from all over the country (only one in my class is from Connecticut) and bring with them a range of interesting histories and experiences. They all share one characteristic: they love performing and are clearly focused on carving out careers in the arts. Their days are packed with courses related to their goals --- acting, dancing, singing, yoga, etc. --- and they apply themselves to those studies with energy and enthusiasm. English Composition 101 less so. Much less so. And that was where the blindside came in. Most of the students signed on to the Norwalk Conservatory believing they would only be doing Arts-related classes, as well as attending auditions and working with “industry creatives” beyond what goes on at the school. Few, if any, thought they would have to take “General Education” courses, like so many they put up with in high school. I was unaware of this before meeting my first class in January. Blindsided. We started with 25 students (out of the 43 in the freshman class --- 18 “placed out”) in January. Now, in late March and on Spring Break, we’re down to 18. Several have “opted out,” choosing to make up the course at another point in time, while others have said they’re not particularly interested in attaining the A.A. degree but want to continue taking arts courses. The stalwarts who remain are resigned to taking the course, with several even engaging in the material with modest enthusiasm. For the most part, we’ve reached a place where we recognize this is not an ideal situation (for any of us, including the instructor) but it is something that has to transpire --- so why not make the most of it? I’ll spend some of my Spring Break preparing the final six weeks of the course, which includes a research project (I’ve already scheduled a “field trip” to the Norwalk Public Library, just down the street from the school). I’m also hoping to bring in a guest or two before the semester is over. I have several former students who have made careers in the Arts and could offer insights regarding the slings and arrows of the profession. In all, this experience is part of the growing pains of building a new school from the ground up. As “industry creatives” and not professional educators, the founders have rightly focused the school on creating an environment that provides students with maximum Arts preparation and opportunities, particularly given our access to New York City. “General Education is firmly, if uncomfortably, ensconced in the back seat. I’m here as an Alien, dispensing information that appears unrelated to the World my students live in and aspire to. Making English Composition 101 engaging remains the enduring challenge for the Academic Stranger in the “Industry” Strange Land.” Keep your eye out for the Final Report Card sometime in May to see how the students and the instructor co-existed throughout the Spring. Until then . . . . the story continues. The Legacy of the Roberts Court
There are 248 days until the 2024 Presidential Election. The primaries are proceeding but we already know the nominees. We also know the “Big Issues” that will dominate the news between now and November 5th. Rather than belabor any of that, I’d like to take a step back and note an item that may not be on everyone’s radar but should be. The Roberts Supreme Court has crossed the line. Their blatant right-wing activism should, once and for all, seal the legacy of this Court. Going back to the early 1990’s, comparisons between Roe v. Wade and the Dred Scott case were raised (by Antonin Scalia!), attempting to define what a Constitutional right to due process and privacy might be. I won’t belabor the arguments surrounding Substantive Due Process, but I will provide historical background on why I believe Dred Scott, Roe and now, the Dobbs decision, as well as the Roberts’s Court ruling kicking the Trump Presidential Immunity claim down the road, all combine to indelibly stain SCOTUS as an institution --- and endanger our democracy. For those who don’t recall their high school U.S. history course, the Dred Scott decision, handed down by the Roger Taney (pronounced Tawn-ey) Supreme Court in 1857 was a significant step toward Civil War. Here’s the Wikipedia summary: In March 1857, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision against Scott. In an opinion written by Chief Justice Roger Taney, the Court ruled that people of African descent "are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word 'citizens' in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States"; more specifically, that African Americans were not entitled to "full liberty of speech ... to hold public meetings ... and to keep and carry arms" along with other constitutionally protected rights and privileges Taney supported his ruling with an extended survey of American state and local laws from the time of the Constitution's drafting in 1787 that purported to show that a "perpetual and impassable barrier was intended to be erected between the white race and the one which they had reduced to slavery". Because the Court ruled that Scott was not an American citizen, he was also not a citizen of any state and, accordingly, could never establish the "diversity of citizenship" that Article III of the U.S. Constitution requires for a U.S. federal court to be able to exercise jurisdiction over a case. Wikipedia also notes: The decision is widely considered the worst in the Supreme Court's history, being widely denounced for its overt racism, judicial activism, poor legal reasoning, and crucial role in the start of the American Civil War four years later. Legal scholar Bernard Schwartz said that it "stands first in any list of the worst Supreme Court decisions". A future chief justice, Charles Evans Hughes, called it the Court's "greatest self-inflicted wound" Scalia’s argument that the Roe abortion decision paralleled Dred Scott was primarily based on the concept that the Supreme Court, in both instances, had overextended its powers and was using an implied application of “citizenship” ---- and, therefore, the “right to privacy” associated with that “citizenship.” Scalia, of course, was quite intentionally trying to muddy the waters surrounding the Roe decision (somehow linking it to slavery) and the Court barely ruled (5-4) to sustain a woman’s right to control her own body. Therein lies the stronger comparison between Roe and Dred Scott. In supporting an extremely strict interpretation of the Constitution --- as conservatives and right-wing extremists are wont to do --- there is an overt desire to control the bodies of people who are, somehow, not equal to (White) Men. By issuing the Dobbs decision and tossing abortion back to the States --- knowing full well how many of those States would make it impossible for Women to gain access to the health care they need --- the Roberts Court clearly harkened back to the Taney Court, asserting the Supreme Court’s power to determine who controls the bodies of those perceived as “less than.” There are purported religious arguments regarding abortion, of course, but the Separation Clause clearly removes those arguments from the purview of the Court. Or, in the case of the Roberts Court, does it? With the addition of Trump’s three Roman Catholic Justices (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett) joining three conservative Catholics already there (Roberts, Thomas, Alito), it appears the Court has taken an extreme turn away from the Separation Clause. Even if that is not the case, the Dobbs decision, overturning Roe (“established law” that Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett implied was inviolate during their confirmation hearings!), creates a clear parallel between the Roberts Court and the Taney Court, for all of history to see. And now, in providing Trump with exactly what he wanted --- a long delay for his January 6th Federal Criminal Trial --- the Roberts Court blatantly revealed their partisan colors. Given that Trump’s case --- that Presidents have total immunity from criminal charges (unless impeached and convicted by the Senate) --- is absurd, the Court’s decision is manifestly political. Trump lost the case in court, lost it (unanimously) in Appeal, but now, miraculously, the Roberts Court not only agrees to hear the case but also schedules Oral Arguments in late April, essentially guaranteeing that the trial, should it even begin in 2024, will clearly occur during this year’s Election Cycle. Even Judge Chutkan’s desire to start the trial as soon as possible cannot supersede the clear conflict conducting it during September and October would present. If this isn’t the nail in the Roberts Court Legacy, I don’t know what else one would need. All told, going back to Citizens United, it’s easy to document where the Roberts Court stands --- regarding individual rights vs. (dark) monied interests, Voting Rights, Affirmative Action and LBGQT rights (except for Obergefell/same-sex marriage ---- which Dobbs has now jeopardized!). This Court, historically, is on track to match the Taney Court as one of the most narrow-minded and bigoted in the history of the nation. Keep in mind, the Taney Court was operating in the middle of the 19th century! But that is, of course, where Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Roberts are most comfortable. This all began with Ronald Reagan, of course, and his passionate animosity for the liberal/liberation movements of the ‘60’s and his “revolution” (more “devolution”) to un-do the strides made by minorities, women, gays, et al. It has taken forty-four years, but the Roberts Court is poised to catapult the society (against its will --- check the polling on Roe) back to that mythological immediate post-WWII period. That’s the “Great” America that Reagan, and then Trump, wanted to make again. The America of Joe McCarthy’s Red Scare, of Jim Crow segregation, of no rights for Women or LBGQT citizens as well as countless other minorities. The America where White, Christian men held power, set policy, and oversaw the world. Then, however, the Warren Court, the Civil Rights movement, the anti-War movement, the Women’s Liberation Movement, the Gay Rights Movement turned that old While Male world on its head. The ‘60’s and ‘70’s, when the United States was energized by movements aimed at (dare I say it) Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) became the “enemy” to an ever-threatened White Male Establishment (there, I’ve said it again!), requiring first Reagan, and then Trump, promise to “Make America Great Again.” You needn’t be a cryptographer to break that Code. And so, we now find that the Supreme Court, one of the three branches of our government created to protect our Rights, has thrown in with the MAGA crowd and is doing its damnedest to turn back the clock. And that’s why the Roberts Court will, historically, live in infamy, like the Taney Court. The United States survived the Taney Court (requiring a Civil War to do so, of course) and I’m hoping we will prevail over the Roberts Court, too. Defeating Donald Trump in November would do a great deal to cut the legs out from under this Court. If the other two branches are secured by politicians sympathetic to the Rights of all our citizens, laws can be passed, bills can be signed, actions will be taken to insure the citizens this court, as malignant as it is, cannot suppress basic freedoms and rights the Constitution guarantees. It will require action by the electorate, however, since the Court is doing all it can to insulate Public Criminal #1 from ever facing justice before November 5th. That action, along with Citizens United, Shelby, and Dobbs, will provide historians for debate fodder: which Court was worse, Taney or Roberts? That Art/Life Imitation Thing
|
|