Trump Trial, Larry & Teresa, & Cabaret!
 
            Another week has flown by and, beyond the inordinate amount of April showers, it was another busy one for these two inhabitants of Winnipauk Village in scenic Norwalk, Connecticut.  The first criminal trial of a former U.S. President began in earnest on Monday, with the entire jury selected by the end of the work week.  On Wednesday evening we traveled to the Fairfield Theater Company’s StageOne venue to hear wonderful, original Americana music created by Larry Campbell and Teresa Williams (https://www.larryandteresa.com/), and then, on Friday, we went to Bridgeport’s Downtown Cabaret Theater to see a stunning production of Cabaret by my Norwalk Conservatory of the Arts students.  All of this created quite a bit to ruminate about as we headed into the homestretch of April.

            Last week, with O.J.’s passing, we considered the late-20th century “Trial of the Century.”  This week, we’re confronted with our first “Trial of the Century” in the new millennium.  The importance of the trial cannot be understated.  Despite what various media outlets may say --- that it’s “only” about hush money payments and it’s “barely” a felony --- the fact of the matter is this trial is about trying to influence the outcome of a Presidential election (2016).  While I don’t believe Trump will actually do jail time if he’s convicted, the importance of this man being made to adhere to the rule of law is really what is most important about this trial.  Make no doubt about it, Donald J. Trump, the presumptive Presidential candidate for the Republican Party, is an aspiring autocrat with clear fascist dictator designs.  I would only remind people that “good Germans” in the 1920’s, seeing Italy’s turn toward fascism, believed “it can’t happen here.”  That Trump is already Putin’s “useful idiot”, and we have a clutch of pro-Putin people in the U.S. Congress only exacerbates the potential crisis we’re facing.  200 days out from the 2024 Presidential Election, the citizens of this country need to recognize Trump is neither a “populist” nor a “patriot” --- that his appeal is, in fact, quite similar to that of the 20th century fascists, pitting groups of people against each other based on race, religion, ethnicity, etc. and recruiting supporters who believe they, somehow, have been shortchanged by “the system.”  All the while, of course, Trump and the super-wealthy who support him are the only “winners” with this calculus.  And the remainder of our week --- gathering with other people to hear music and watch musical theater, only made the Trump Trial resonate with greater intensity.

            Larry Campbell and Teresa Williams have been playing music together since the 1980s, originally as country/western oriented artists but evolving into what has become known as “Americana” or “Roots” music --- a combination of country, folk, R & B, blues, and bluegrass.  Campbell is a stunningly accomplished multi-instrumentalist, playing the guitar, pedal steel guitar, the violin, the mandolin, and slide guitar.  He also is a gifted vocalist and has played with an impressive list of musicians, not the least of whom is Bob Dylan (from 1997 to 2004).  Campbell also produced two Grammy-winning Levon Helm albums.  Teresa Williams is an accomplished vocalist who, when not playing with Campbell, has supported an array of acts across genres.  What is most compelling about their shows (and we’ve seen them many times now) is how self-effacing and charming they are. (check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv1dpPeeVVo)  Seeing them again on Wednesday not only reminded me how impressive and talented they are but also made me acutely aware of how important people gathering together to appreciate other (generally more talented) people creating art in your presence is.  That these particular artists’ milieu is “Americana” seemed poignantly relevant midweek during the Trump trial.  During the performance I couldn’t help but reflect on this idea that people, humans, have gathered together to watch and listen to other people make music, or perform plays for longer than we can accurately pinpoint.  As important is the idea behind it all --- that the art that is being witnessed is special, unique, out of the ordinary --- and worth one’s time.  It elevates, it exhilarates, it excites --- and it evokes a spectrum of emotions.  I couldn’t help but compare this serene yet stimulating gathering, focused on four musicians creating art we hadn’t experienced before, with the over-the-top rallies Trump (who is on trial!) conducts around the country ---- like some kind of traveling Tent Revival revue.  Gathering to listen to music in hope of achieving some sense of the Hindu dharma, hoping for some insight into ourselves and our world, could not stand in higher relief to the Clown Car that Trump rallies are.  And I was struck by how, watching this “Americana,” it stood in stark contrast with Trump’s flag-hugging claims of being a “patriot.”  And that became all the more striking when, on Friday, we went to see Cabaret.

            Cabaret began its Broadway run in the fall of 1966 and won two Tony Awards in 1967.  In the fall of 1967, I was a college freshman and hadn’t ever seen a Broadway show (I remember my mother went with her “girlfriends” --- to see A Funny Thing Happened . . . , Fiddler on the Roof,  etc. in the ‘60’s . . . but I never was “invited” to join her).  As luck would have it, in October of ‘67, a fellow freshman football player, Eric Klosterman, knew I was a Joe Namath fan (despite being a lifelong NY Giants fan) and asked if I’d like to see a Jets game at Shea Stadium with him.  Eric’s “Uncle Don” worked for the Houston Oilers, so we could go in for Saturday night and see the game on Sunday, courtesy of “Uncle Don.”  Only after taking the New Haven railroad into New York and finding our way to the Summit Hotel did I learn that “Uncle Don” was the General Manager of the Houston Oilers and we’d be staying with him in a suite.  After ordering “whatever you want” from the Room Service menu, “Uncle Don” asked if we wanted to see a show and, when we said, “sure,” he called downstairs and told us there were tickets for Cabaret (one of the hottest shows on Broadway at that time) waiting for us at the Concierge Desk.

            I got to see Joel Grey and Lotte Lenya in what was, at that time, quite an “edgy” musical ---- particularly in its dealing with homosexuality and abortion.  Indeed, the Kit Kat Klub was a den of iniquity --- and the presentation of the slide from Weimar Germany into Nazi Fascism was chilling, too.  Remember, the parents of our generation had fought in WW II against the evil of Hitler and his minions.  What I realized last night, as I watched my students from the Norwalk Conservatory impressively perform the show, was that those students are the same age (now) as I was when I first saw the show!  That led me to wonder if they at all recognize the fascism they portrayed in the musical is, indeed, a reality we are facing in our society and in the Presidential Election.  Despite their youth, the students presented a marvelously mature rendition of the show on all levels --- singing, dancing, acting like genuine professionals. And it led to my reflecting, again, on this uniquely human endeavor --- creating art.  In this instance, there was a genuine sense, on my part, that “everything old is new again.”  Homosexuality?  Abortion?  Fascism?  These are all hot-button political issues in the 2024 election, with the forces of fascism and their opposition to same-sex marriage and LGBQT+ rights and their rejection of women’s rights (particularly regarding abortion) are paraded as “patriotic” and “truly American.”  Cabaret shines a direct light on the lie of “it can’t happen here,” as Herr Schultz is convinced, despite being a Jew, that he is safe from the Nazis because, after all, he is “a German.”
​
            In the “America” that Trump and his allies want to create, only those who buy into the narrow, pro-Putin, bigoted view of the United States and the world are “safe,” reinforcing the importance of the trial being conducted in lower Manhattan.  And that takes us full circle.  It’s important for every citizen who cares about the future of our country to pay close attention to this, the first of several, trials Trump will face.  He is running to stay out of jail and  create an American society where he (and his ilk) are insulated from the rule of law.  As bad, in the kind of world Trump would promulgate --- one where artists like Larry Campbell and Teresa Williams and my students from the Norwalk Conservatory would not be free to present their works in those communal settings we love to attend.  Keep in mind what “art” became under Hitler and Stalin --- a vehicle for state propaganda and revisionist history.   Those are the choices on the ballot this November and it is imperative that concerned citizens make sure they --- and their fellow citizens --- make informed choices to guarantee freedom and the rule of law remain cornerstones of our democratic republic.
           

                                                                                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.
           
 
 

                                          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?

                                        “History Never Repeats Itself,
                                               But it does often Rhyme”
 
         As one who taught U.S. History for many years (and prepared people to teach U.S. History)Mark Twain’s quote struck me as particularly relevant in terms of how to teach history.  Over the years I researched whether there was any evidence that justified teaching history chronologically and came up empty.  Either no one has been interested in the question or, more likely, there’s really no way to quantify how people retain facts and concepts about history.  It seemed to me that students with good memories and a predisposition to learning in a concrete sequential fashion found plodding through U.S. history from 1492 to the “present” a fine way to proceed.  If one agrees with Anthony Gregorc’s Learning Styles model (abstract/concrete & sequential/random, in combination), that meant only about a quarter of any group of students would benefit from proceeding in that fashion --- not to mention I personally found it mind-numbingly stultifying.  If you have a room full of adolescents “history” is this week and events that occurred before their birth is not only “old” but incredibly “boring.”  The challenge, then, is to present U.S. History in a fashion that meets the Learning Needs of students and engages them in the material.

            When I first started teaching in 1972 a common adage related to those of us tasked with teaching U.S. History was “you better get to the Civil War by Christmas.”  And, of course, if you were going to use your textbook as your curriculum that meant you needed to tear through facts, dates, and “important people” at a rather breakneck pace so that you could (at that time) reach the approximate “halfway” point in the chronology before you headed into the New Year.  Even with that, most students (and teachers) would be frustrated that those courses “never got to” the late 20th century material.  Here’s the problem with this entire model: it’s all about the content and the teacher.  As one who loves U.S. History --- and wanted to share that passion with his students --- I began to look for ways to present the content in a more engaging manner.  What I came up with may not have served the concrete sequentials as well as chronological plodding, but I do think it helped the abstract randoms, the concrete randoms, and the abstract sequentials better.  And, as someone who is concrete sequential myself, I figured if I could follow my method, most of my students would be served.

            One thing we do know about the way humans learn involves looking for patterns.  As noted by Robert C. Barkman, PhD., in Psychology Today:

Patterns are observations organized into meaningful categories by the observer. When students seek patterns in the world around them, they see order instead of chaos, which builds confidence in their understanding of how the world works and gives them a feeling of control.   (April 2, 2020)
 
Based on that notion, I began to look for what I thought were meaningful patterns in U.S. History that would provoke thinking and engage my students in their studies on a deeper level.  If you stand back and look at U.S. History, it is not that difficult to see patterns of parallelism.  For example, there is the American Revolution and the Vietnam War.  A dominating World Empire fighting against an emerging, much smaller nation thousands of miles away.  The Little Guys, of course, were fighting on their home turf and had a brilliant leader (who, in Vietnam’s case, had already evicted the French colonialists).
Starting with those facts, students can then begin digging for other parallels (or not!) and seriously engage in the U.S. History material.

            As we examine the U.S. timeline, we can see that the 1920’s and 1960’s are rife with parallels, too: prohibition/marijuana; Jazz/rock’n’roll; flappers/women’s lib; Lindbergh/the moonwalk; etc.  In the same way the Gilded Age and the “Reagan Revolution” (the late 19th and the late 20th centuries) are comparable.  Moving on, the late ‘60’s & 70’s compares nicely to the early 21st century: JFK/LBJ/Nixon (civil rights/social progress, hippies/hardhats, disastrous foreign policy) and Bush/Obama/Trump.  A little research leads to uncovering parallels throughout our nation’s history and makes it more relevant (and interesting?) to those involved in the study.

            Given that, I cannot stress enough the current crisis we are facing regarding our democracy and the clear historic parallel too many may be ignoring.  Put simply, I would point people toward studying The Beer Hall Putsch, led by Adolf Hitler on November 8-9, 1923 and the January 6th attempted coup in 2021.  If you are not familiar with the Beer Hall Putsch, here’s the quick Wikipedia summary:
The Beer Hall Putsch, also known as the Munich Putsch, was a failed coup d'état by Nazi Party  leader Adolf Hitler, Generalquartiermeister Erich Ludendorff and other Kampfbund leaders in Munich, Bavaria, on 8–9 November 1923, during the Weimar Republic. Approximately two thousand Nazis marched on the Feldherrnhalle, in the city center, but were confronted by a police cordon, which resulted in the deaths of 16 Nazis, four police officers, and one bystander.  (After the failed coup) Hitler redirected his focus towards obtaining power through legal means rather than by revolution or force, and accordingly changed his tactics, further developing Nazi propaganda.
 
       If you read it carefully, the parallel is chilling.  And it is important to note that November 9th became a rallying point for the Nazis as they moved ahead and took power in Germany.   

Der neunte Elfte (9 November, literally 'the ninth of the eleventh') became one of the most important dates on the Nazi calendar, especially following the seizure of power in 1933. Annually until the fall of Nazi Germany, the putsch would be commemorated nationwide, with the major events taking place in Munich. (Wikipedia)
 
Hitler’s insurrectionists were portrayed as “martyrs,” just as Trump’s are now “hostages.”  And, January 6th, like November 9th is now a rallying point for anti-democratic forces intent on wresting control of the government and its power.

            True patriotic citizens of this country need to take note of this rhyming history, it is not a simplistic “snowflake” fear of Trump.  The threat to our democracy is real and my fear is that, like the German citizenry a century ago, we will not do enough to quell this threat.  Hitler went to jail after the Beer Hall Putsch (and dictated Mein Kampf while there) and, while Trump is facing potential jail time, too, it will not be before the election in November --- and that’s the key point here.  Every  concerned citizen, every true patriot who cares about democracy --- and is not part of an idolatry cult --- needs to actively engage in the coming election.  Volunteer, recruit voters, be active on social media, talk to people about how important  it is to actively preserve our democracy. 

            In the late Sixties I remember being aware that I was living through an exceptional, and significant, period of U.S. History.  I sincerely believe this is another of those significant moments and, as in the late-Sixties, it is important for concerned citizens to actively engage in the democratic process and preserve the nation.

​                                                       A New Adventure!
 
            There’s been a bit of a lapse in writing The Blast/Boomerant! because I’ve embarked on a new venture that has consumed quite a bit of time.  As of last Thursday I began a part-time teaching assignment (English Composition 101) at The Norwalk Conservatory of the Arts, a newly accredited junior college here in Fairfield County, Connecticut.  After ten years of retirement, I’ve returned to the classroom and thought it would be interesting to share the experience.  I started keeping a journal last week and hope to continue doing so as the semester progresses, sharing any insights, revelations, and observations that might prove interesting or amusing.  Here’s an installment from the first session last week.

January 18, 2024

            10:37 a.m.

            The last time I was in a classroom as a teacher was in June of 2014 --- almost a full decade ago.  I’m about to dive back into the deep end of the pool this afternoon and, while not exactly nervous, I do think I’m apprehensive.

            Is it like riding a bike?  Will I wobble and fall and maybe scrape a knee (thoughts of Billy Collins Turning Ten)?  And if I do . . . ?

            In 1955-56 I attended three different schools, moving from Babylon to Bethpage to Bay Shore (some affinity for “B’s”?).  I vaguely remember the experience --- and only vividly remember the Bay Shore experience --- and not just because it was the final one.  In Babylon and Bethpage, I attended  classic “modern” suburban elementary schools --- low slung, lots of windows, spacious playing fields and well-equipped playgrounds.  In Bay Shore I had to attend the Fourth Avenue School --- a building that had already been condemned (while there were urinals, the toilets were outhouse-style holes cut into a board with some disgusting receptacle below).  No playground, no playing fields.  Miss Weiler, unlike my previous teachers who were young and energetic, seemed to have come with the building when it was built.  Grey haired (in a bun), quite elderly (at least to a first grader), and stern.  I don’t remember much else from that year but the whole idea of being “the new kid” in the school is how I’m presently feeling.

            The Norwalk Conservatory of the Arts is a newly (this fall!) accredited junior college (granting an associate degree after two years) here in the town where I live.  Its focus is primarily on producing Musical Theater & Dance performers, as well as TV/Film actors.  What this means is that the English Composition 101 course that I’ll be teaching is required for graduation but not at all in the wheelhouse of the students --- at least not in their major area of interest, for sure.  Maybe there will be an aspiring screenwriter or playwright here and there, but part of my job will be learning what, exactly, their experiences in reading/writing have been.

            When I was preparing people to be secondary school teachers at Brown and Yale I often described “the job” as a Tom Sawyer situation.  If you remember the scene in Mark Twain’s novel where Aunt Polly tasks Tom with whitewashing the family’s fence, a chore he doesn’t want to do, he cleverly convinces a variety of children from his neighborhood to take over his duties --- even “paying him” (in toys, trinkets, apples) for the honor of whitewashing.  That’s what teaching is.  Getting people to do things they might not ordinarily want to do --- and enjoy the experience!

            And that’s my task today, as I see it.  Can I meet this group of students and begin to develop a community of learners who, over time, will genuinely enjoy the reading and writing that is outside their wheelhouse and not necessarily an area  where they have experience or “strength?”

            I’ll be leaving in about 45 minutes, picking up a Dunkin’ coffee to go, parking at the Yankee Doodle garage, and xeroxing some final materials for the day’s class. 
 
Friday, January 19th

10:00 a.m.

         Well, it was, in fact, like riding a bike --- without the falling and scraping that I feared.  Twenty-nine students from all over the country (the recruiting for the school has been extensive and impressive!), brimming with new-semester energy.  There are three cohorts (Musical Theater Performance, Musical Theater Dance, and TV/Film Performance) and they’ve spent a semester together --- leaving me as the odd man out. Nonetheless, they were honest, forthright, and quite a pleasure.  Several freely admitted they had come to the school precisely because there weren’t any “academic” subjects.  My response: “Joke’s on you.”  They were not only accepting of the idea that they had to have “academics” to get a degree, they were more than willing to hear me out and meet me halfway.
​
            Creating a Learning Community is the first major challenge any good teacher faces when working with a new class.  The simplest things --- learning the names of the students as quickly as possible, for example --- are the building blocks, the foundation.  Can you be informal yet respectful of each other?  Can you ensure that everyone’s voice is heard and that you’ve established a comfortable environment where students are willing to take risks?  Anyone who hasn’t been a teacher --- and cared about being a good teacher --- probably hasn’t thought about these things.  The art and science of teaching requires planning, reflection, and a dedication to the profession.  And now I find myself back in the game, working with a group of bright young people who expect to “get something” from our class, which will require my energy and focus for the next four months.
 

                                          Democracy & Capitalism
                                                                                                  Part Three
 
  By the time the McCain-Obama election was underway, W’s term in office (with the growing omnipresence of the internet) had spawned conspiracies about 9/11 as “an inside job,” while increasing distrust about the federal government’s competence and trustworthiness, sowing the seeds for today’s “deep state” mindset.  As CEO salaries skyrocketed and the average Americans’ salary flat-lined, the stage was being  set for more outlandish conspiracies and exploitation of an “us vs. them” scenario.  And the election of Barack Obama was the final push to send the country reeling toward a destiny that would polarize the citizenry in a way unexperienced since the Civil War.
 
            Part of Obama’s appeal was that he was perceived as an “outsider” (an image his campaign cultivated with its “Hope” messaging).   The favorite for the Democratic nomination in 2007 was Hillary Clinton but by the time the primaries rolled around Obama and his team took advantage of a nation that was tired of Bushs and Clintons and wanted some kind of change.  Obama took advantage of that “fatigue” and was helped by John McCain’s disastrous vice-presidential choice, Sarah Palin.  What we can see in retrospect is that, while Palin was a significant factor in McCain’s defeat, she was also a harbinger of things to come.  Her appeal to the voting bloc that grew into the Tea Party and then the MAGA movement was the first indication of things to come.  McCain’s cultivation of his “maverick” reputation as a Senator convinced his advisors the Alaska Governor would be a “value-added” running mate.  As noted in Wikipedia:
 
 
Palin's career in Alaska had shown maverick tendencies similar to McCain's,  and McCain hoped that Palin's youth, reformist record, appeal to social conservatives, and appeal to disaffected female Hillary Clinton voters would outweigh her lack of national and international visibility and experience.
 
Palin, of course, was a disaster but, looking back, we see that she was, in fact, the first MAGA candidate.  She reveled in her ignorance, flaunted her “hockey Mom” image, and openly sparred with the media.  Her inexperience and lack of preparation proved the un-doing of the McCain candidacy, which originally ran against Obama with a “Is he ready to lead?” approach.  Having a less-experienced, clearly unprepared running-mate a heartbeat away from the Resolute Desk disastrously undercut the GOP campaign.
 
            But Palin hit responsive chords in a segment of the Republican electorate and that group would grow over the next dozen years, ultimately creating the confrontation between democracy and capitalism we are wrestling with today.  We cannot minimize the significance of the election of America’s first Black President.  The Republican Party, since Reagan’s administration, had been re-designing government to serve the needs of the upper 1% to 10% of the nation’s population and, since Nixon’s Southern Strategy in 1968 – when Southern segregation “Dixiecrats” migrated en masse to the GOP --- clearly used the white race card to pull voters into their column (remember Bush, Sr.’s Willie Horton ad against Dukakis?).  Obama’s inauguration in January of 2009  was the event that brought the coalition of monied interests and white anxiety together --- and there were political foot soldiers ready to march to new drummers.
 
            Within moments of Obama taking office, the Tea Party appeared (backed by Koch brother’s money) --- trumpeting a “fiscal responsibility” agenda and taking aim, in particular, at the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”).  Most significantly, the Tea Party blatantly supported the notion that there should be no government oversight or regulation of the economy.  As the Tea Party was gaining momentum within the GOP, the Citizens United v FEC Supreme Court ruling came down, allowing corporations (under a free speech argument) to donate to political campaigns with little or no oversight or restriction.  This confluence of capitalism and anti-democratic priorities of corporations as a result of Citizens United is undeniable at the point.  The “influence” (and corruption?) on the democratic process (from both parties) is hard to deny some 13 years later.  We know that “Big Donors” call the shots --- not just in nominating and electing candidates but in setting business agendas the government  will follow.
 
            While all this was transpiring, we saw the emergence of Donald Trump and his outlandish “birther”  conspiracy regarding Obama.  Trump claimed he had “proof” that Obama was born in Africa, not Hawaii, and, as a result, could not be the duly elected President of the United States.  As we know (and as New Yorkers had known for years) Trump had no proof  to support his claim but, in a style we know all too well, his incessant media presence claiming he had proof (that never materialized) sucks in a segment of the electorate.  In this case, white non-college educated working class voters began to view Trump as a possible candidate to stand up to the “Others” who were now (illegitimately) in control of the government.
 
            Donald Trump epitomizes how far we have descended into our diverging capitalism/democracy divide.  In the tradition of Ronald Reagan, Trump was a “celebrity” whose knack for self-promotion had made him a mainstay of Page Six and tv gossip shows.  That he parlayed his celebrity into Reality Show “stardom” provided the launch pad for his political career.  In a society that has become more diverse and more economically polarized, Trump sold himself as a representative of the aggrieved white workers who loathed the Clintons and recoiled at Obama.  Trump --- with the help of Roger Ailes and Fox News --- ignored facts and told those aggrieved Americans that the “Other” was the source of their woes:  the Mexicans, the Moslems, the Globalists, and the University Elitists (who looked down on the Aggrieved and promoted the Democrat’s Liberal agenda!).
 
            Facts like “the three richest American families own as much as the entire bottom half of the population” (Robert Reich, Substack) never appear in Trump’s accounting of the “American carnage” he described in his inaugural address.  While claiming to support “free market” capitalism, Trump and his MAGA acolytes promote the growing kleptocracy America has become.  Since the Reagan years, the working class has seen no significant wage growth while the society’s upper echelon (1% to 10%) has accumulated more and more wealth.  Unions have been eviscerated and politicians are bought and sold by corporate interests.  Robert Reich’s Substack essays on American Oligarchy describe all this in much finer detail than I present here, but his conclusions are similar --- democracy is endangered by Trump’s clear support from --- and for --- oligarchs and kleptocrats.  We have reached a point where untrammeled corporate cronyism and capitalism present a clear and present danger to democracy. 
 
The 2024 election puts these issues in high relief.  That Trump has already been found guilty of business fraud and sexual assault has no effect on his cult of true believers and his corporate sponsors.  The 91 criminal (felony) charges make no difference either.  He has already said he would be a Dictator on Day One, that his Supreme Court appointees are responsible for the repeal of Roe v. Wade, and that he believes Presidential immunity (his version) would allow him to execute his political rivals.  It is imperative that responsible citizens not only vote but also organize and actively promote the democratic republic Benjamin Franklin challenged us to “keep” 236 years ago.  I am, to my own surprise, optimistic about our chances --- but I know those who believe in democracy will need to go more than the “extra yard” this election year to ensure the continued survival of this American “experiment.”
 

                                              A New Year’s Reflection
 
         As we leave 2023 in the rearview and start the New Year, I found myself wondering how ---and/or when --- January 1st became “the day” that we start a New Year.  I had some ideas about it (regarding the Julian and Gregorian calendars) and certainly knew it was dictated by Western Christianity, but I wasn’t entirely clear about the genesis of January 1st as the start of New Years.

            While I understood the Winter Solstice (on or about December 21st) was a significant “holiday” for ancient peoples it seemed more logical that the Vernal Equinox (on or about March 21st), the beginning of Spring (and planting season), would be the “awakening” of a New Year.  Here’s what I learned from Wikipedia (yup, this is how I spent New Year’s Eve Day).

            The Roman republican calendar and the Julian calendar both recognized January 1 as the beginning of the New Year. The date was chosen partly in honor of Janus, the Roman god of beginnings and the month’s namesake. The calendar was proposed by Roman consul Julius Caesar in 46 BC as a reform of the earlier Roman calendar, which was largely a lunisolar one.  It took effect on 1 January 45 BC, by edict.  Though medieval Christians attempted to replace January 1 with more religiously significant dates, Pope Gregory XIII created a revised calendar that officially established January 1 as New Year’s Day in 1582. That date was gradually adopted in Europe and beyond; it subsequently spread to countries without dominant Christian traditions.

            Most nations of Europe and their colonies officially adopted 1 January as New Year's Day somewhat before they adopted the Gregorian calendar. France changed to 1 January from 1564, most of Germany did so from 1544, the Netherlands from 1556 or 1573 according to sect, Italy (pre-unification) did so on a variety of dates, Spain and Portugal from 1556, Sweden, Norway and Denmark from 1599, Scotland from 1600, and Russia from 1725.  England, Wales, Ireland, and Britain's American colonies adopted 1 January as New Year's Day from 1752.

        It seems, then, that January 1st has been the start of the New Year (in the Western world)in some way, shape, or form,  for 2068 years.  So, that sated my curiosity about how January 1st became New Year’s Day.  As I further reflected on this year’s turn, I recognized it as my 75th  “new year.”  Three quarters of a century.  Quite a chunk of time.  Makes one realize the finish line is within sight (but you hope it keeps moving farther away).  For whatever reason, it led me to think about my paternal great-grandmother and my maternal grandmother --- both of whom lived to be 84 years old.  It wasn’t so much that they were both 84 when they passed --- it was that “Nana” (my great-grandmother) was born in 1876 and my Grandma was born in 1900. 

           As I considered the history of New Year’s Day, I couldn’t help but consider my own history --- and the fact that I knew someone born when Rutherford B. Hayes was President, and someone born when William McKinley was President!  While my personal timeline overlapped for 11 years with Nana and 35 with Grandma, they had experienced 73 and 49 years, respectively, before I ever showed up.  In terms of U.S. history (I won’t even attempt to consider the scope of World History) Nana was born the year Reconstruction ended and Jim Crow began, she lived through the Gilded Age and industrialization, the Spanish-American War.  At that point, Grandma was born, and the two of them were alive when the Wright Brothers took off, Marconi sent his first radio message, Henry Ford created the Model-T, the Titanic sunk (and Fenway Park opened), World Wars I & II, the Roaring Twenties and the Great Depression, the dropping of the A-Bomb and the beginning of the Cold War.  Nana was still alive when Yuri Gargarin orbited the Earth and Grandma saw Neil Armstrong walk on the moon!  These two women, who had been born in agrarian societies in Bohemia and Sicily, respectively, in a world where beasts of burden pulled plows, had seen this radical progress --- radio, movies, talkies, television all occurred in their lifetimes.  From bi-planes to missiles, from horse-drawn carts to personal automobiles, the Brooklyn Bridge, the Empire State Building, Lindbergh’s flight.  It goes on and on, of course, but the realization, for me, is that as this New Year turns I am, however remotely, connected & related to people who lived through extraordinarily historic times.

              This, in turn, led me to think about something I used to tell the high school students at my last teaching position.  Most of the students at that school had been born in the late 1990’s and early aughts, and very few remembered 9/11.   Periodically --- particularly when I seemed grotesquely out of touch regarding their culture and music --- I would point out, “Hey, I was born in the first half of the last century --- gimme a break.”  It did give them pause (as I watched a few try to do that math in their heads) and led to questions about whether the world itself, like the television shows I described, was in black & white.  And that reminds me that we fading Boomers have lived through quite a bit of history and we should be sharing our stories with the extended families we’re a part of.  At the very least, we can write down what we remember or create a video archive.  I know the Baker and Lacerenza grandchildren I’m lucky enough to spend time with, couldn’t care less about hearing my stories and reminiscences --- right now.  But they are a bright and curious lot and maybe one (or more?), at some point  in the future, will want to know what Grandma and Pop-pop lived through.  They know we went to Woodstock (not very impressed) and experienced “The Sixties” (the high school age boys have a textbook sense of what that means) --- but we haven’t talked about the Moon Landing or the JFK/MLK/RFK assassinations.  There have been some conversations about the Vietnam War but I’m not sure they even know about the Challenger explosion or the Clinton impeachment.

           New Year’s, then, has me reflecting on personal history and the larger world.  As we approach what seems a momentous Presidential election, we may need to look at history to maintain ballast and perspective (I highly recommend reading Jennifer Rubin’s Opinion Column in the Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/12/31/history-conflict-unity-nostalgia/).
It may serve us well to reflect on stories from our own journeys as this New Year begins.  Rubin’s column reminds us that we are too often nostalgic about “the past,” as opposed to remembering the nitty-gritty and the extreme highs and lows of the reality we lived through.  It would be great if the younger members of our families  wanted to hear our stories but, whether they do or not, it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t create some record of your “life well-lived.”  A 2025 New Year’s gift, perhaps --- maybe as much to yourself as to your posterity.

            Happy New Year.
 
Coming Soon:  Democracy and Capitalism, Part Three
 
 
 
 
 

                                                     A Christmas Wish
 
         The NBA’s Detroit Pistons lost their 26th consecutive game last night, tying a League record.  Not a great way to start the Holiday weekend.  I bring it up because, in an odd way, it connects to my take on the Holiday season.  Fifty years ago, in 1974, I began my career as a Varsity basketball coach at Blind Brook High School.  We played our first game in early December against Bronxville High School (where I would later teach and coach basketball).  We did not have a senior on our team, and very few players near or over six feet tall.  The Bronxville team, captained by future NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, beat us 72 to 29 --- and they played their scrubs for much of the second half.  We would go on to lose 15 more games that season, finishing 0-16 and, the following year, we would lose our first 12 games before finally winning a game (and we won two in a row, before losing our last two, finishing 2-14).  You can do the math: we lost 26 games in a row, just like the Pistons.  I bring this up because it taught me an important lesson, and one that connects to the Holiday Season for me.

            I grew up an extremely competitive athlete --- playing football, basketball, baseball, and running track in high school, and then playing football and lacrosse in college.  Luckily for me, I was surrounded by quite a few great athletes and the teams I played on were extraordinarily successful (except for my freshman college lacrosse team, but that’s a story for another time).  I cannot blame my parents for my vicious competitive streak --- it’s something innate (tied to an extreme inclination for perfectionism) and I still  lapse into “that guy,” even while playing senior tennis.  For an athlete as competitive as I, losing 26 consecutive games was not an easy pill to swallow.  Over those early years of coaching basketball, I lost far more games than I won and, while I could find reasons (make excuses), I ultimately had to learn humility, particularly when involved in sports --- and that brings me to the Holiday Season.

            Most of my friends could tell you that, over the years, I’m pretty much a Grinch about Christmas --- but it weirdly ties into that notion of humility.  While I’ve been a devout atheist my entire adult life, I was raised a Roman Catholic and I have to say that the early lessons of the New Testament stuck with me and had a deep influence on certain core beliefs.  If you read the stories about Jesus, it’s hard to not see his basic communist  tendencies --- driving those moneychangers out of the temple, feeding everyone with fishes and loaves, turning the other cheek, seeing everyone as one's “brother.”  Those lessons, particularly caring about the “greater good,” were deeply embedded in me and help explain my own disdain for capitalism (and my career as a teacher & coach).  And that brings me back to the Holiday Season.

            My Grinchiness stems from the gross commercialization of Christmas.  While the Holy Day itself commemorates the birth of Jesus Christ, the holiday as presently constituted, is about things and profits.  It’s about receiving gifts --- and, oh, yeah, giving some, too.  The hard sell starts before Halloween --- the bombardment of ads online and on streaming and tv networks begins in October and accelerates, unabated, through the 25th of December.  While some networks run the “Jesus” movies (or PBS documentaries), the basic essence of who Jesus was and what he preached  is seldom, if ever, focused on.  The notion that someone else comes first, that it is, in fact, “better to give than receive,” that --- whether you believe it or not --- this man sacrificed himself for the greater good  is seldom, if ever, the focus of the day.

            So, not to be the Grinch --- I would ask folks, during the next week, to take a moment to consider why this holiday  (“Holy Day”) exists, who it commemorates and what he believed in --- and act accordingly.  Amid the plethora of NFL and Bowl games, “Holiday Specials” and Hallmark Movies, find a quiet place to be thankful for what you have, to remember those who have helped you along the way, and, maybe, to even reach out and perform a kind gesture you might not otherwise do.  And have a Happy Holiday.