Class Acts

Nelson Riddle and Route 66

2015-11-15T11:54:00.001-08:00

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Here's the Wikipedia entry for Nelson Riddle who composed the music for the TV series: ROUTE 66: "In 1962, Riddle orchestrated two albums for Ella Fitzgerald , Ella Swings Brightly with Nelson , and Ella Swings Gently with Nelson , their first work together since 1959's Ella Fitzgerald Sings the George and Ira Gershwin Songbook .

The mid-1960s would also see Fitzgerald and Riddle collaborate on the last of Ella's 'Songbooks', devoted to the songs of Jerome Kern (Ella Fitzgerald Sings the Jerome Kern Songbook ) and Johnny Mercer (Ella Fitzgerald Sings the Johnny Mercer Songbook ).In 1963, Riddle joined Sinatra's newly-established label Reprise Records , under the musical direction of Morris Stoloff . Much of his work in the 1960s and 1970s was for film and television, including his hit theme song for Route 66; steady work scoring episodes of Batman and other television series, and composing the scores of several motion pictures including the Rat Pack features Robin and the 7 Hoods and the original Ocean's Eleven.

In the latter half of the 1960s, the partnership between Riddle and Frank Sinatra grew more distant as Sinatra began increasingly to turn to Don Costa , Billy May and an assortment of other arrangers for his album projects. Although Riddle would write various arrangements for Sinatra until the late 1970s, Strangers In The Night , released in 1966, was the last full album project the pair completed together.

The collection of Riddle-arranged songs was intended to expand on the success of the title track, which had been a number one hit single for Sinatra arranged by Ernie Freeman .During the 1970s, the majority of his work was for film and television, including the score for the 1974 version of The Great Gatsby , which earned Riddle his first Academy Award after some five nominations.

In 1973, he served as musical director for the Emmy Award winning The Julie Andrews Hour . Nelson Riddle's Orchestra also made numerous concert appearances throughout the 1970s, some of which were led and contracted by his good friend, Tommy Shepard .On March 14, 1977, Riddle conducted his last three arrangements for Sinatra.

The songs, "Linda," "Sweet Lorraine," and "Barbara," were intended for an album of songs with women's names. The album was never completed. "Sweet Lorraine" was released in 1990 and the other two on "The Complete Reprise Studio Recordings" in 1996. [1] 1982 saw Riddle work for the last time with Ella Fitzgerald , on her last orchestral Pablo album, The Best Is Yet to Come."

____________________________________________________________________________

Fats Waller - Ain't Misbehavin' - Stormy Weather (1943)

2014-05-21T11:08:00.000-07:00

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

"Stormy Weather" dates to a American musical film produced and released by 20th Century Fox in 1943. One must remember that America was, in those days, considerably more racially divided than is the case today. Given the slow progress of civil rights, the film was considered to be a showcase of some of the top African-American performers at a time when African-American actors and singers were rarely starred in mainstream Hollywood productions.

Stormy Weather takes its title from a song of the same title dating to 1933. It is inspired by and based on the life of its star --dancer Bill "Bojangles" Robinson.

Along the way, he approaches a beautiful singer named Selina Rogers, played by Lena Horne. It is one of her few non-MGM film appearances and one of only two films from the 1930s-40s in which Horne played a substantial role.

Other notable performers in the movie include Cab Calloway and Fats Waller. Both of them appeared as themselves. This was Robinson's final film. He died in 1949. Waller died a few months after the release.

Musical highlights include Waller performing his composition "Ain't Misbehavin'," Cab Calloway leading his band in his composition "Jumpin' Jive," and a lengthy sequence built around the title song, featuring vocals by Lena Horne and the dancing of Katherine Dunham. Horne also performs in several dance numbers with Robinson.

Fats Waller - Ain't Misbehavin' - Stormy Weather (1943)

Lena Horne - Stormy Weather (1943)

Hedy Lamarr in “Dishonored Lady”

2014-04-28T04:19:00.002-07:00

by Len Hart, the Existentialist Cowboy

Often called the “the most beautiful woman in films”, Hedy Lamarr was, in fact, among the most intelligent. She co-invented radio-guided torpedoes used by the U.S. Navy. [See: the autobiography of George Antheil, her 'partner'].

Some writers have said that the real Hedy Lamarr was, in fact, a 'somewhat disturbed character'. Once convicted of shop-lifting, it was rumored that she often had a “mad flicker” in her eyes. Was she just “acting”? Published sources have said that she was Jewish –not Austrian; her real surname was “Kiesler”.

Her wardrobe was routinely described as “spectacular...nothing less than a fantasy fashion parade”. In “Dishonored Lady, a white fur coat in this film is singled out for comment and admiration. Gowns and jackets were often called a “... cross between Dior and Dali!”

Among Lamar's most often recalled films, “Dishonored Lady” was directed by English director Robert Stevenson credited with several classics to include “"Owd Bob”. Lamar' role in this film may be standard fair: she plays a “gal with a past”, a past about which we, the audience, are curious. Though it is the stuff of many movies, you must watch the film to see why this treatment of it rises above the level of so many others.

Hedy Lamarr, Dishonored Lady

Santana: Smooth

2014-02-01T05:03:00.001-08:00

Written by Thomas and Itaal Shur, "Smooth" is a collaboration between Latin rock band Santana and Rob Thomas of the rock group Matchbox Twenty. By Thomas, produced by Matt Serletic, it won three Grammy Awards to include Record of the Year, Song of the Year, and Best Pop Collaboration with Vocals. It was the final number-one Hot 100 hit of the 1990s.

Originally conceived by Shur as "Room 17", Thomas, re-wrote the lyrics and melody and re-named it "Smooth" to describe an acquaintance --John Bizanes, who was, it is said, "very smooth".
Over time credit for inspiration was given to Thomas' wife, Marisol Maldonado.

"Smooth" was a huge hit in 1999. It spent some 12 weeks as number one on the Billboard Hot 100. It was the first chart-topping song in Carlos Santana's long-running career. Santana's previous and biggest hit had been "Black Magic Woman" which peaked at number four in 1971. "Smooth" stayed in the top ten of the Billboard Hot 100 for 30 weeks, a record only broken by "How Do I Live" by LeAnn Rimes.

In the United Kingdom, "Smooth" first charted at number 75 in the UK Singles Chart in October 1999. On a full release in March 2000 it peaked at number 3, spending eight weeks in the top 40.
"Smooth" also spent a record-breaking ten consecutive weeks at the top of the VSpot Top 20 Countdown, a record that held up until the Dixie Chicks broke it in 2006.
Hat tip: Gene Horvitz

Santana, Rob Thomas

Review: The Creative Process by Brewster Ghiselin

2013-07-01T00:59:00.003-07:00

by Len Hart

The subtitle of this terrific anthology is "Reflections on Invention in the Arts and Sciences". In almost every case, it is the artist, the writer, the scientist him/herself who "reflects". We are privileged to share these thoughts.

In this volume may be found near ramblings by Thomas Wolfe, the lucid mind of Einstein; the troubled mind of van Gogh, the meditative thoughts of William Wordsworth on Westminster Bridge.

Earth has not anything to show more fair:
Dull would he be of soul who could pass by
A sight so touching in its majesty:
This City now doth, like a garment, wear
The beauty of the morning; silent, bare,
Ships, towers, domes, theatres, and temples lie
Open unto the fields, and to the sky;
All bright and glittering in the smokeless air.
Never did sun more beautifully steep
In his first splendour, valley, rock, or hill;
Ne'er saw I, never felt, a calm so deep!
The river glideth at his own sweet will:
Dear God! the very houses seem asleep;
And all that mighty heart is lying still!

--William Wordswroth, Composed upon Westminster Bridge

I cannot imagine a "writer" failing to get something out of this book. It is a collection of essays and not all of them are about writing. Some are about the visual arts! One is a letter by Albert Einstein. Another, by Roger Sessions, is about musical composition. Even the art of sculpture is not forgotten. Nor collage.

Nor science. Kekule is "covered" for having dreamed of a snake eating itself by its tail. Awake, Kekule made the quantum leap: this was the molecular structure of the Benzine molecule.

Most "essays", however, are about writing as writing is believed to be or ought to be, i.e, a 'creative' enterprise. In a single volume, you will find many writers/authors and all of them, it seems, are "speaking" directly to you. That is especially the case with Thomas Wolfe's "The Story of a Novel".

Think of it as a Monet but with words. There are dabs and strokes both here and there and up close they mean very little, but from a respectable distance, the whole will coalesce. So it is with 'the creative process' in general. In a single setting, Wolfe gives you "his" Paris.

The only other "work" which does the same and as well is Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue". Or, of course, Monet's series of paintings of the cathedral at Rouen, a cathedral which seems, as if in a movie, to dissolve before our eyes.

Wolfe writes:

"During that summer in Paris, I think I felt this homesickness more than ever before, and I really believe that from this emotion, this constant and almost intolerable effort of memory and desire, the material and the structure of the books I now began to write were derived."
Now --the obligatory "recommendation": get this book. You won't regret it.

The Future of Movies

2013-05-23T08:20:00.001-07:00

by Len Hart

Movies were originally intended to be projected, seen by a group. A sense of "community", a "shared experience" were an important part of motion pictures even after the advent of television. TV was TV but movies were big screen, often spectacular, obviously more expensive per episode. TV stars were well-known but "Movie Stars" were in another league.

Those days may be gone.

As spectacular as was Cameron's "Avatar", there was no single "star" indispensable to the telling of the tale as was, for example, Bogey in "Key Largo" (hard to imagine anyone else playing the role). One hopes that content and 'craft' can usher in a new era, attract a new audience already inured to a panoply of digital devices.

Steven Soderbergh, however, sees "digital" as a possible savior for the future of motion pictures. He also just gave a much talked about State of Cinema address at the San Francisco International Film Festival.

It’s a bit of a barn-burner, full of anger at the clueless studios. “Cinema is under assault by the studios,” Soderbergh says, and “with the full support of the audience.” And yet he hasn't lost hope entirely, seeing promise, for instance, in the more affordable movie-making allowed by digital technology. (“Whenever people start to get weepy about celluloid,” Soderbergh thinks of a quote he attributes to Orson Welles: “I don't want to wait on the tool. I want the tool to wait on me.”)

He gets into some detail about financial figures, saying that studios insist that it costs $30m to market a film domestically and another $30m internationally. (He also says the electric bill for the Ocean’s 13 casino set was $60,000 a week.)

--David Haglund, Steven Soderbergh on the Future of Cinema

In the end, movies may be rescued by those entities that made motion pictures the popular entertainment of an era, that is, talented, charismatic actors and actresses, i.e, MOVIE STARS.

Peter, Paul and Mary: Puff the Magic Dragon

2013-05-20T07:08:00.001-07:00

"Puff, the Magic Dragon", written by Leonard Lipton and Peter Yarrow, became a huge hit for Peter, Paul and Mary in 1963. The lyrics by Leonard Lipton, a Cornell University student, were were inspired by a poem Ogden Nash poem entitled "Custard the Dragon", a real pet "dragon". "Puff" is ageless, a playmate of Jackie Paper who grows up and eventually loses interest in imaginary adventures.

He leaves Puff alone and depressed. It has been suggested that the line --"A dragon lives forever, but not so little boys" implies that Jackie Paper dies but the Dragon lives on.

Lipton and Yarrow were friend with was friends with Peter Yarrow's housemate when they were all students at Cornell. Lipton is said to have typed the poem on Yarrow's typwriter. Years later, Yarrow credited Lipton with having written the lyrics; he still gets royalties.

Puff the Magic Dragon

Stevie Ray Vaughan Fondly Remembered

2013-05-09T09:43:00.000-07:00

by Len Hart

Stephen "Stevie" Ray Vaughan (October 3, 1954 – August 27, 1990) was an American guitarist, singer-songwriter, and record producer. He is most often referred to as SRV and associated with his group --Double Trouble. Double Trouble also consisted of drummer Chris Layton and bassist Tommy Shannon. As a group, they are credited with having "ignited" a "blues revival" in the 80s. Vaughan's career spanned just seven years but he and his group consistently sold out concerts while albums went gold.

Born and raised in Dallas, Vaughan lived briefly in Graham, Texas. He dropped out of school at age 17 and moved to Austin which was, at the time, beginning to earn its reputation as a music mecca. It was in 1977 that Vaughan created the "Triple Threat Revue" which eventually became "Double Trouble"

In 1982 he his group stunned the crowds at Montreaux --the famous Jazz festival in Switzerland. It was there that he attracted the attention of David Bowie and Jackson Browne. Bowie asked Vaughan to be a part of his album "Let's Dance".

In 1983, Vaughan and Double Trouble signed with Epic Records. Their producer would be the legendary John Hammond Sr. The debut album --Texas Flood --was released that year.

Although his career had progressed successfully, Vaughan checked into a rehabilitation hospital in Atlanta, Georgia to give up a cocaine and alcohol habit before returning to touring with the band. In June 1989, In Step was released and earned the band a Grammy Award for Best Contemporary Blues Performance. On August 27, 1990, Vaughan was killed in a helicopter crash following a performance in East Troy, Wisconsin.

Stevie Ray Vaughan was 35 years old when he died in a helicopter crash outside East Troy, Wisconsin on August 27, 1990. The previous day, Vaughan had relayed to his bandmates a disturbing dream he had where he witnessed his own funeral. That evening, the guitarist, with his band Double Trouble, joined as special guests for a concert at the Alpine Valley Musical Theater, along with Eric Clapton, Buddy Guy, Robert Cray, and Vaughan’s brother, Jimmie. After the show, four helicopters, owned and operated by Omniflight Helicopters Inc., were reserved to fly the artists and their crews back to Chicago. One helicopter was reserved for Stevie, Jimmie, and his wife Connie. Members of Clapton’s crew, however, had already taken seats on the helicopter when the Vaughan’s arrived to board. Eager to return to Chicago, Stevie asked Jimmie and Connie for the last seat.
--How Stevie Ray Vaughan Died

Vaughan's "intense style" is said to have been derived from various sources and music "styles" to include rock and blues most obviously. Those most influential include Albert King, Freddie King, Otis Rush, and Muddy Waters as well as rock legends like Jimi Hendrix and Lonnie Mack. Vaughan was inducted posthumously into the Blues Hall of Fame in the year 2000. A memorial statue was erected in Austin's Auditorium at Shores park. His fame has contibnued to live; he is considered to be one of the greatest musicians to come out of Texas.

SRV: Mary Had a Little Lamb

Stevie Ray Vaughan - Texas Flood (Long version!)

B.B. KING, STEVIE RAY VAUGHAN, ERIC CLAPTON - Why I Sing the Blues

Recording Session: Diana Damrau -- Queen of the Night from The Magic Flute

2013-05-04T13:46:00.001-07:00

Diana Damrau studied with Carmen Hanganu at the Musikhochschule Würzburg. After graduating. she worked in Salzburg with Hanna Ludwig. She has sung in venues throughout the world --the Vienna State Opera, the Metropolitan Opera New York, Covent Garden, the Bavarian State Opera, Munich and the Salzburg Festival.

She was invited to sing the title role in Antonio Salieri's Europa riconosciuta at the re-opening of La Scala, Milan in 2004, under the baton of Riccardo Muti. The Magic Flute (German Die Zauberflöte, K. 620), composed in 1791, is an opera in two acts by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.

The libretto is by Emanuel Schikaneder. The work is a Singspiel, a popular form that included both singing and spoken dialogue. The opera premiered in Vienna September 30, 1791 at the suburban Freihaus-Theater auf der Wieden with Mozart conducting. The role of the Queen of the Night was sung by Mozart's sister-in-law Josepha Hofer. It was immediately evident that Mozart and Schikaneder had achieved a great success and contempory accounts report the opera drawing immense crowds during hundreds of performances during the 1790s.

Diana Damrau: Queen of the Night from The Magic Flute

Roy Orbison: In Dreams

2013-04-07T04:13:00.000-07:00

Roy Kelton Orbison was born on April 23, 1936 at 3:30 pm, in Vernon, Texas. Nadine, his mother, was a nurse. Orbie Lee, his father, a worker. Roy was their second child. For his sixth birthday, Roy asked for a harmonica, but fortunately his daddy gave him a guitar. Orbie Lee is generally credited with teaching Roy to play guitar.
However, he also learned from Charlie Orbison, Orbie Lee’s brother, and Kenneth Schultz, brother of Nadine’s. Together with Clois Russell, Orbie Lee’s neighbor and workmate, they would often play and sing. The first song Roy ever played was the classic “You Are My Sunshine”. He learned very quickly, so that way he could stay up late with the grown-ups and sing.

The Orbison family moved to Forth Worth sometime in 1942. In Forth Worth, they found employment in the munitions and aircraft factories that had been expanded due to America’s entry into World War II. But due to epidemic polio in 1944, Roy and his elder brother Grady were sent back to live with their maternal grandmother, a divorcee, in Vernon. Roy Orbison wrote his first song “A Vow of Love”, in front of his grandmother’s house the same year. In 1945 he entered and won a contest on KVWC in Vernon and this led to his own radio show singing the same songs every Saturday. In 1946 a medicine show came to town and Roy entered the talent contest singing “Mountain Dew” and “Jole Blon”, and tied for first place with a 15-year-old kid. The total prize was $15, so he got $7.50 and gave his buddy half of that for carrying his guitar.
--ROY ORBISON – OFFICIAL BIOGRAPHY

I recall and associate Roy Orbison with Odessa, Texas. In those days, I was just a kid hoping to become a radio announcer/DJ. I had appeared as a Ventriloquist on local TV 'Telethons' that were raising money for the "March of Dimes" fight against polio. Orbison and his "Teen Kings" may have appeared on all of them as well. I met him and his group at one of these broadcasts and, on another occasion --a grand opening of a furniture story in Odessa, TX.

Roy had been writing with Joe Melson, and after a false start they came up with “Uptown” which was recorded and released in late 1959. “Uptown” sold better than any other Orbison record since “Ooby Dooby”, peaking half way up the Hot 100. The sound was something different. It had strings as opposed to fiddles, which were not very common in Nashville.

The third single for Fred Foster’s Monument label was “Only the Lonely”, which became the first song that truly probed the frightening potential of Roy Orbison’s voice, and established his uniqueness. The song peaked at number 2 on the Billboard Charts and became number 1 in the UK.

The challenge to consolidate “Only the Lonely” was a difficult one. The follow-ups, “Blue Angel” and “I’m Hurtin”, were cloned too closely from “Only the Lonely”, and it took another few tries for Orbison and Melson to come up with something special.
...
A few things contributed to Roy Orbison’s success. The songs, the production, and the performance were key factors. The songs were completely original in structure, sound and style. Totally innovative compositions, that didn’t exist until then. It became a style. Fred Foster really went for quality instead of quantity. He was willing to splash money on a session without any guarantee of payback. He was also willing to take a chance on a sound that did not conform to accepted market norms. After that came “Crying”, “Candy Man”, “Dream Baby”, “Working for the Man”, “Leah”, “In Dreams”, “Pretty Paper”, “Blue Bayou”, “Mean Woman Blues “, “It’s Over”. This became an unbroken string of Top 40 hits that lasted for four years. Roy became the top selling American artist and one of the world’s biggest names.

In May 1963, and with the success of “In Dreams”, Wesley Rose eventually accepted an invitation for Roy to tour England on a bill with The Beatles, who meant nothing in the United States at that time. The tour was sold-out in one afternoon. On the first night, Roy did fourteen encores before The Beatles could get on stage.

Roy Orbison was one of the few hit-makers to hold his ground, and even to increase his popularity in the wake of the so-called British Invasion. He did it by maintaining a matchless quality of releases, with an original variety of content, structure, tempo and rhythm. He was also an extremely subtle song craftsman, making changes during the course of a session, or between sessions, adding the final commercial gloss to a song.
“Oh Pretty Woman” was recorded on August 1st, 1964. It was written by Roy together with his new writing partner Bill Dees and it became Roy’s biggest hit, and in fact the most popular song of all time. Released in August in the US and in September in the UK, it went to number one in every country of the World. By most estimates, the song sold about seven million copies that same year.
--ROY ORBISON – OFFICIAL BIOGRAPHY

Flashdance

2013-04-06T10:31:00.000-07:00

Alexandra "Alex" Owens (Jennifer Beals) is an eighteen year-old welder at a steel mill in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, who lives with her dog Grunt in a converted warehouse. Although she aspires to become a professional dancer, she has no formal education, and works as an exotic dancer by night at Mawby's, a neighborhood bar and grill which hosts a nightly cabaret.Lacking family, Alex forms bonds with her coworkers at Mawby's, some who aspire to greater artistic achievements. Jeanie, a waitress, is training to be a figure skater, while her boyfriend, short-order cook Richie, wishes to become a stand up comic.

One night, Alex catches the eye of customer Nick Hurley (Michael Nouri), the owner of the steel mill where she works. After learning that Alex is one of his employees, Nick begins to pursue her on the job, though Alex turns down his advances at first. Alex is also approached by Johnny C. (Lee Ving), who wants Alex to dance at his nearby strip club, Zanzibar.

After seeking counsel from her mentor Hanna Long (Lilia Skala), a retired ballerina, Alex attempts to apply to the Pittsburgh Conservatory of Dance and Repertory. Alex becomes intimidated by the scope of the application process, which includes listing all prior dance experience and education, and she leaves without applying.

Leaving Mawby's one evening, Richie and Alex are assaulted by Johnny C. and his bodyguard, Cecil. Nick intervenes, and after taking Alex home, the two begin a relationship. At a skating competition in which Jeanie is competing, she falls twice during the competition, and sits defeated on the ice and has to be helped away. Later, feeling she will never achieve her dreams, and after Richie has left Pittsburgh to try to become a comic in Los Angeles, Jeanie begins going out with Johnny C. and works for him as a Zanzibar stripper.

After seeing Nick with a woman at the ballet one night, Alex vandalizes his house, only to discover that it was his ex-wife (Belinda Bauer) whom he was meeting for a charity function. Alex and Nick reconcile, and she eventually gains the courage to apply for entrance to the Conservatory.

Nick uses his connections with the arts council to get Alex an audition for the Conservatory. Alex is furious with Nick, since she did not get the opportunity based on her own merit and decides not to go through with the audition. Seeing the results of others' failed dreams and after the sudden death of Hanna, Alex becomes despondent about her future, but finally decides to go through with the audition.
At the audition, Alex initially falters, but begins again, and she successfully completes a dance number composed of various aspects of dance she has studied and practiced, including breakdancing she has seen on the streets of Pittsburgh. The board responds favorably, and Alex is seen joyously emerging from the Conservatory to find Nick and Grunt waiting for her with a bouquet of roses.

The cast includes: Jennifer Beals as Alexandra "Alex" Owens, Michael Nouri as Nick Hurley, Lilia Skala as Hanna Long.

Wikipedia

Wille Nelson: The Party's Over

2013-04-04T08:41:00.001-07:00

by Len Hart

From 1967, Willie Nelson's "The Party's Over" (RCA) is the title track of a 1967 album that Nelson recorded for RCA. Nelson had already recorded "Crazy" and "Funny How Time Slips Away" in an "interim period" not long after Nelson had begun writing songs in Nashville. Later, of course, Nelson would achieve legendary status following his move to Austin, TX where he "re-wrote" his career and perhaps re-invented himself.

"The Party's Over" is often said to be typical of the classic “Nashville Sound” defined as it was by flawless production and what some have called "wispy strings". The voice, of course, defines Nelson. But, at the time, Nelson was not thought to be among "Music City’s" elite.

"The Party's Over" was covered by Phosphorescent on their 2009 album. Matthew Houck said he’d always wanted to record it.

“I didn’t pick them anytime recently,” Houck is quoted as having said; “They’re all songs that I have just always loved. Once I realized that I could do a full-length record, I thought, ‘I can do that.’ Then once I knew it was ten songs – it was those 10 songs I have always loved.”

The lyrics are:

Turn out the lights the party’s over They say that all good things must end Let’s call it a night the party’s over and tomorrow starts the same old thing again

What a crazy, crazy party never seen so many people Laughin’, dancin’, look at you you’re havin’ fun But look at me I’m almost cryin’ but that don’t keep your love from dyin’ Misery ’cause for me the party’s over

Turn out the lights the party’s over They say that all good things must end Let’s call it a night the party’s over and tomorrow starts the same old thing again

Once I had a love undyin’ I didn’t keep it, wasn’t tryin’ Life for me was just one party and then another Broke her heart so many times had to have my party wine But one night she said sweetheart the party’s over

Turn out the lights the party’s over they say that all good things must end Let’s call it a night the party’s over and tomorrow starts the same old thing again

--Written by Willie Nelson

Willie Nelson: The Party's Over

The Beatles: Hey Jude

2013-04-04T06:33:00.001-07:00

Posted by Len Hart

Hey, Jude, don't make it bad Take a sad song and make it better Remember to let her into your heart Then you can start to make it better

Hey, Jude, don't be afraid You were made to go out and get her The minute you let her under your skin Then you begin to make it better.

And any time you feel the pain, hey, Jude, refrain Don't carry the world upon your shoulders Well don't you know that its a fool who plays it cool By making his world a little colder

Hey, Jude! Don't let her down You have found her, now go and get her Remember, to let her into your heart Then you can start to make it better.

So let it out and let it in, hey, Jude, begin You're waiting for someone to perform with And don't you know that it's just you, hey, Jude, You'll do, the movement you need is on your shoulder

Hey, Jude, don't make it bad Take a sad song and make it better Remember to let her into your heart Then you can start to make it better

The Beatles: Hey Jude

Forbidden Planet: Monsters From Our Id

2013-03-24T10:26:00.001-07:00

by Len Hart

Forbidden Planet (1956) was not the first 'space travel' motion picture! Many "space travel" flicks filled seats at the local "picture show" throughout the 1950s. Most of them are memorable for cheesy flying saucers, absurd monsters, death rays and ray guns.

Not yet of the level of 2001: A Space Odyssey, Forbidden Planet, nevertheless, represented a timid maturation of the genre as depicted on film. Much credit must be given Director Fred M. Wilcox and screenwriter Cyril Hume.
Forbidden Planet, staring Walter Pidgeon, Anne Francis, and Leslie Nielsen, is often compared to Shakespeare's The Tempest. The role played by the collective "ID" of those landing on this strange world invites analogies with the work of Carl Jung, specifically with respect to the "sub-conscious" ID, the source of human "will" if not "evil".

Forbidden Planet also makes film history: it is said by many sources to have been the first SCI-FI flick in which homo sapiens travels to an alien world in an alien star system. And they do it in a space-craft of their own. Up to this point, most SCI FI films were about aliens invading Earth and threatening homo sapiens. The notable exception was the early 50s film: Destination Moon in which a rocket, carrying astronauts, is landed on the lunar surface.

Forbidden Planet, however, is about the distant future, warp-drive is implied, and the distance to Altair is assumed to be far outside our solar system. Forbidden Planet is the Star Wars of its day, perhaps the very best science fiction film to have been made in the 1950's.

Forbidden Planet features special effects for which A. Arnold Gillespie, Irving G. Ries,Wesley C. Miller were nominated for Academy Awards, the only major award nominations associated with the film. Forbidden Planet features the groundbreaking use of an all-electronic music musical score.

The concept of 'artificial intelligence' is explored by "Robby the Robot", perhaps first film robot to exhibit much more than "mechanical" computing abilities. Robby, we believe, is conscious and capable of advanced mathematics and logic. Much more than a walking 'tin can', Roby can reason and evinces a "distinct personality"; "he" is, in fact, a supporting character,

When Adams and his crew are sent to Altair in the constellation of Aquilae (some 17 light years from Earth) investigate the silence of a planet inhabited by scientists. They learn that all but two have died. Dr. Morbius and his daughter, Altaira, have somehow survived a hideous monster which roams the planet. Unknown to the visiting crew, Morbius has made a discovery, and has no intention of sharing it (or his daughter!) with anyone.

Special Effects --nominated for an Oscars --are by A. Arnold Gillespie, Irving G. Ries, and Wesley C. Miller. It was the film's "only major award nomination".

Trailer: Forbidden Planet

Young Frankenstein Puttin' on the Ritz

2013-03-24T08:44:00.001-07:00

by Len Hart

One of the funniest movies ever put on film, an outcome owing much (if not everything) to the comic genius of Mel Brooks, whose "The Producers" was my introduction to this comic/film genius and his wit. Years later, I had the good fortune to meet Mel and interview him for a broadcast outlet in Houston.

"Young Frankenstein" is a comic version of the "classical horror film genre". In many ways, it is faithful to the Boris Karloff "Frankenstein" which remains the standard and the "vision" that is forever associated with one of the most frightening monsters to have defined the genre.

It hardly needs repeating that the original "Frankenstein" was the creation of Mary Shelley who was vacationing in Switzerland. It is said that her novel was the result of a either a challenger or a bet.

Mary Godwin, soon to be Percy Shelley's wife, gave us the book, Frankenstein; or The Modern Prometheus, in the summer of 1816. She, Shelley, and other members of Lord Byron's freewheeling crew vacationed with Byron in Switzerland. Mary was the nineteen-year-old daughter of the famous feminist writer Mary Wollstonecraft and the anarchist William Godwin. The group talked about creating a modern Gothic novel. They agreed they'd each have a go at writing one. Mary was the only one who really succeeded.

For someone so young to hand us a creature of such power was astonishing. But it came out of a hotbed of post-industrial-revolution intellectuals, steeped in a morbid fascination with the way science and industrialization were transforming their world.

Mary's antihero, young Victor Frankenstein, tells us, early in the book, that "My reluctant steps led me to M. Krempe, professor of philosophy, an uncouth man, but deeply imbued in the secrets of his science."

Under Krempe's instruction, Frankenstein's Faustian quest for knowledge takes him to the terrifying secret of life. What that secret is, we're not sure -- although it's clearly kin to the new electrical science of Franklin, Volta, Davy and Faraday.

--Dr. John Lienhard, The Engines of Our Ingenuity, No. 1337: FRANKENSTEIN

Brooks' comedic version is faithful to the "look" of earlier films. It is shot entirely in black and white at a time when almost every Hollywood offering was in glorious color. Brooks was, likewise, true to the 1930s-style opening credits and scene transitions to include "iris outs, wipes, and fades to black".

Young Frankenstein is a 1974 American comedy film directed by Mel Brooks and starring Gene Wilder as the title character, a descendant of the infamous Dr. Victor Frankenstein. The supporting cast includes Teri Garr, Cloris Leachman, Marty Feldman, Peter Boyle, Madeline Kahn, Kenneth Mars, Richard Haydn and Gene Hackman. The screenplay was written by Brooks and Wilder.[3]

The film is an affectionate parody of the classical horror film genre, in particular the various film adaptations of Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein produced by Universal in the 1930s. Most of the lab equipment used as props were created by Kenneth Strickfaden for the 1931 film Frankenstein. To further reflect the atmosphere of the earlier films, Brooks shot the picture entirely in black-and-white, a rarity in the 1970s, and employed 1930s-style opening credits and scene transitions such as iris outs, wipes, and fades to black. The film also features a notable period score by Brooks' longtime composer John Morris.

--Flavio Rizzardi

Revolution

2013-03-24T07:17:00.000-07:00

"Hasta Siempre, Comandante", or simply "Hasta Siempre", is a 1965 Spanish song by Cuban composer Carlos Puebla. The song's lyrics are a reply to revolutionary Che Guevara's farewell letter when he left Cuba, in order to foster revolution in the Congo and later Bolivia,[1] where he would be captured and executed.

The lyrics recount key moments of the Cuban Revolution, describing Che Guevara and his role as a revolutionary commander. The song became iconic after Guevara's death, and many left-leaning artists did their own cover versions of the song afterwards. The title is a part of Guevara's well known saying "¡Hasta la Victoria Siempre!" ("Until Victory, Always!"). The song was re-released by Nathalie Cardone in 2002.

Natalie Cardone: Hasta Siempre

Maxwell Anderson's "Winterset"

2013-03-04T10:37:00.001-08:00

by Len Hart

James Maxwell Anderson (15 December 1888 – 28 February 1959) was an American playwright, author, poet, journalist and lyricist. His most famous play --Winterset, a drama written largely in poetic form, deals with an American tragedy: the executions of Sacco and Vanzetti two Italian immigrants whose politics were considered to be radical.

In fact, Ferdinando Nicola Sacco (April 22, 1891–August 23, 1927) and Bartolomeo Vanzetti (June 11, 1888–August 23, 1927) were anarchists --not terrorists. Few today believe that the charges against them were, in any way, justified. The trial, say critics, is notable for the "utter lack of evidence" against the defendants. Nevertheless, the two men were charged, tried and found guilty of killing two men during a bank robbery in South Braintree, Massachusetts. After a series of appeals, Sacco and Vanzetti were executed August 23, 1927.

There is still a highly politicized dispute over their guilt or innocence. Many believe that much of the evidence was contradictory and there remains no consensus among historians.

The plot of 'Winterset' follows the 'quest' of Mio Romagna to prove his father’s innocence years after Bartolomeo Romagna had been executed for the crimes of robbery and murder. Mio's quest is complicated by his love for Miriamne Esdras and difficult ethical decisions resulting from his connection to her family.

Not surprisingly --'Winterset' is a very political play with "Shakespearean meditations" on faith, truth, justice, love, and duty. It frequently alludes to the Bard as well as to Judaic philosophy.

The Broadway production, produced and directed by Guthrie McClintic, opened September 25, 1935 at the Martin Beck Theatre in New York and ran for 195 performances. The cast included Burgess Meredith, Margo, and Eduardo Ciannelli. It won the first ever New York Drama Critics' Circle Award for Best Play.

Meredith, Margo, and Ciannelli were joined by John Carradine, Stanley Ridges, and Mischa Auer in the 1936 film adaptation, directed by Alfred Santell.

Maxwell Anderson's "Winterset"

The Mists of Avalon

2012-11-03T08:15:00.000-07:00

by Len Hart

The year was 1190 shortly after the death of Henry II, the Plantagenet Norman King of England. In the west --the Welsh, who had never submitted to Saxon rule, had no intention of submitting to the new Norman Kings.

It is against this backdrop that the monks of Glastonbury Abbey may have made an archaeological discovery which intrigues us to this day --or they managed to pull off one of history's greatest hoaxes and, in doing so, made possible the careers of writers, playwrights, poets and storytellers over a period of some 1,000 years. The jury is still out.

Imagine the life of a medieval historian --Gerald of Wales. It is his account of the reputed discovery of the bodies of King Arthur and his "second" wife Guinevere near the abbey of Glastonbury in 1189/90 that resonates as strongly with moderns as it did among contemporaries in the court of Henry II.

In our own lifetime, when Henry II was reigning in England [ Henry died 6 July 6, 1189 ] strenuous efforts were made in Glastonbury Abbey to locate what must have once been the splendid tomb of Arthur. It was the King himself who put them on to this, and Abbot Henry [ Henry de Sully, appointed abbot on 14 September 1189 ], who was later elected Bishop of Worcester, gave them every encouragement.
-- Liber de Principis instructione, Gerald of Wales

In Gerald's account the Glastonbury monks acted upon information that had been given to Henry II by a bard. In the Abbey cemetary, they unearthed a hollowed-out log containing two bodies from a depth of sixteen feet; the "coffin" was covered with a stone slab found at a depth of seven feet. On the underside of the slab was an oddly shaped cross inscribed in latin:

Here lies buried the famous King Arthur in the isle of Avalon with his second wife Guinevere
--Speculum Ecclesiae, Gerald of Wales, c.1216

That is Gerald's account of the inscription, of course, but was he telling the truth? And Glastonbury is not Avalon --or is it? One must keep in mind that there are many contemporary accounts of the recovery of a tomb at Glastonbury and they vary only in detail. Indeed, many accounts vary not a word with regard to the inscription on the cross. Geoffrey of Monmouth claimed that Arthur died at the battle of Camlann in 542 which is consistent with other sources --Adam of Domerham, for example -- which claim Arthur's grave was discovered 648 years after his death. Simple arithmetic gives one the year of the excavation: 1190. Problematic, however, is the style of lettering; the inscription is not thought by scholars to predate the tenth century.

Did the monks pull off a hoax? Admittedly the monks would have benefited from a "relic" which would attract, in modern terminology, the "pilgrim market". Yet they never seemed to have tried to exploit the find with a medieval public relations campaign. They did, however, maintain that their abbey had an Apostolic founding i.e., it was founded by original Christian apostles and that among them was Joseph of Arimathea who had carried with him to England, the Holy Grail. Now that is a relic!

The Grail/Glastonbury connection is most intriguing. Had the monks been interested in hoaxing the public in order to increase the pilgrim traffic they might have found a more credible Grail-bearer than Joseph. Many scholars point out that but for their assertions, there is no evidence that Joseph of Arimathea ever left the middle east, much less venturing as far afield as England. A better candidate is the Apostle Phillip who led a first century Apostolic mission to Gaul. Writing in the third decade of the twelfth century, the highly regarded historian William of Malmesbury raised the possibility that Phillip's mission was not confined to Gaul (modern France). The best defense for the monks' claim of Apostolic origin is to be found in William's original version of his De Antiquitate:

There are documents of no small credit, which have been discovered in certain places to the following effect: 'No other hands than those of the disciples of Christ erected the church of Glastonbury.' Nor is it dissonant from probability; for if Philip, the Apostle, preached to the Gauls, as Freculphus relates in the fourth chapter of his second book, it may be believed that he planted the word on this side of the Channel also.
[ emphasis mine, LH ]

That was the monks' story and they were sticking with it; moreover, they had less to gain by doing so. The Joseph of Artimathea scenario is a premise which found itself resurrected, so to speak, in various guises from Mallory to Tennyson to Speilberg. From various and disparate sources, however, one may piece together a fascinating tale. Joseph of Arimathea, having provided the burial chamber of Christ, ventured to England carrying with him the blood and sweat of Christ in a simple vessel: the Holy Grail. Later, as Saxon tribes threatened to displace the original Britons, a champion was made king: Arthur. Arthur himself was a saviour figure who defended his homeland against foreign invaders. By the twefth century, the Norman threat had replaced the Saxon; the Celtic Welsh --who submitted to neither --kept alive the hope that Arthur yet lived and would return to heal the land and usher in a millenium in which right ruled might.

Who's to say that isn't so?

Of those stories, those legends, those dreams of mankind's redemption now seemingly lost in the mists of time and Avalon, Winston Churchill, in his History of the English Speaking Peoples said it best:

"If they are not true, they ought to be!"

Through the Mists of Time and Skellig-Michael

2012-11-02T05:56:00.000-07:00

by Len Hart

When Mary of Guise garrisoned four thousand troops in Edinburgh, Scotland England decided that it was time to launch a pre-emptive strike. Norfolk's position: you are either for us or against "...the terrorists. His raison d'etre was to smoke out "heretics" and bring them to justice. In Elizabeth's England, "justice" consisted of being hanged but not until dead. Then one (if male) was castrated while still alive, drawn and quartered.

I do not like wars. They have uncertain outcomes.

--Elizabeth I of England

Scotland was never capable of launching a full scale invasion of England --either under Mary of Guise as regent or later under the rule of Mary Queen of Scots. Mary, a Catholic, was "dispatched" to Scotland because Francis II of France had died and Mary's mother-in-law, Catherine de Medici did not like her.

But the religious "cultural" wars were even worse in France. France was officially Catholic, but Protestants --called Huguenots --insisted upon the freedom to worship in their own way. A brutal massacre of Huguenots in 1572 --called the Massacre of St Bartholomew's Eve --was the 911 of its day. Some six thousand or more men, women, and children, were butchered on the streets of Paris. Descriptions of blood running ankle deep through the streets echo surviving eyewitness accounts of the Christian Crusader slaughter of Muslims, Jews, and Christians during the First Crusade.

The atrocity inspired a play by Christopher Marlowe: The Massacre of Paris, a work of protestant propaganda, designed to rally righteous indignation and perhaps justify similar atrocities against Catholics. Certainly, shock waves reverberated throughout Europe. Queen Elizabeth cancelled negotiations for the hand of King Charles's brother, Francis, Duke of Alencon.

Christopher Marlowe most certainly did not write Shakespeare. Marlowe died of a knife wound in 1593 and was long dead by the time Shakespeare wrote Hamlet, Richard II, Richard III, MacBeth, The Merchant of Venice (inspired by Marlowe's "Jew of Malta"?) It is difficult to understnad why a rake, a liar, and a common grifter like Richard Poley, however well-connected, would have helped Marlowe fake his own death in Deptford in 1593 for mere friendship sake. It is more probable that Poley helped murder Marlowe --who had apparently fallen from Elizabeth's good graces. And there was most probably something in it for Poley, Ingram Frizer, and Nicholas Skeres --all of whom helped frame Mary Queen of Scots by way of the Babbington Plot. She was thus groomed for the block. Both Marlowe and Poley had been spies for Walsingham, a fanatic protestant. Once a spy, it is difficult to come in out of the cold.

One of the things I found interesting is the deep blue in Scotland. Not surprising when one considers centuries of Scottish-French diplomacy aimed at undermining England's growing influence after the reign of Henry VIII. Mary, Queen of Scots was Catholic, was welcomed in Scotland. When she fell from grace, she sought asylum in England. It turned out not to have been a good idea. Hers is a sad life. She represents one of several significant links to the Italian Renaissance. She was the daughter-in-law of Catherine de Medici. Catherine was the daughter not of Lorenzo de Medici called Il Magnifico0 but of Lorenzo de Medici II. It was this "second" Lorenzo to whom the exiled Machiavelli had kissed up in hopes of regaining a position of influence in Florence. He was not successful and lived out his life writing and tending his fields.

Another connection to the Italian Renaissance from that era is none other than William Shakespeare. There is evidence that young William had read translations of Plato by Marcilio Ficino, perhaps the most prominent member of Lorenzo de Medici's Plato Academy. Shakespeare --already familiar with Ovid --most probably read a "cache" of literature from Lorenzo's "academy", a group of distinguished scholars with whom young Michelangelo was in contact daily. This explains Shakespeare's fascination with and knowledge of all things Italian. So many plays, so many Italian settings: The Merchant of Venice0 , Romeo and Juliet, Two Gentlemen from Verona, Julius Caesar, et al. Also interesting is the "Orthodox" church (deep pink on the map). It's too easy to overlook the influence of the Ottoman empire in what we now call Russia. The distinctive architecture of the Orthodox churches come to mind.

There is a Russian Orthodox church in what was "Calvin Country" --Geneva. Those countries most often identified with the Latin-based languages are "Roman" Catholic. Except, of course, Ireland. But Ireland's History is both sad and fascinating. A book of about ten years ago was entitled: "How the Irish Saved Civilization".

Lord Kenneth Clark pointed out that even earlier literacy and civilization survived but only "...by the skin of its teeth" on the outer fringes of what had been the great Roman Empire. Civilization gain precarious footholds in bleak, cold, windswept places like Skelleg Michael in Western Ireland and Iona founded by St. Columba in the year 534 --a date that is contemporaneous with the life of King Arthur, if he existed. Arthur is often called the "last Roman" due to the fact that he was a Romanized Briton. It is claimed that he waged war against "invading" Angles and Saxons. If it were not for those invasions, England might have appeared pink in that map.

As for Arthur: if the stories about him are not true, they ought to be (apologies to Winston Churchill). Ireland had no Arthur but did have St. Patrick --another Romanized Brit. In his youth, St. Patrick (Patricius) committed a heinous crime and carried a guilty conscience to his grave. His "confession" is one of only two surviving sources of information about his life. It reads like a contemporary document in that we glimpse this man's personality, his very thought processes. Unlike many contemporary documents, however, it is remarkably free of guile. St. Patrick is what he is and speaks clearly from across the centuries.

I am Patrick, a sinner, most unlearned, the least of all the faithful, and utterly despised by many. My father was Calpornius, a deacon, son of Potitus, a priest, of the village Bannavem Taburni\'e6; he had a country seat nearby, and there I was taken captive.

For although I be rude in all things, nevertheless I have tried somehow to keep myself safe, and that, too, for my Christian brethren, and the virgins of Christ, and the pious women who of their own accord made me gifts and laid on the altar some of their ornaments and I gave them back to them, and they were offended that I did so.

--Patricius, called Patrick, translated from the Latin by Ludwig Bieler

The details are lost in the mists of history, but charges were brought against Patrick. His confession answers some of those charges. From his allusions to the gifts that were made to him, We might conclude that the charges might have involved sexual improprieties. There had been missionaries even while the empire survived but, significantly, none of them had proselytized beyond the borders of Rome's frontiers.

None, that is, but Patrick. Patrick was, in fact, a threat to the authority of the church in Rome and, sure enough, he was in trouble with authorities in Rome. Were the charges against him trumped up? Were they motivated by Rome\rquote s displeasure with him. His closet Catholicism as well as the fact that literate Europeans of the day, especially those in northern climes, in general were fascinated with things Italian had something to do with it too. Shakespeare had goodreason to be a "closet" Catholic. Sir Francis Walsingham, a master spy employed a small army of accomplished agent provocateurs to enforce the "state" religion. The pervert, Richard Topcliffe, presages the Bush administration's obsession with torture as Elizabeth's torturer in chief.

With what he was paid, Topcliffe maintained a lavish private home inwhich he indulged in torturous perversions for God and Queen. Elizabeth's was cheated; Topcliffe would have done it for the jollies he got. Indeed! Fans of Edward de Vere as the author of Shakespeare find it hard to believe that a rustic from Warwickshire could have beenso erudite about not only Italy but matters of law and geo-politics. That's their strongest argument. As Charles Burford, President of the Shakespeare Oxford Society 1995-1997, said: "If you get Shakespeare wrong, you get the whole Elizabethan era wrong." He was probably right about that, but it doesn't follow that because de Vere is depicted carrying a spear ( Shake spear0 , get it?) that de Vere wrote that body of work that we call Shakespeare. Secondly, like Marlowe, de Vere died too soon. Most damning to the Oxfordians, however, are the "stylometic" studies of de Vere's "language" compared to Shakespeare.

The closer match is Marlowe --not de Vere. Another, better match than de Vere is Elizabeth I herself. However talented a writer and actress, Elizabeth most certainly didn't have the time to write "Shakespeare". It is said now that she didn't even write the famous speech made at Tilbury as the Armada approached. What a shame!! As Churchill might have put it: if she didn't write it, she should have!!

Christopher Marlowe may have been one of them. But, neither did Marlowe write Shakespeare. Like de Vere, he died too soon. Shakespeare's most productive period began after Marlowe's death in Deptford. In the end,Shakespeare is that body of work that we call "Shakespeare". As the bard himself --presaging Bertrand Russell and the philosophers of philosophical analysis --put it: "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

Mark Twain didn't believe that Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare. But Twain said of Wagner: "It's better than it sounds." "TheMarch into the Grave," is a caricature by A. Paul Weber illustrating Ernst Niekisch's 1932 pamphlet "Hitler-ein deutsches Verh\'e4ngnis". Both pamplet and cartoon predicted that the Nazis would lead Germany to disaster. By Analogy: Americans had been warned AT LEAST since the regime of Bush I about the disaster that the Bush crime family would portend for America. Who listened? And who did anything about it?

An American in Europe

2012-10-30T06:40:00.000-07:00

by Len Hart

Much is written about the so-called "Ugly American". The "Ugly American" still exists but one hopes "he" is a relic of those days when transatlantic flights were coming into their own. Europe, for most Americans, was still exotic. Twain, Wolfe, the James' brothers William and Henry, et al were of another generation, another era.

Business travel has made Europe a convenient destination. From the East Coast, it's a mere hop. Aside from backpackers and business execs, there is still a "gentile" way to enjoy and absorb.

Not just American pop culture is appreciated here. American authors may be found in English in bookstores. The French adopted jazz and rock a quite some time ago. More recently, The Simpsons is a big hit on TV and movies. Sadly, however, The Simpsons does not always translate well. The inside jokes about the FOX network are, for the most part, lost on French audiences.

American Country and Western music is also big. I found Swiss music fans who knew as much about Hank Williams as I did. American expatriates in Europe fare better when they embrace and appreciate local cultures on their own terms. If I wanted American-style mega-malls, I might have stayed at home. I love the local color and the villages at least as much or more as I enjoyed a very big city --London. I love wines from the Jura as well as Ale from the Wheatsheaf in Rushden in Northants, England. I also like the little cafes in Versoix between Geneva and Nyon.

Throughout England, I sought out REAL ale --not the fizzy, pop bottle beers one gets in the US. Once in York, a "Yorkie" entertained the entire pub with a story of how mother duck and all her little ducklings following in a row had stopped traffic all over York. In France, I like the funky, little coffee shops where I order a "renverse". Starbucks, eat your heart out. I also seek out the art. I discovered original Corot paintings of a neighborhood where he lived in Geneva.

Nearby by U S standards, are two former residences of Voltaire. I was allowed to examine several of his handwritten letters. None were to Rousseau, however, but all were in an impeccable "hand". No one can write like that today. In London, I found Carlyle's house and Whistler's too. And I found several favorite pubs --the Christopher Wren (which I fear succumbed to new development near St. Paul's), The Crown (near the British Museum), and The Thistle near Picadilly. Always seek out the pubs serving "Real Ale". Many, perhaps all, good English pubs offer lunch ranging from 'pub grub' to fine roast beef.

In Florence, there are some great little coffee shops between between the Stazione di Santa Maria Novella and the Santa Maria del Fiore (Duomo). The hotels are moderate and very comfortable. You are within walking distance of the Piazza del Signoria, the Cathedral (with Brunelleschi,'s dome) the Accademia and Michelangelo's David, the Uffizi where is found Michelangelo's "Holy Family", Titian's Venus of Urbino, Botticelli's "Birth of Venus", "Primavera", Leonardo's "Anunciation", "Adoration of the Magi", and Henry James' favorite painting --a portrait by Bronzino. It was the inspiration for his novel --"The Wings of the Dove".

As interesting as the art, the history and the Signoria and the Medici tombs was the four hour lunch I indulged just across the street from San Lorenzo.

Sinatra and Jobim: The Girl From Ipanema

2012-10-11T03:09:00.001-07:00

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Two 'masters' appeared on television together and made TV history. The masters were Frank Sinatra --the recognized elder statesman of 'cool', a founding member of the 'rat pack'; representing a younger generation --Antonio Carlos Jobim --the man who will be forever defined by the huge hit: The Girl From Ipanema.

In fact, Jobim is credited with having "invented a musical genre" --the Bossa Nova --sensual, compelling, hypnoted if not spiritual. The alchemy turned out to be a combination of samba rhythms partnered with jazz improvisation. It's hard to listen to Bossa Nova without summoning images of a sunrise seen from Rio.

This 'new beat' inspired a new generation of jazz and pop singers. It's influence persists in what was eventually called 'smooth jazz' which, in fact, became a radio format. Stan Getz, meanwhile, helped Jobim introduce Bossa Nova to America with the LP, "The Girl From Ipanema" released shortly after Jobim's death. Frank Sinatra's collaborations with Jobim are on Reprise. Also, check out the original classic Getz/Gilberto debut from 1964.

Joanie Sommers: Softly, The Brazilian Sound

2012-10-10T07:03:00.000-07:00

by Len Hart

Joanie Sommers (born Joan Drost, Buffalo, New York, February 24, 1941), is an American singer and actress with a long career of jazz, standards and popular material and extensive show-business credits. Once billed as "The Voice of the Sixties", and associated with top-notch arrangers, song-writers and producers, Sommers' popular conception nevertheless became inexorably tied to her biggest, yet most uncharacteristic, hit song "Johnny Get Angry."

--Wikipedia

But it was only a bit later when she released an album of Bossa Nova numbers that blew me away. Still a teen ager, I had landed a job with a local FM station and put Joanie's Bossa Nova on the air immediately. It was like a breath of fresh air. Her unique voice caressed subtle Bossa rhythms like a cool sea breeze. She handled rhythms and phrasing as subtly as did Stan Getz --lilting, gently swinging, precise.

Even now, listening to her albums are like sipping Pina Coladas, barefoot on a sunset beach. Rio never had a better ambassador. The good news is: this sound is as fresh as ever.

Timeless! This collection features some of the songs that I remember from that sixites release --Quiet Nights and Meditation, specifically. But every song she touches, she makes hers. Joanie is definitely among the great vocalists.
________________________________________________________________________________

A Farewell to Arms

2012-09-18T10:40:00.000-07:00

By Len Hart

A very young Gary Cooper (Frederick) and a young and beautiful Helen Hayes star in this classic made from the Hemmingway story. For those of us who remember Gary Cooper as the tall, quiet, always good guy, it may be difficult to see him as a party guy who falls in love and goes AWOL from the ambulance corps while in the heat, the midst of battle. Even so, the acting is wonderful (it won 2 Oscars) even if the sound and picture are badly out of sync, it is still worth watching over and over again.

Lieutenant Frederic Henry is a young American ambulance driver serving in the Italian army during World War I. At the beginning of the novel, the war is winding down with the onset of winter, and Henry arranges to tour Italy. The following spring, upon his return to the front, Henry meets Catherine Barkley, an English nurse’s aide at the nearby British hospital and the love interest of his friend Rinaldi. Rinaldi, however, quickly fades from the picture as Catherine and Henry become involved in an elaborate game of seduction.
...
When Henry is wounded on the battlefield, he is brought to a hospital in Milan to recover. Several doctors recommend that he stay in bed for six months and then undergo a necessary operation on his knee. Unable to accept such a long period of recovery, Henry finds a bold, garrulous surgeon named Dr. Valentini who agrees to operate immediately. Henry learns happily that Catherine has been transferred to Milan and begins his recuperation under her care. During the following months, his relationship with Catherine intensifies. No longer simply a game in which they exchange empty promises and playful kisses, their love becomes powerful and real.

To reveal more would be a 'spoiler'.

A Farewell to Arms

Truth, Time and 'Absolute Space'

2012-09-17T06:48:00.000-07:00

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowby

When Galileo was compelled to recant, it is said that he muttered inaudibly under his breath: "...but it DOES move". 'It' being Earth, of course. The Catholic Church had maintained its doctrine of an unmoving Earth in unmoving space, a 'God's eye view' of absolute space about unmoving objects. The Church insisted upon its version of the way the universe was created and worked.

If I should ever be compelled to 'recant' my liberal, progressive views of both politics and metaphysics, it will be the because the American right wing will have created and enforced a dictatorship of both the very stupid and those who choose to be ignorant, a 'faith based dictatorship', a 'faith based tyranny'. Those who know better but rationalize their accommodation with such a dictatorship epitomize what the Existentialists call 'bad faith'! Any school curriculum, any dictatorship derived from either deliberate ignorance or 'bad faith' must be opposed and replaced by a true democratic system and based on egalitarian principles that are subject to reality checks and pragmatic expectations.

My views are entirely consistent with any religion based upon 'faith'. Faith does not require proof or even meaningful sentences. Faith is just that: faith. But 'certitude' –certainly the best word to describe the more militant fundamentalist churches --is inconsistent with both faith and science. One cannot have faith if one is certain and if one is certain faith is not required. It cannot be both ways. Therefore, religion, by definition, must not be militant. When it is, it ceases to be religion and when religion ceases to be based on faith becomes dogma. Even the fundamentalist baptist church I grew up in 'preached' that the acceptance of Christ must be chosen freely! It follows, then, that if it is coerced or induced through brainwashing, the choice is not free. Like a bad vaccination, it doesn't 'take'.

That brings up the matter of William Jennings Bryan who was, in many respects, a very admirable and honest person. Sort of the Ron Paul of his day. But at Dayton, TN he supported efforts of the state to IMPOSE upon a curriculum a religious agenda. By definition, 'faith' cannot be imposed. Any oath imposed by law or coerced at the point of a gun or threat of excommunication is invalid. The very notion is self-contradictory. [see: Darrow, Darwin and Dayton ]

A more recent example is Sarah Palin whose record of trying to put 'creationists' on School Boards is anathema to those who believe in freedom of religion as guaranteed in the First Amendment. This is not a matter of faith; 'creationists' believe their theory to be fact. As their acts have now made this a political issue, it is fair game for debate. For them 'creationism' is not a matter of faith but of fact. The truth is that 'creationism' is a pseudo-science that they would have us teach in school science classes. I oppose that. I would oppose it for logical reasons even IF I subscribed to the 'creationist' ideology.

As Cafferty said of Palin: "...this women is one 72 year old's heartbeat away from the White House and if that doesn't scare you it should."

As 'science', the 'creationist' ideology is easily disproved It comes down to this: if we can look up at the sky at night and see Andromeda, 'creationists' are wrong! Andromeda has been proven to be some 2 million light years distant. We see Andromeda as it was some 2 million years ago. Seeing it proves that the universe is exponentially older than the mere several thousand years that Palin ascribes to it. If we can see it at all, 'creationism' is wrong. Creationism is not science but faith, in fact, 'bad faith'.

The distance to Andromeda can be determined very precisely.

By comparing the absolute and apparent magnitudes, Ribas's team concluded the Andromeda Galaxy is 2.52±0.14 million light-years from Earth. This agrees perfectly with the Cepheid-based distance to Andromeda: 2.5 million light-years. The newly determined distance, however, does not depend on assuming a distance to the Large Magellanic Cloud. The agreement means astronomers can probably trust Cepheid distances to more distant galaxies, such as those in the Virgo and Fornax clusters.
--First direct distance to Andromeda

This alone disproves Palinesque nonsense. We can see Andromeda. I found Andromeda as a kid in Odessa, TX. I had nothing more than a good pair of hand-me-down binoculars, a shaky tripod and a star map. It is the only Galaxy visible to the naked eye. If we had discovered no other object, we must conclude, therefore, that the universe is very old. Most scientists are agreed that the age of the universe is some 13.7 billion years.

Of course, there are many more objects that are much, much more distant than Andromeda; they are easily discerned by the Hubble telescope, considerably more advanced than a simple pair of hand me down 7x35 binoculars duct taped to a half-assed tripod.

Theory is good! The 'creationist' position with regard to the teaching of 'creationism' in public schools, however, is a straw man. Every curriculum I have ever seen teaches science as theory. But creationism is not science nor is it a scientific 'theory'. Scientific theories are subject to being disproved and upon being disproved ––discarded. Religious dogma, by contrast, is 1) believed and/or espoused upon faith – not fact; 2) almost never provable one way or another even by experiment; 3) embraced or adopted upon 'decrees' issued by 'authority', in every imaginable instant it is a self-appointed 'authority'. The process differs little from that of 'the Church' in Rome which opposed Galileo. They were the 'authority' and Galileo was not.

The 'authority' of the church was, in the final analysis, merely assumed and asserted by those who had assumed it. It was decreed from the top and compelled with threats. Churches of almost every persuasion function similarly. Upon no proof or evidence, they presume to tell rational human beings what to think. The 'authoritarian' nature of organized religion, thus, nullifies the individual conscience and, in all matters verifiable, the church may be at odds.

In Existentialist terms, the worst creationists espouse their 'theory' in bad-faith. They know it to be untrue but insist that you believe it. Many may know it to be untrue or beyond verification by any means but espouse it anyway ––knowing it to be untrue or, worse, beyond verification of any kind one way or the other. This is dis-honest.

Meaningful theories are subject to proof or disproof. Articles of faith, by definition, are not. Because of the genius of our founders, people are free to act upon their religious convictions and may worship in the church of their choice –or not! Anyone insisting that religious faith be taught in schools financed with your tax monies violates your rights, specifically 'Freedom of Religion' which is guaranteed you in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This is the law!

My good friend Douglas Drenkow wrote:

On the other hand, the Left – from the beginnings of humankind – has challenged us to think for ourselves, in both matters of reason and faith, while respecting those who have proven themselves advanced in studies or achievements in various fields.

That describes what should be our role. The First Amendment is respectful of those who profess a faith in 'good faith' and guarantees a right of dissent for those who are of a different persuasion.

Jean-Paul Sartre and Bertolt Brecht have defined 'integrity' far more effectively than any 'bible thumping' fundamentalist preacher that I had been forced, as a child, to endure. Both Sartre and Brecht addressed the issue of bad faith, essentially, the 'condition' in which an individual appropriates a false notion of self and as an inevitable result, the world. Bertolt Brecht summed it up: "A man who does not know the truth is just an idiot but a man who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a crook". The fashion photographer Richard Avedon was even more succinct: "You cannot expect another man to carry your shit!"

The GOP –as a whole –is premised upon 'bad faith'. Recent GOP Presidents – Ronald Reagan, Bush Sr., Bush Jr., ––courted the 'religious right' in 'bad faith'. The case of the two Bushes may be cause for alarm. Both were members of Yale's infamous 'Skull and Bones', most certainly a secret society about which John F. Kennedy had warned the nation in his so-called 'Secret Societies Speech'. What little is known of the Skull and Bones leads one to believe that it is a Satanic Cult at odds with religion.

To the extent that much organized religion in America (especially the 'super churches' of the 'super fundamentalist evangelical movement) is but a mass manifestation of 'bad faith' the exploitation may be mutual, in other words --a circle jerk.

People do not seek religion because they wish to be moral. I doubt that there is any statistical correlation between the espousal of religion and morality. On the other hand, moral people may be found among Atheists and agnostics.

I am in good company when I am criticized for raising doubts among the faithful. Upon his conviction on similar charges, Socrates was forced to drink hemlock. He might have saved himself had he 're-canted' --a tactic favored by the 'establishment'.

The tactic is, In fact, a Faustian bargain in which one trades his soul for his life. Because he believed that "a man's soul is his self" [ the existentialist point of view], St. Thomas More turned down the 'offer'. In Robert Bolt's great play "A Man for All Seasons", More tells his daughter, Meg: "...when a man takes an oath, Meg, he's holding his own self in his own hands. Like water and if he opens his fingers - he needn't hope to find himself again" A description of 'bad faith'. Later, when More is 'sold out' by the ambitious Richard Rich: "Why, Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world... But for wales ----?"

Another great existentialist play from the period is Jean Anouilh's Becket; ou l'honneur de Dieu. As the title suggests, Becket, having first served his King with distinction, found his 'honor' in the service of "God". To act contrary to that would have been, for Becket, the supreme act of 'bad faith'. Forced to make the existential choice, Becket chose the honor of God above his duty to his King. Simplistically, he lost his life but saved his soul. Poor Galileo! He saved only his life.

I saw both movies in the same year in which I heard Stokely Carmichael address an audience at Cullen Auditorium on the University of Houston campus. It was historic --Stokely Carmichael's promise to keep alive the revolution that the assassinations of RFK and Martin Luther King Jr the following year would end. With them, the 'dreamed' seemed to have perished.

JFK could have made the Faustian bargain with the Bush crime family that even then, via the Sr Bush, was directing the CIA effort against Cuba. RFK threatened the same people. Just recently, a BBC documentary established that RFKs 'killer' was most certainly the CIA. Martin Luther King, of course, represented the 'black' revolution that would have rocked the establishment.

If a man's soul is his 'self', then one may never find it in 'organized religion', a standardized journey through preconceived dogma. By definition, every individual must take this journey and experience it. Because it differs with each individual, it cannot become scripture. However, the 'form' seems always the same: the 'individual, in crisis, is given a choice: his life or his soul. It is no coincidence that this 'form' is likewise the structure of almost every work of literature worth reading or watching.

I am quite sure that 'gravity waves' are a type of 'electro-magnetic' wave like light and radio waves. If a craft had a sufficient energy source, it might produce it's own gravity waves relative to a local field. The degree to which it is either negatively or positively out of phase with the surrounding gravity field just might get you from planet to planet. If I were to design such a craft, I would make it look just like the sleek craft that Klaato and Gort emerged from in "The Day the Earth Stood Still' : ) Klaatu barada nikto

'Particle' and 'wave' are just words to describe a 'noumenon' --as Immanuel Kant would have called things as they just are --before names are stuck on them, things NOT as they are perceived or measured but thing in the state of mere 'being'. As I recall, Kant may have referred to it as a God's eye point of view. A 'particle' is but the 'snapshot' we make of a 'wave'. Waves, by definition, are manifested only over time. ( some noumenal existence in motion).

Certainly --Heisenberg's 'uncertainty principles' is verbally stated thus: a 'particle's position or its velocity may be measured at any given instant but not both at the same instant.' I like the photographic analogy. My photograph of 'something' (a noumenal existence of some sort) that makes a looping motion as it moves from 'point' A to point 'B' will look like a SOLID object if my shutter speed is --say-- one half second or longer depending up the lateral speed of the object.

The same 'object' making the same looping motion while moving from the same point 'A' to point 'B' will look amazingly different if photographed at 1,1000th of a second. Depending upon how quickly the 'object' is moving, my photograph might even suggest the shape of the actual 'object'. Point being, the faster my shutter speed, the closer I get to the actual shape of the object but at the expense of being able to determine its speed. This is the visual proof of Heisenberg's 'uncertainty principle'.

By definition, a shadow, or projection of a 3D object, indeed, any n-dimensional object will always be 2D. In other words, an (n-1) dimensional image; a 3D object makes a 2D 'projection' or, by analogy, a 2D shadow. Physical reality may, therefore, consist of 3-dimensional projections of 4D objects just as a 'time-line' through Platonia may be considered the 3D projection of a higher dimensional reality of at least four dimensions. Our world may be but "images" or "shadows", integrated projections of a 4th (or higher ) reality. We are not living in a movie; we are a living movie!

Depending upon its forward velocity, a 'looping' object will describe a 'sine wave' as it moves. In those instances, orbits are 'frozen' sine waves. The moon, for example, orbits the earth but describes a 'wave' as it follows the Earth in its orbit about the sun. An electron 'orbiting' an atom makes a sine wave if both electron and nucleus are in motion...and they are always in motion. Depending upon how it is 'photographed' (to use the analogy) it is both a particle and a wave. Electrons are particles if their position is pinned down, but waves otherwise. At the quantum level, particles are still blurs --just smaller blurs. One wonders if anything really exists at all.

To use the photography analogy again --what shows up on the 'photograph' depends upon the shutter speed. Slow shutter speeds make blurry photographs in which small objects may appear to be large and blurry. A very fast shutter speed will result in a smaller, sharper object. Similarly, Heisenberg's equation describes the relationship between the accuracy of a position vis a vis a velocity. A precise determination of velocity can only be made at the expense of a precise determination of the object's position.

As a very small kid, I recall asking my father how fast we were going (a car trip). He said 50 mph. I wanted to know what that meant. He explained that we would travel fifty miles over the course of an hour. Being a kid, I shot back: "But how fast are we going RIGHT NOW?" \My question was really not a bad one. At that age, however, I could not have known the power of graphs, slopes, tangents and co-ordinates to any given point on a curve. It does make sense to say that at an infinitesimally small 'point' representing an 'instant', a speed is 'X'. But ---if I define the 'car' as the fourth dimensional shape that it manifests over the duration of a one hour trip, then I will have learned the precise velocity of the car at any given instant BUT I will have done so at the expense of the fourth dimensional shape that is manifested only over the course of an entire hour long road trip.

I like the description of 'gravity wave' --that they are ripples in the fabric of space-time. I found some very interesting GIF animations of 'gravity waves' in a 3-D graphics program. That, of course, is a projection twice removed --but nevertheless one gets the idea. If a craft is ever built utilizing the interference patterns generated by two dissimilar wave fronts, inter-stellar travel will be like surfing the universe, catching a wave and soaring off into space. Thought of in that way, such a craft is also a time machine.

Julian Barbour is consistent with Occam's Razor. I believe that Barbour did not find it necessary to posit additional dimensions as he must surely be convinced that they are not necessary to his hypothesis. Barbour's theory is fully developed within four dimensions. If one is otherwise satisfied or otherwise convinced of Barbour, then the question is: what purpose is served by positing additional dimensions?

An atomic clock works like any other clock, that is, it measures time against oscillations of a known duration. For a Grandfather clock, it is the oscillations of a pendulum. For an atomic clock it is the oscillation of electrons about a nucleus. I have always had problems with the conventional MODEL of the atom depicting electrons orbiting a nucleus. As atoms are always in motion, those 'ORBITS' are oscillations. Likewise, the moon is said to orbit Earth but because the Earth itself is in motion about the sun, and the sun about the about the center of the Galaxy, and the Galaxy about the center of the 'local group' etc, etc, ALL, it would appear, are oscillations. The universe is an oscillating machine.

As Johnny Carson would have said while rapping a pencil on the desk: "Weird, wild stuff" And Ed, the Man, McMahan would have responded: "You are CORRECT, sir!"

The Quality of Mercy

2012-09-16T07:30:00.000-07:00

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

"The quality of mercy is not strain'd,
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath: it is twice blest;
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes"

—Portia, The Merchant of Venice, William Shakespeare

Another right wing hypocrisy exposed:

Of Darwinism and Social Darwinism

by Robert B. Reich

The Conservative Movement, as its progenitors like to call it, is now mounting a full-throttled attack on Darwinism even as it has thoroughly embraced Darwin’s bastard child, social Darwinism. On the face of it, these positions may appear inconsistent. What unites them is a profound disdain for science, logic, and fact.
...
The modern Conservative Movement has embraced social Darwinism with no less fervor than it has condemned Darwinism. Social Darwinism gives a moral justification for rejecting social insurance and supporting tax cuts for the rich. "In America," says Robert Bork, "‘the rich’ are overwhelmingly people – entrepreneurs, small businessmen, corporate executives, doctors, lawyers, etc. – who have gained their higher incomes through intelligence, imagination, and hard work."
...
The only consistency between the right’s attack on Darwinism and embrace of social Darwinism is the utter fatuousness of both. Darwinism is correct. Scientists who are legitimized by peer review and published research are unanimous in their view that evolution is a fact, not a theory. Social Darwinism, meanwhile, is hogwash.

"Bastard Child" at the very least! Social Darwinism does not follow from "Darwinism" and, worse, it attributes to Darwin positions he never took. Interestingly, the term "survival of the fittest" was never used by Darwin. Though it has been variously attributed, Hofstadter traced the phrase to rail road men and other early 'robber barons':

Railroad executive Chauncy Depew asserted that the guests of the great dinners and public banquets of New York City represented the survival of the fittest of all who came in search of fortune. They were the ones with superior abilities. Likewise railroad magnate James J. Hill defended the railroad companies by saying their fortunes were determined according to the law of survival of the fittest.

—Hofstadter, Richard; 1959; Social Darwinism in American Thought, Braziller; New York.

Elsewhere, the term is attributed to Herbert Spencer who clearly inspired a generation of radicalized, latter-day 'industrialists' all of them lacking the "...quality of mercy" so immortalized with but a few words by Shakespeare:

[Herbert] Spencer said that diseases "are among the penalties Nature has attached to ignorance and imbecility, and should not, therefore, be tampered with." He even faulted private organizations like the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children because they encouraged legislation.

—Social Darwinism and American Laissez-faire Capitalism

An equally fallacious corollary to "Social Darwinism" is often phrased: the rich are rich because they are better, work harder and are more intelligent. To be expected, George W. Bush put it more crudely: “The poor are poor because they are lazy!” In the same vein, the conservative economist Joseph A. Schumpeter likened recessions to a "douche" leaving us to wonder just who is "douched" and how? He might have been accurate had he used the word: 'flushed'.

More importantly: who makes those life and death decisions? Who gave them that right? Only sociopaths could believe that a tiny and shrinking elite should be empowered to the exclusion of everyone else to decide matters of life and death. It unconscionable that by its pursuit of obscene riches, just 1 percent of the nation may with its purely fiduciary interests decide matters of life or death for millions, indeed billions all over the world. It is difficult not to conclude that New Orleans after Katrina is but the disastrous consequence of this kind of "blame the victim" thinking. It is insane to believe that because short-sellers, quick buck artists and robber barons have gotten in front of a wave that they are justified in asserting a right, by virtue of wealth, to make decisions that threaten human life, indeed, our global future.

It is not surprising that Spencer's influence continues, not in the field of biology, but in economics, specifically those theories most often associated with the right wing: the American apologists, William Graham Sumner and Simon Nelson Patten.

No doubt, Spencer’s ideas received a major boost after Darwin's theories were published, but it was at the very outset that the issues were muddied. It is unfortunate that the application of the terms "adaptation" and "survival of the fittest" to social thought became known as "Social Darwinism".

More recently, the work of John Nash, recently the subject of the motion picture, A Beautiful Mind, argued persuasively that not only games but societies and economies benefit more from cooperation and community than from competition. Spencer, and Social Darwinists after Spencer, took another view. And that is unfortunate.

Spencer believed that because society was evolving, government intervention ought to be minimal in social and political life. Nevermind that government is but a function of society and responsible to it. Influenced by Spencer, many describe American capitalism in terms of the “rational man” making rational decisions in not only a free market but a 'rational' one. In practice, however, economic decisions may or may not be rational and free markets are not only hypothetical they can be maniuplated. It is a mistake to believe that "rational self-interest", said to work collectively behind Adam Smith's "invisible hand", has had anything but an irrational effect in most cases.

'Social Darwinism' and other defenses of robber baron practices may sound good 'in theory' but are, in fact 'bad theory though conservatives have worked mightily to force reality into the mold. That’s bad science; models must describe reality —not the other way round. Nash proved that cooperation is often more successful than competition, leading to the inevitable conclusion that societies which rationalize discrimination, income disparity, and social injustice on such a fallacious basis as Social Darwinism, are apt not be so successful themselves.

In A Beautiful Mind, Nash, portrayed by Russell Crowe, is in a favorite watering hole with two colleagues, later termed "negotiants" in his theories. The three young males were distracted by three unattended and comely females and among the three, a blonde, was seen to be the most desirable. Nash immediately saw a mathematical certainty of failure should all three males "hit on" the most attractive female. Equally certain, mathematically, was rejection by the remaining unattended females who would then be insulted, having become "second and third choices." Some fifty years later, Nash still polishes and refines the mathematics behind the only chance that three "geeks" might have with three comely young women--cooperation rather than competition:

...it is more desirable to be accepted than to accept (!), so with there being reduced pressure to avoid the penalty of the {0,0,0} payoff when there is failure at the first step then the players naturally adapt at equilibrium by becoming "less accepting" and "more demanding." (The demand parameters...rise as the acceptance rate quantities decrease, but this turns out to be at a logarithmic rate)....the players can be viewed as in a sort of "continuous auction" process where...the players are able to "bid"...and get into the process of cooperation. And this continuous version of the voting process seems probably to be good for generalization to any number of players.

--John Nash from a published email; emphases mine, LH

The word "theory" is either misunderstood by the right wing or it is perverted for it's propaganda value. There is nothing wrong with "theory" per se, though the word is consistently used by the right wing in a pejorative sense except, significantly, when it is applied to Spencer and, more recently, Milton Friedman or Arthur Laffer. Accurately, the negative connotations implied are simply not to be found among those who use the word "theory" — academically or in science. This linguistic abuse smacks of propaganda.

It must be noted that Einstein was, likewise, a "theorist"; so too, Newton. Einstein has been confirmed no more times than Darwin; Newton is close enough for mundane applications or "government work". Significantly, neither "theory" has been challenged in court —though both theories may one day be replaced or reconciled with a "theory of everything". But there is a political agenda behind the campaign of attacks on Darwinism even as the same constituency supports Intelligent Design which is supposed to 'sound Darwinian' but clearly is not!

Theories are never of a final form. Unlike ideology, real science is self-correcting as new facts emerge from research. Darwin's theories were confirmed by Mendel, accommodated Mendel which, in turn, tended to confirm Darwin. The science of genetics and the discovery of "mutations" confirm Darwin beyond any reasonable doubt. And, along the way, no one, no real scientist ever hired a consulting firm, a focus group, a PR agent or a K-street lobbyist.

Future discoveries will modify our view of Darwin, but that does not discount Darwin nor our views. Our view of Einstein, for example, is already modified but in no way discounted. In the main, he is confirmed. And when a unified field theory is achieved it will be the result of many scientists each of whom will owe much to Einstein.

No one has ever sued because Einstein is at odds with a particular dogma. And no one dared picket a school for teaching 'Relativity'. It is certain, however, that no future discovery will confirm "intelligent design" —a logical fallacy on its face and quite beyond any confirmation of any kind!

"Facts" tend to be narrowly phrased; theories, by contrast, embrace a wide but finite set of related facts. The scope of 'facts' is narrow; 'theories', by contrast, are often sweeping, embracing numerous facts, reconciling one with the other. Darwin and the sciences that followed him are entirely consistent with new discoveries in the field of genetics. [See: Science and Human Values, Jacob Bronowski]

Intelligent design is of a religious nature; people have a right to believe it, a right guaranteed them in the U.S. First Amendment. But 'intelligent design' explains nothing! Worse than a circular argument, it is beyond proof, in fact, meaningless. Worse — it raises other issues, themselves unexplained, meaningless or unexplanable. For example: who designed the designer? The question itself assumes a designer. It is, therefore, a circulus in probando fallacy. People are free to believe fallacies, but they must not be free to impose them upon other people at tax payer expense!

A fact, for example, is the equation that describes the acceleration of falling objects; examples of theory are both the Newtonian and the Einsteinian views of "gravitation" though 'gravitation' is conceived differently by both. The entire science of genetics confirms Darwin who, interestingly, did not have the benefit of Mendel's research when he wrote Origin of the Species and the The Descent of Man. It was Mendel's research that described the mechanism by which 'traits' are inherited, passed on to succeeding generations. Darwin —despite the lies about his theory — has been confirmed! Evolution is an observable fact! Accurate predictions are, in themselves, evidence in support of theories. [See: Evolution in Action, Julian Huxley]

Evolution is simple. Any organism which survives long enough to procreate passes on its genes to a succeeding generation. Random changes in genetic code are variously attributed but are statistically significant, dictating the very speed with which evolution occurs. Every farmer who has deliberately bred for specific characteristics knows the truth of evolution. Every cowboy who has said 'Never kill a slow roach; you just improve the breed' knows the truth of evolution.

Evolution is often considered to be so true as to be trivial: what survives survives. Critics of Darwin will often cite the tautology though it does not support them; it supports Darwin. Species which survive pass on their genes as well as mutations. This is quite beyond debate. Every farmer who has bred for specific characteristics knows the truth of it. And every cowboy will tell you that if you kill a slow roach, you improve the breed.

Adaptation! Natural Selection! Evolution!

Some of the more subtle critics of "Darwin" say that "survival of the fittest" is a circular argument: the fittest are those who survive, and those who survive are deemed fittest. There are a couple of problems with that:

Darwin never used the term "survival of the fittest"! That dubious honor belongs to Herbert Spencer, a "Social Darwinist" who never understood Darwin, nor was he "social"!

Even if the term "natural selection" is more properly substituted for the bogus term "survival of the fittest", the argument is circular only if the invalid conclusion that "only the fittest survive" is added! The invalid value judgment –survival of the fittest –is falsely attributed to Darwin.

There is nothing circular about the observable fact that in any given generation, some organisms survive and procreate, other do not. Defining traits are thus passed from one generation to another. Over time great changes often occur over numerous, multiplying 'threads'. Over longer periods of time, greater changes are evinced. One of the best examples of 'evolution in action' was Carl Sagan's memorable episode in which he cited the evolution of the Heikegani Crab, native to Japan. The Heikegani Crab has a carapace that resembles a human face, specifically, that of Samurai warrior.

The proponents of "intelligent design" have erected several huge straw men. Evolution, for example, has nothing to do with "coming down from the trees". [See: Richard Leakey's "The Origin of Humankind" ; also: Answers to Creationist Nonsense!]

It could be said, however, that no one has yet produced a new specie by selection. But they have indeed done just that! Consider wheat! Wheat does not grow in the wild. Related to ancient grasses, wheat is clearly the result of an ancient application of "artificial selection." Had wheat evolved naturally, it would be found growing wild like prairie grass. But it isn't and it didn't. Clearly – wheat was cultivated at some ancient date. The original ancestor became extinct – an ancient and undocumented event.

Social Darwinism is one of many ideas that have harmed mankind. It has provided a rationalization for the perpetual and quite deliberate impoverishment of large segments of our society and, insidiously, it has done so with a baseless theory fallaciously associated with Darwin.

In simpler terms, the philosophical basis for the American right wing is this:

"Are there no workhouses? Are there no prisons...then let them die and decrease the surplus population."

—Scrooge

Human DNA