Monday, November 30, 1942. The Battle of Tassafaronga.

The U.S. Navy suffered a defeat in the Battle of Tassafaronga off of Tassafaronga Point, Guadalcanal.  

A night action, Japanese destroyers sank a U.S. cruiser and damaged three other American cruisers to the loss of one destroyer. American vessels opened fire first, but their flashes of their guns illuminated their positions.

The Navy had intercepted the Japanese vessels in their attempt to deliver food to Japanese forces on the island.  Rear Admiral Samuel J. Cox, a Navy historian, regards this battle as one of the worst defeats in U.S. naval history.  Having said that, in spite of the heavy losses, the Japanese destroyers did fail in their mission and the Japanese forces on the island were now cut off from food supplies.

German surface raider Thor went down in Yokohama Harbor, along with the supply ship Uckermark.  Thor had been raiding in the Indian Ocean.  A fire broke out on the Uckermark, and it took both of htem out.

Actor Charles "Buck" Jones, age 50, died from injuries he sustained in the Coconut Grove fire.

Thursday, November 30, 1922. Thanksgiving Day turkeys and speeches, Ominous rallies in Germany, Living by the sword in Ireland, Strange Imperial Chinese weddings.

Well, at least I didn't miss this one.

This day was Thanksgiving Day in 1922.

Unlike the entry for 1942, I can't give any personal recollections for my parents, or speculations on what they did, as they weren't born yet.

President Harding had earlier made a proclamation in advance of and in recognition of the day.

THANKSGIVING - 1922 BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - A PROCLAMATION 

In the beginnings of our country the custom was established by the devout fathers of observing annually a day of Thanksgiving for the bounties and protection which Divine Providence had extended throughout the year. It has come to be perhaps the most characteristic of our national observances, and as the season approaches for its annual recurrence, it is fitting formally to direct attention to this ancient institution of our people and to call upon them again to unite in its appropriate celebration. 

The year which now approaches its end has been marked, in the experience of our nation, by a complexity of trials and of triumphs, of difficulties and of achievements, which we must regard as our inevitable portion in such an epoch as that through which all mankind is moving. As we survey the experience of the passing twelve-month we shall find that our estate presents very much to justify a nationwide and most sincere testimony of gratitude for the bounty which has been bestowed upon us. Though we have lived in the shadow of the hard consequences of great conflict, our country has been at peace and has been able to contribute toward the maintenance and perpetuation of peace in the world. We have seen the race of mankind make gratifying progress on the way to permanent peace, toward order and restored confidence in its high destiny. For the Divine guidance which has enabled us, in growing fraternity with other peoples, to attain so much of progress; for the bounteous yield which has come to us from the resources of our soil and our industry, we owe our tribute of gratitude, and with it our acknowledgment of the duty and obligation to our own people and to the unfortunate, the suffering, the distracted of other lands. Let us in all humility acknowledge how great is our debt to the Providence which has generously dealt with us, and give devout assurance of unselfish purpose to play a helpful and ennobling part in human advancement. It is much to be desired that in rendering homage for the blessings which have come to us, we should earnestly testify our continued and increasing aim to make our own great fortune a means of helping and serving, as best we can, the cause of all humanity. Now, therefore, I, Warren G. Harding, President of the United States of America, do designate Thursday, the thirtieth day of November, as a day of Thanksgiving, supplication and devotion. I recommend that the people gather at their family altars and in their houses of worship to render thanks to God for the bounties they have enjoyed and to petition that these may be continued in the year before us. 

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. 

Done at the City of Washington this second day of November, in the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-two, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and forty-seventh.

Liam Lynch, the Chief of Staff for the Irish Republican Army, issued orders to the IRA authorizing the assassination of Irish Free State officials in retaliation for the execution of those caught with handguns contrary to an Irish emergency law earlier in the week. The order further provided: 

All members of the Provisional 'Parliament' who were present and voted for the Murder Bill will be shot at sight. Houses of members... who are known to support Murder Bill will be destroyed. Free State army officers who approve of Murder Bill will be shot at sight; also all ex-British army officers and men who joined the Free State army since 6 December 1921.

Lynch was shot by Free State troops himself on December 6, 1923.

On the same day, oddly enough, the British announced the withdrawal of its remaining troops from Ireland, starting on December 12 and to be completed by January 5.  The UK also closed its post offices in China, something that had been operating for fifty years.

A riot over rationing in Mexico resulted in the deaths of seventeen people in clashes with police in Mexico City.

Aisin-Gioro Puyi (溥儀) age 17, the former Emperor of China, and future Emperor of collaborationist Manchucko, married Gobulo Wanrong (郭布羅·婉容), age 16, in an elaborate ceremony in the Forbidden City.

Wanrong.

In spite of the termination of the monarchy, some of its traditions were still strong, and Puyi had been ordered to marry by the Dowager Empress.  Wanrong was chosen from a collection of photographs he was given and was in fact his second choice after being informed that his first choice was suitable only to be a concubine.  A marriage to the first choice, Erdet Wenxiu 額爾德特·文繡, was performed later that night in an example of hopeless oddity.

Wenxiu.

The Chinese royal family was quite frankly extraordinarily weird in many ways by this time, and its maintenance after its fall preserved its oddities.  The marriages may not have been consummated, but if they were they were certainly not happy in numerous ways.  Puyi himself noted that they were strained as the two women were effectively slaves, rather than real spouses.  There is some fairly serious speculation that Puyi was homosexual, in spite of having at least one other concubine.

Wanrong smoking a cigarette in the 1930s.

Wanrong lived a miserable life in spite of being the claimant to the title of Empress.  As Empress of Manchuko she entered into affairs and became pregnant by a court chauffeur.  The baby was murdered after birth.  She would have divorced Puyi, but the Japanese precluded it. She was taken prisoner towards the end of the Second World War by the Red Chinese. She died in their captivity at age 39 in June, 1945.

Not too surprisingly, Wenxiu was also unhappy in her role as a second class wife and had a troubled relationship with Wanrong and Piyu.  She divorced him in 1931 and latter married Major Liu Zhendong in 1947. He later became a car dealership and then the two of them lived in poverty following the Red Chinese victory in the Chinese Civil War. She died in 1953.

Yuling.

As if this isn't odd enough, and in spite of the questions this raises, Puyi would take two more consorts over time, Tatara Yuling 他他拉·玉齡 and Li Yuqin.  Puyi grew to be very fond of Yuling, who died undergoing medical treatment in 1942 at age 22. There are some suspicions regarding her death as her physician was Japanese and she was known to harbor negative thoughts about the Japanese.  Puyi kept a picture of her with him until his death.  Yuling was half Korean.

Yuquin married Puyi in 1943 and was with Empress Wanrong when she attempted to flee at teh endo fthe Second World War.  She was released from capitivy in 1946 and became a textile factory employee and a library employee.  She sought a divorce from Puyi in 1955 but oddly was ordered to reconcile with him by the Red Chinese government.  They none the less divorced in 1958 and she latter married technician Huang Yugeng (黃毓庚). She died in 2001 in Changchun.

Puyi lived until 1967, dying in Red China. The Soviets saved his life by refusing to extradite him to the Republic of China, which viewed him as a traitor.

50,000 gathered to hear Hitler speak in Munich.

Participation in lies

The simplest and most accessible key to our self-neglected liberation lies right here: Personal non-participation in lies.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Sunday, November 29, 1942. Coffee Rationing commences in the United States.

A grim item from our companion blog, Today In Wyoming's History: November 29: 

1942   Coffee rationing began in on this day in 1942.

Smiling soldier.  I think he's drinking coffee.  I may have had to volunteer for service (which I likely would have done anyway) just in order to get a cup of coffee.

I would not have liked that.  Coffee roasters were already restricted to 75% of their wartime prior average.  This resulted not due to fewer beans being produced during the war.  Not hardly. Rather, it resulted from the fact that this import crop is shipped to the continental United States.

I think that's something that we tend not to ponder much. Coffee is a huge American drink, just like tea is a huge British drink, but in neither case do these consuming nations produce the elemental crop locally.  Given that, it's really amazing that either drink has such a hold in the consuming nation.  Indeed, by and large, with some slight exception, its not even grown in the Norther Hemisphere.  Kona coffee, grown in Hawaii, is the only coffee actually grown in the United States, in so far as I'm aware.

Just consider it for a moment.  The bean that is roasted to produce the crop is grown thousands of miles from the continental United States, roasted (often) in the US, and then packaged for sale here.  It's pretty amazing that there's more than a couple of varieties of it, frankly, or that its even affordable.

The Coffee Bearer, by John Frederick Lewis, Orientalist painter.  The same figure was a figure in his painting The Armenian Lady, whose servant she is portrayed as being.

As an aside, the second-biggest coffee bean producer in the world (the first is Brazil) is. . . . Vietnam.

One more reason that not having prevailed in the Vietnam War is unfortunate, to say the least.

Well, anyhow, it's not cheap, as any coffee drinker will tell you. But it's not terribly pricey either.

And somehow, it's gone from a few basic brands to a wide variety of specialty brands and brews of every imaginable type and variety.

Coffee varieties have of course always existed.  Interestingly, one of the contenders for oldest coffee brand sold in the United States is Lion Brand, which is Kona coffee.  Lion was first sold in the United States, as green coffee beans, in 1864.  Pretty darned early.  Hawaii wasn't an American territory at the time.  Folgers has them beat, however, dating back to 1850.  Hills Brothers dates to 1878.  Maxwell House to 1892.

Arbuckle Coffee, for some reason, was a huge item in the West in the late 1800s, showing how brands come and go.  I've never seen Arbuckles sold today, although it apparently still exists.  The owners of the company, John and Charles Arbuckle, owned a ranch near Cheyenne, although I don't know if that explains the connection with the West, or if perhaps that connection worked the other way around.

Now there's a zillion brands of coffee, many of which I don't recognize, and many which have pretensions towards coffee greatness.  This seems to have come about due to the rise of coffee houses, lead in a major way by Starbucks.  There's a Starbucks on every street corner now, it seems.  I'll be frank that I don't like their coffee much at all.  Too strong, and I like strong coffee.  Anyhow, the many specialty brews that Starbucks makes has spawned many various specialty coffees, or at least different coffees, to the extent to which a person can hardly keep track of it.  Over the weekend I was in City Brew, one of the local coffee houses, as well as Albertsons, where a Starbucks is located, and they both had "Christmas Blends".  How can there be a Christmas blend of coffee?

Chock full o' Nuts, a brand that, as the can indicates, has been around since 1932.  That was the date the company founder changed his nut shops into lunch counters, figuring that they were a better bet during the Great Depression.  I used to drink Chock full o' Nuts when I was in college, but stopped as it seemed to have way too much caffeine.

Not that I'm complaining.  I frankly like the vast variety in coffee. And while I'm not inclined to buy something like Starbucks Free Range Easter Island Coffee Licked Gently By Baby Yaks, I will buy peculiar roasts just because they sound interesting. And I tend towards those dark roasts, even if I sometimes wish I'd gotten something milder.

And it is interesting to see how coffee houses, following in Starbucks' wake, have popped up everywhere.  Just the other day I bought a sack of Boyer's coffee in the grocery store.  I was aware of Boyers, as they're a Denver brand with a Denver coffee house, but I wasn't aware that you could buy it up here.  Quasi local, as it were.  A great Denver coffee, with some good coffee houses, is Dazbog, which plays up the Russian origin of the founders.  One of the independent local coffee houses here sells Dazbog, and it's good stuff.  City Brew has outlets here in town, and apparently they're originally from Montana, which they play up with some of their roasts, even though we all know coffee isn't grown in Montana.  I'm told that Blue Ridge Coffee, another local coffee house that sells sacked coffee, is purely local.

And that doesn't cover every coffee house in town.  Quite the evolution when just a decade or so ago you'd have had to go to a conventional café and just have ordered the house coffee, whatever that was.  No special roasts or blends.  Just a up of joe.

And I prefer to buy from the locals as well.  Subsidiarity in action, I suppose.  Indeed, I'm not told that I can buy Mystic Monk sacked coffee at the Parish Office, and I likely will.

In the grocery store, for the most part, you bought the major brands.  Most of those are still around,  but now you can buy any number of major and minor brands.  I even have a coffee grinder, although that certainly isn't a new invention, although most of the time I buy pre ground coffee.  Indeed, I got the grinder as I bought whole bean coffee by mistake, which I've done from time to time, and I don't want to waste it.

Using coffee grinders, of course, is an odd return to the past. Everything old is new again, sort of.  But the huge variety, of course, is wholly new.

Industrial strength coffee grinder.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Related threads:

Coffee

The Science Behind Coffee and Why it's Actually Good for Your Health

Blog Mirror. A Hundred Years Ago: Keep Coffee Warm with a Thermos

National Coffee Day.

The Joy of Field Rations: Roasting Coffee in the Field

What a hideous day in history this was.

If, that is, this was it.  Frankly, it's not entirely clear, even though it should be.  It is clear that it was within a few days of this date.

On the same day, German forces slashed with American and British forces at Tebourba and Djedeida in North Africa.  Churchill, anticipating victory in North Africa, warned the Italians that they faced a "shattering air attack" from that region, and should accordingly overthrow Mussolini.

What's with all the infantile movies?

Some time ago (well, a long time ago, I first started this draft in 2016) I posted this item:

Lex Anteinternet: The "Avengers", seriously?: There's a new "Avengers" movie out that's receiving a lot of press. And by that, I mean serious press. Serious film crit...

What is up with this category of movies?  And by that, I mean movies that are properly the domain of children being dressed up, overblown, and released for adults.  Are we unable to deal with the adult world anymore in any fashion?

As noted, I first started this draft in 2016.  Maybe.  The movie linked in was written about in 2015.  Since that time, it's only grown worse.  A flood of Marvel cartoon character films, amazing watched by adults, has since been released.

This genre of movie has been around for a long time, to be sure.  D.C. comics character Superman first appeared in a live action film in 1948.  But let's be frank, these films were stupid and meant for young adults.

Kirk Alyn in the 1948 version of Superman.

It wasn't until 1978, however, with another Superman movie that these films really crossed over to adult fare.  They remain as stupid as ever, but they seemingly won't go away.

It's not just these films, I'd note, although they're the bulk of what I'm complaining about. An entire class of really stupid light comedy fare is out there as well.  If Adam Sandler is in it, for example, it's probably stupid.  But stupid live action comedies have seemingly always been with us forever.  How else do you explain The Three Stooges?

A person may, of course, state what's the harm. But the harm is there in that these films are oddly enough taken seriously.  People analyze them for what they mean, often attributing meaning to them that they likely do not deserve. Comparing them to myths of old, for example, is done, or comparing them to religious tenants and positions, is yet another.

And now they're being given social import, although in a backwards fashion.  The next installment of the cartoon Black Panther is out, the same being Wakanda Forever.  I didn't see Black Panther, and I'm not going to see Wakanda Forever, but it's clear that it riffs off of the popular American concept, at the current time, of powerful female led African kingdoms once existing.  This is, quite frankly, simply American feminist fare and not really very charitable to real Africans, including real African women.

Powerful African kingdoms, within context, did exist, but outside of the Christian world women's roles have always been a bit grim to some extent.  And looking at some of the real world African political entities wouldn't take you in this direction at all.  An early slave rebellion in the Colonial south, for instance, occurred with a warrior society of Angolan Catholic slaves rose up and dashed off.  

You read that right.

They were Africans, they were in a warrior society, and they were Roman Catholic.

There are a lot of good stories that could be mined here.  But true ones.  Why not explore them?

All of which leads me back to this.  These infantile movies are somehow another example of panem et circenses.  Light escapism.  The fact that escapism has become so big. . . that's not really good.

Jello.

I’ve observed before that only creatures with backbone are able to be rigid. Jello isn’t rigid. That’s why it conforms to whatever mold it is poured into.

Fr. Dwight Longnecker

Honesty and suffering Wyoming.

I should note here that I'm cynical about politicians and politics once a person leaves the local realm.

Now, I don't feel that way about politicians at the local level.  The ones I've known personally were genuinely engaged and had entered into politics as they had real concerns about their communities, or schools, etc.

And, of the few state legislators I've known, most fit that same description.

Theodore Roosevelt, long before he ever ran for the Oval Office, once rebuked a reporter for suggesting that he might some day occupy it.  In doing so, he stated that a person must never tell a politician, which he already was, being in the New York Assembly, that he might some day be President as he'd quit being his natural self and alter positions so that he could obtain that goal.  

There's really something to that.

Harriet Hageman is in the category of politicians I've met and sort of once somewhat knew.  

During the recent race, I was frankly shocked by a lot of her conduct, which I at first attributed to her simply wanting to be in Congress. Since that time, I've come to wonder if in fact she may believe the positions she's taking, in which case that's scarier yet.  That would likely mean that of our three person Congressional delegation, she's the only true ideologue, and not in a good way.

Back in April, Harriet Hageman spoke in Powell and made this statement:

I’ve really got a dog in this hunt, I’m from Wyoming. My family’s from Wyoming … Wyoming is my passion. The way that I put it is that when Wyoming prospers, my family prospers. But when Wyoming suffers, my family suffers.¹

That's the very first thing I've seen attributed to Hageman which would give a person a reason to vote for her.  That same reasoning applied to the primary candidates who ran against Cheney when she first ran, and won, which of course means that a lot of the people who might find this view appealing now, apparently weren't all that worked up about it back when, including Hageman who at one time supported Cheney.  None of which means that it isn't a good point.

Mind you, there are a lot of reasons not to have voted for Hageman, although most Wyoming voters who participated in the off year election did. The big reason for that is that most Wyoming voters bought the Trump lie that didn't sell nationwide this election, that the election was stolen.  

Wyoming's voters, frankly, have been buying a lot of cheap fibs and obfuscations in recent years, so perhaps we shouldn't be too surprised.

So we should hope that Hageman really means what she says, and that she remains capable, as an attorney should be, of analyzing the facts.  Given her age and status, she won't be personally culpable for failing to do so.  I.e, if what she has been selling turns out to be a bill of goods, well she'll go on to retire and not bear the brunt of it.

Hageman says she has a dog in the "hunt" as she's from here and her family is too.  And she is from the Ft. Laramie region and her family is here, in agriculture, although unlike those of us who have kids who to worry about for the future decades hence, she has no children, so that's really worrying about her extended family.  I have no reason to believe that she doesn't genually bear them in her heart.

In any event, however, worrying about what happens when Wyoming suffers means, more than anything else, looking at the world honestly, and not at some romanticized past that never existed and which, to the extent it did, is evolving.

In 1960 Harold Macmillan, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, addressed the reality of the state of British colonialism to the South African parliament, stating:

The wind of change is blowing through this continent and, whether we like it or not, this growth of national consciousness is a political fact. We must all accept it as a fact, and our national policies must take account of it. 

Macmillan was right, and there was no holding back the change those winds brought.  But he had a concern beyond that, and stated:

As I see it, the great issue in this second half of the twentieth century is whether the uncommitted peoples of Asia and Africa will swing to the East or to the West. Will they be drawn into the Communist camp? Or will the great experiments of self-government that are now being made in Asia and Africa, especially within the Commonwealth, prove so successful, and by their example so compelling, that the balance will come down in favour of freedom and order and justice?

Not everyone was willing to accept the storm that had arrived.  Ian Smith, the Prime Minister of Rhodesia, did not, and took his country out of the British Empire.

Rhodesia no longer exists. Zimbabwe, a wreck of a country, exists in its place.  Many of the departing African colonies have had terrible post-colonial histories, but Zimbabwe has one of the worst.  It's story is complicated, but in part that disaster can be put at Smith's feet.  MacMillan proved correct, Smith's actions gave strength to Marxist revolutionaries, who won, and who effectively destroyed the country's economy.

Elections have consequences, as they say, and so does ignoring reality.  Wyoming has a lot of going for it, but it doesn't control every trend in the United States or globe.  Every time somebody says "electric cars will never work here", they cast a vote for fantasy.  That's a minor example, but it's a relevant one.  Harriet Hageman claimed, back in April when she gave her speech in Powell, that her first act in Congress would be to introduce a bill requiring the United States to use American energy.

Well fine, pass that bill (it won't pass), but what she means is almost certainly petroleum oil and coal.  California, with a population dwarfing ours, is already legislatively phasing out the use of petroleum.  Congress isn't going to be able to mandate a change in course that's already been taken, and not just here, but all over the globe and in the hearts of minds of consumers.

Wyoming has a lot going for it economically, and a lot of that predates its oil and coal history.  But will it value it, or will it insist that we return to the 1980s and expect others to go along?  I fear the latter is almost certain.

In addition to that, when Hageman claimed nativist grounds for people to vote for her, she ironically pointed out something that's very much impacted our recent political history.  Yes, Cheney was not from Wyoming but John Barrasso isn't either.  Foster Freiss, whom the far right here adored, very much was not.

Nor are a host of Wyoming political figures, some of whom are angry relocates from points further east.

The point isn't that you have to be born here to win elections or to run, but rather this. We should be very careful about taking our political views from out of state imports, whose presence is usually temporary.  In recent years, particularly in the COVID era, we've received a lot of new people, but the backstory is a lot of them leave pretty quickly.  The myth of Wyoming is that "everyone is so friendly", which isn't really true.  It's easy to mistake politeness and curiosity for friendly.

Wyoming is a hard place to live and work.  A lot of people flood in when the price of oil is high, and then hang for a while when it drops until they chase the dollar somewhere else. A lot of those people bring their views, often from the west of the Missippii, south of the Picket Wire region, and that temporarily impacts views here. Freiss, when he ran for office, had a campaign style that somewhat resembled something out of 1970s Alabama, for example.  When they leave, that view usually goes with them.

Likewise, Wyoming throughout its history has had influxes of outsiders, people born well outside the region, who prove to be temporary.  Nice summers are attractive at first, but long winters, no services, and the howling wind take their toll after a few years, and they move on. Something like 50% of people who move here just to move here move on in less than a year.

At the end of the day, Wyomingites, those born here who stayed, and those who moved here, mostly from neighboring states that have a lot of the same character, are invested in the state in ways that others aren't and want its character preserved. That means its entire character.  You can't be the Congressman from the Oil Industry, or the House member from Coal, or the Representative from farmers in Ft. Laramie.  It's the whole smash, and those who have lived and endured here, rather than those taking up temporary residence of a fictional Wyoming that exists only on Yellowstone or Longmire, do have opinions that matter more than those moving through.

That means being honest.  Honesty starts with being honest to yourself first, and then to everyone else.  It's a character trait that's really departed from national politics to a massive degree in recent years.

So, don't make Wyoming suffer, starts with being honest.

Footnotes

1. There's's a mixed metaphor at work here.  The dog/hunt line is usually "that dog doesn't hunt", which is a phrase given to dismiss an argument that doesn't work.  The other line, which Hageman must have been recalling, is "I don't have a dog in that fight", which means that you aren't betting on a dog in a dog fight.  I.e., you have no personal interest in the outcome.

Related Threads:

Before the Oil. And after it? The economies of Wyoming and Alaska.

The Wyoming Economy. Looking at it in a different way.

Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1. The Economy

Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (a). The Economy again. . . the extractive industries

Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (e). What about those other industries?

Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (d). The Economy again. . . Tourism. The fragile leg of the stool

Looking at the nature of Wyoming's economy again

Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (c). The Economy again. . . Agriculture

Dare we, and should we, Wyomingites that is, ponder a near term world in which coal and oil use decline? Part I.

Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1 (e). The Economy again. . . what if we really don't want it to change?

Lex Anteinternet: Issues In the Wyoming Election. A Series. Issue No. 1(b). The Economy again. . . dare we say it. . . Government (shush). And, what's up with Wyoming's GOP hating the Federal Government?

T. K. Whitaker as a model for Wyoming?

Saturday, November 28, 1942. Battle of Réunion and the Coconut Grove Fire.

The Coconut Grove nightclub in Boston caught fire, resulting in 492 people losing their lives.  It's the worst such disaster in American history.

The Léopard.

The Léopard landed Free French Troops at Réunion off of the east coast of Madagascar in order to take the island from Vichy, which rapidly occurred.

Enlightenment

Last fall, I received a letter from a student who said she would be “graciously appreciative” if I would tell her “just what enlightenment” I expected her to get from each of my stories. I suspect she had a paper to write. I wrote her back to forget about the enlightenment and just try to enjoy them.

Flannery O’Connor

Today In Wyoming's History: Sidebar: Confusing fiction for fact

Today In Wyoming's History: Sidebar: Confusing fiction for fact: 

Sidebar: Confusing fiction for fact

One of the things that's aggravating for students of history is the way that popular portrayals botch the depiction of the topic of their interest or interests.  Sometimes this is mildly irritating, and sometimes colossally aggravating.  This is just part of the nature of things, which doesn't make it any less aggravating, and this is just as true of Wyoming history and the depictions of Wyoming and its citizens as it is with any other topic.  I suspect that the residents or students of any one area could say the same thing.

Before I go further with this, however, I should also note that this blog is very far from perfect, and I don't mean to suggest otherwise. As a daily catalog of Wyoming's history it's doing okay, but even at that, it isn't anywhere near as complete as it should be, and with certain big events in Wyoming's history its grossly incomplete.  A blog of this type should allow a person to follow a developing story as it plays out, and so far, for the most part, this one doesn't do that, that well, yet.  It certainly isn't up to the same standard that the World War Two Day By Day Blog was before it sadly, and mysteriously, terminated on September 24, 2012.  It'll hopefully get better with time, and it's doing okay now, but it is an amateur effort done with very limited time, so it isn't as complete as it should be yet.  We can hope for better in the future, of course, and it is better this year as compared to last.  We can also hope that it gets more comments in the future, which would assist with making it more complete.

Anyhow, while noting that, it's still the case that there are a lot of aggravating errors and depictions out there.  Maybe this blog can correct a few of them, although with its low readership, that's pretty doubtful.  And people cherish myths, so that operates against this as well.

What motivated this is that I was doing a net search for an update of a recent entry here and hit, through the oddity of Google, a website devoted to the movie Brokeback Mountain, which I have not seen.  I'm surprised that there's a fan website devoted to the movie, which of course I have not seen, as I'm surprised by any fan movie site.  A movie has to be of massive greatness, in my view, before I can imagine anyone devoting a blog to it.  Say, Lawrence of Arabia, or a movie of equal greatness. There probably aren't a dozen movies that are that good.  

Anyhow, if a person wants to devote a blog to a movie they really like, but isn't one of the greatest movies of all time, that's their business, but there is a difference between fact and fiction. And the reason I note the site noted is that there's a page on the site the one I hit debating the location of the Brokeback Mountain. The blogger thought it was in one place, but cited author Larry McMurtry for another location.

Well, McMurtry notwithstanding, there is no Brokeback Mountain. The book and movie are fiction.  It makes no more sense to say that some mountain is Brokeback Mountain than it does to say that the Grand Tetons are Spencer's Mountain, unless the point was intended to be that some backdrop for a film was a certain identified location.  If that's the case, i.e., identifying an actual location, I get it, but that's not what they seemed to be debating.  I don't think the film was actually filmed in Wyoming, although I could be mistaken and perhaps some background scenes were (although I don't think so).  Of course, if I am in error, I'm in error, in which case they're trying to identify a location they saw in the film, and I'm off base.

Along these same lines, when the film Unforgiven came out, I went to see it.  The movie was getting a lot of press at the time, and it was hailed as great.  It isn't.  It's not really that good of a film frankly, and I didn't think it was at the time.  I think it was hailed as great as a major Western hadn't been released in quite some time, and it starred Clint Eastwood.  Eastwood has been in some fine movies to be sure, but he's been in some doggy Westerns also, and this one, while not a dog, wasn't great.

At any rate, while watching that film, I recall a young woman asked her date, several rows in front of me, where the town the film depicts, Big Whiskey, Wyoming, was located.  I thought surely he'd say "there isn't one," but, dutifully he identified its location, essentially morphing Whiskey Mountain, a mountain, into the fictional town.  Whiskey Mountain is a real place, but Big Whiskey, the town, is a complete fiction.  It doesn't even sound like the name of a 19th Century Wyoming town.  I don't know of any Wyoming town named after an alcoholic beverage, or even a beverage of any kind.  For that matter, I don't know of any named for anything edible or potable, save for Chugwater.  In the 19th Century, the founders of towns like to name towns after soldiers if they could, which gives us Casper, Sheridan, Rawlins, Lander and probably other locations.  

While on the topic of fictional towns, there's the fictional characters in them.  Big Whiskey, in the film, was ruled over by a well dressed tyrannical sheriff and a well dressed tyrannical Englishman, if I recall correctly.  Tyrannical sheriffs are popular figures in Western movies, and in recent years they're well dressed tyrants.  In quite a few films the tyrannical sheriff is the ally of a tyrannical (probably English) big rancher.

In actuality, sheriffs all stood for election in those days, just as now.  They often had a really rough idea of what law enforcement entailed, but they did not tend to be tyrannical.  They tended to be grossly overworked, covering huge expanses of territory.  They also probably didn't tend to be snappy dressers.  While some of them had been on both sides of the law, quite a few were Frontier types that fell into the job for one reason or another, like Johnson County's "Red" Angus or Park County's Jeremiah Johnson (the famed mountain man).  Sheriff's of that era tended to spend days and in the saddle without the assistance of anyone and often tended to resort to gun play, which average people did as well, but they did not tend to be agents of repression.  If they were, they would loose office pretty quickly.  Probably one of the better depictions of a Frontier lawman is the recent depiction of Marshall Cogburn in the Cohen Brothers version of True Grit.

The tyrannical local big rancher thing is way overdone as well.  The reason that there was a Johnson County War is that the old big landed interests were loosing control so rapidly, not because they were retaining it.  Films like Open Range, or Return to Lonesome Dove, which depict people straying into controlled territory are simply wrong.  The cattle war was more characterized by an ongoing struggle than Medieval fiefdoms.  There were some English and Scottish ranchers as well, but there were big interests that weren't either.  And the both sides in those struggles formed interests groups that involved lots of people, rather than one big entity against the little people, contrary to the image presented in Shane and so many other films.

As part of that, one thing that these period films never seem to get correct is that the West was a territory of vigorous democracy.  Yes, in Wyoming large cattle interests tried to squash the small ones in Johnson and Natrona Counties through a shocking armed invasion, but they also had to content with the ballot box. When things went badly for them in the Invasion, the legislature briefly turned Democratic and Populist.  Newspapers were political arms in those days as well, and they were often exceeding vocal in their opinions.  Their opinions could sometimes be shouted down, or crowded out, but the concept that some English Duke would rule over a vast swatch of territory unopposed is simply incorrect.  More likely his domain would be subject to constant carving up and the sheriff was less than likely to be in his pocket.

While on the topic of films, the way that characters are depicted, visually, is very often incorrect.  In terms of Westerns, to a large extent, films of the 30s and 40s depicted characters the way that film makers wanted them to look, films of the 50s the way that people thought the viewers wanted them to look, films of the 60s reflected the style of day, and so on.  It wasn't until the 1980s, with Lonesome Dove, that a serious effort was made to portray 19th Century Western figures the way they actually looked, with a few really rare exceptions.  Shane, which I otherwise do not like, did accurately portray the visual look of a couple of characters, the best example being the gun man portrayed by Jack Palance. Why they got that one correct, for the region, and few else, is a mystery.  The older film Will Penny did a good job in these regards.  The Culpepper Cattle Company is very well done..  In recent films, the film Tombstone was very accurate in terms of costume for the region it was set in, so much so that it received criticism for the odd dress styles it depicted, even though they were period and location correct.  Modern Westerns tend to botch this if set in Wyoming or the Northern Plains, and are almost never correct in these regards.

Hats get very odd treatment in this context.  From the 20s through the 30s, hats were fanciful in film, and didn't reflect what people actually wore.  In the 50s, the hats that were then in style were shown as being in style in the late 19th Century.  Only recently have historical films generally been correct, and they still hit and miss on films set in the present era.  A lot of movie makers can't tell the difference between Australian drover's hats and real cowboy hats, and would probably be stunned to find that a lot of cowboys look like they did over a century ago, to a large extent.

The expanse of territory is also routinely inaccurate in old and new depictions.  Film depictions of Wyoming either seem to think that Wyoming has the geographic expanse of Alaska or, alternatively, Rhode Island.  Distances seem to be rarely related to the period in which they are set, with some depictions set in the 19th Century seemingly thinking that a town was always nearby, while ones set now seemingly thinking there isn't one for a thousand miles.  Expanses in Wyoming are vast, but the state is not Alaska.  Conversely, ranch and farm geography isn't grasped at all, and frankly its forgotten by most Wyomingites, in a historic concept, now.  Up into the 1930s there were an increasing number of small homesteads, meaning the farm and ranch population, throughout the West, was much higher than it is now. 

Probably the single worst depiction of modern geography, geography in general and ranch geography, is the horribly bad film Bad Lands, a fictionalized account of a series of events that actually mostly took place in the Mid West but which ended in Wyoming, in reality.  In that film the teenage murderers are shown driving across the prairie and there's actually an absurd line about being able to see the lights of Cheyenne in the distance in one direction and some extremely far off feature to the north.  In reality, you can not drive a car, any car, across the prairie as the prairie is rough and cut with gullies, ravines, gopher holes, etc.  And there's a lot of barbed wire fences.  The thought, as the movie has it, of driving dozens and dozens of miles straight across the prairie is absurd.  Not quite as absurd as being able to see Cheyenne's lights from a safe vast distance away, however.  Cheyenne sits in a bit of a bowl in the prairie, and if you see its lights, you are pretty close, and if you are driving across the prairie, pretty soon you're going to be entering some ranch yard or F. E. Warren Air Force Base.

One of the best depictions of geography, however, comes in McMurtry's Lonesome Dove, which does get it basically correct, and which the film gets basically correct.  In the film, the cattle are driven across arid eastern Wyoming, which is actually correctly depicted as arid.  Film makers like to show Wyoming as being Jackson's Hole.  Jackson's Hole is Jackson's Hole, and while it is very beautiful, and in Wyoming, it's darned near in Idaho and most of the state doesn't look like that.

On the topic of land, a really goofball idea depicted in many, many, current depictions of Wyoming and Montana is that you can go there and buy a ranch. No, you cannot.  Well, if you have a huge amount of money you can, but otherwise, you are not going to.  In spite of this, films all the time have the idea that people will just go there and buy a ranch.  One episode of Army Wives, for example, had an episode where a Specialist E4 was going to leave the Army and buy a ranch.  Baloney.  Buying any amount of agricultural land actually sufficient to make a living on in the United States is extremely expensive, and you aren't going to do it on Army enlisted pay.  Specialist E4 pay wouldn't buy a house in a lot of Wyoming.  Part of this delusion is based on the fact that in Western conditions the amount of land needed to make a living on is quite large and Eastern standards, which most people have in mind, bear no relationship to this in the West.  Out of state advertisers sometimes take advantage of this ignorance by suggesting that people can buy a "ranch" in some area of Wyoming, by which they mean something like 20 to 40 acres.  That isn't a ranch in the working sense of the words by any means in that there's no earthly way a person could make a living ranching it ,or farming it, or even come anywhere close to making a fraction of a living wage.  I've run into, however, people on odd occasion who live very far from here but believe that they own a ranch, as they bought something of this type site unseen.  In one such instance a person seriously thought he would bring 100 cattle into a small acreage that was dry, and wouldn't even support one.  This, I guess, is an example of where a mis-impression can actually be dangerous to somebody.

On ranching, another common depiction is that it seems to be devoid of work.  People are ranchers, but they seem to have self feeding, self administering, cattle, if a modern ranch is depicted.  Ranching is actually very hard work and a person has to know what they are doing.  Even if a person could purchase all the ranch land and all the cattle they needed to start a ranch (ie., they were super wealthy), unless they had a degree in agriculture and had been exposed to it locally, or they had grown up doing it and therefore had the functional equivalent of a doctorate in agriculture, they'd fail.  This, in fact, is also the case with 19th Century and early 20th Century homesteads, the overwhelming majority of which failed.  People who had agricultural knowledge from further East couldn't apply all of it here, and often had to pull up stakes and move on.  And, often missed, it took a lot of stuff to get started.  One account of a successful Wyoming 19th Century start up homestead I read related how the homesteader had served in Wyoming in the Army for years, specifically saving up his NCO pay and buying equipment years before he filed his homestead, and he still spent a year back east presumably working before he came back and filed.  J. B. Okie, a huge success in the Wyoming sheep industry, worked briefly as a sheepherder, in spite of being vastly wealthy, prior to coming out well funded to start up.  Many of the most successful homesteaders, but certainly not all, had prior exposure to sheep or cattle prior to trying to file a homestead.

On erroneous depictions, one particularly aggravating one is when films attempt to depict what they think the regional accent is.  There is a bit of a regional speech pattern, i.e, an accent, but it's so rarely done accurately that it shouldn't be tried.  For the most part, native Wyomingites have the standard American Mid Western accent, but they tend to mumble it a bit.  That sounds insulting, but it isn't meant to be, and Wyomingites are so attuned to it, as are rural Coloradans and Montanans, that they generally cannot perceive it.  I'm from here, and no doubt I exhibit that accent.  Most people don't recognize an accent at all, and it takes a pretty attuned ear to be able to place it, although some people very definitely can.  I can recall my father having told me of that having occurred to him on a train in the 50s, and I've had it happen once in the 1980s.  In my father's case, the commenter noted that he must be from one of the Rocky Mountain states.  In mine, I was specifically asked by a fellow who had worked for the Park Service for decades if I was from the West Slope of Colorado, as many park rangers were and I had the same accent.  Most Wyomingites, at some point, probably get a puzzled question from somebody about where they are from that's accent based, but the questioner never reveals that.  It's a regional accent, so the best a person can do is tell that you are from rural Colorado, Wyoming, or Montana if they know what the accent entails, or that there even is one.  Film makers, who must be aware that there is an accent, occasionally try to insert one in a modern Western, but when they try it they present a bizarre laughable accent that doesn't occur anywhere on the planet.  Years ago, for example, there were advertisements on television here for the Laramie Project, which is another film I haven't seen, and which I couldn't have watched due to the horribly bad efforts an accent that the filmmakers were attempting. We do not drawl.  We speak more like Tom Brokaw, but perhaps with a bit of mumbling that we don't recognize as mumbling. 

I've read that Irishmen find American attempts at an Irish accent hilarious.  Some English attempts at an American Mid Western accent are really bad.  Our accent here is fairly rare, and there's no way that they're going to get it right, and they ought not try.  By not trying, they're closer to the mark.

Friday, November 27, 1942. Vichy Scuttles its Fleet, Jimi Hendrix born.

The Vichy French scuttled their own ships in harbor in Toulon to keep them out of German hands.  It was a brave act by Vichy, perhaps the most admirable thing it did during the war.  Operation Lila, the German offensive operation to seize the French Navy, had in fact commenced on November 19.

Three battleships, seven cruisers, fifteen destroyers, twelve submarines and thirteen torpedo boats of the French Navy went down at French hands.

Admirable though it was, it was not as admirable as what the Italian Navy would do the next year, which was to bolt to the sea so that it could join the Allies.  Indeed, in retrospect, or even at the time, the decision not to break out can be questioned, but Vichy was still making pretenses to being the de jure French government at the time, even though it was rapidly losing that status, and in fact already had.

Venezuela broke off relations with Vichy.

James ("Jimi) Marshal Hendrix, the greatest guitar player who ever lived, was born in Seattle, Washington.

Self-taught, and unable to read music, Hendrix came out of a blues saturated background and crossed over into Rock & Roll during its greatest era.  Nobody played the guitar like he did before him, and nobody has surpassed his abilities since.  Amazingly, Hendrix did not take up the guitar until he was 15.

A master of distortion at a time in which using it had not yet been figured out, Hendrix became a full time musician following his discharge from the Army in 1962.  Entering the music scene in the turmoil of the 1960s, Hendrix was unfortunately drawn to the drug culture of the era, which ended up taking his life in 1970 at age 27.  In his short musical career he established a body of music which stands out to this day.

Hendrix was just learning how to read music at the time of his death, and interestingly enough, was learning how to play wind instruments in addition to the guitar and bass that he already knew how to play.  Given that 80 years of age isn't an uncommon one, had drugs not taken his life, he could still be living today, and the music scene would have undoubtedly developed much differently than it did since 1970.

Monday, November 27, 1922. Safety in D.C., Change of government in Greece.

Streetcar decorated with safety slogans. Washington, D.C., Nov. 27, 1922

Lt. Gen. Stylianos Gonatas became the Prime Minister of Greece following the bloody shakeup in the prior Greek government.

Southern Rockies Nature Blog: Thunder without Tears: The Passing of Tom McIntyre

Southern Rockies Nature Blog: Thunder without Tears: The Passing of Tom McIntyre: 1987 was the worst year of my life. A dream job of working on an outdoor magazine was falling apart (with the publication itself), leaving M...

Tom McIntyre's death has been mentioned here twice before;

The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty; yet their span is but toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away.

In Memoriam: Thomas McIntyre.

I'm struck by how this brings up the old adage that it is a small world.  At least, our circle of associates can be amazingly small.  You wouldn't think that it'd be the case that two blogs I follow are authored by people who met Mr. McIntyre, which I had not, but he had become a frequent commenter on my blog.  

I'll miss his presence here.

Truly, it is a small world.

The entries on the two blogs noted, by the way, are very much worth reading and will give you a much better idea of who Tom was than anything I've written here.

No people can be great who have ceased to be virtuous.

No people can be great who have ceased to be virtuous.

Samuel Johnson

The Best Posts of the Week of November 20, 2022

The best posts of the week of November 20, 2022.

The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. The Waking Up Edition (Vol 1).

Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago at Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel

 

Much ado about Twitter.

Musing for Conservatives from a real (well mostly, sometimes, 50/50 anyway) Conservative.

Lex Anteinternet: Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago...A few observations.

In Memoriam: Thomas McIntyre.

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist XL. Panem et circenses.

Quiet Quitting? Is it real, and if so, why?

Wars and Rumors of War, 2022. The Russo Ukrainian War Edition, Part Nine. Rout

The 2022 Election Part XIV. The Results.

There is such a thing as a free lunch. Was, Lex Anteinternet: Quiet Quitting? Is it real, and if so, why?

The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty; yet their span is but toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away.

A Thankgiving Day pondering.

Small Business Saturday: Remembering Quadragesimo Anno.

Sunday, November 26, 1922. Peanuts, Colorado's, and Gallipoli.

Prisoners of Myth I. The Russians in the war with Ukraine

Thursday, November 26, 1942. Casablanca premiers, Battle of Brisbane