Friday, March 20, 2015
Thursday, March 19, 2015
On Law, Corruption and Puritanism in American Politics
It is widely assumed, as we all know, that there's vast corruption in American politics. Indeed, there's a new television series out right now based on that thesis. And I'll freely admit that this country has had its share of corrupt politicians, or ones who acted in what I'd regard an amoral or immoral fashion. I could go into that topic and express my views on those people now, but I'll forgo it for another point.
I wonder, quite frankly, to what extent American politics are characterized not by corruption, but by lingering Puritanism. Quite a lot, I think.
Take the current flap over Hillary Clinton's email, and her use of a private rather than a government account. Who cares? I don't. In most countries, quite frankly, this would not be a matter of the slightest concern. But, in the same spirit that caused the Puritans to ban Christmas, the whole country seems to be having a big to do over this. Only in the US would such a minor matter be regarded as really serious.
Or take the personal behavior of our politicians in other areas. In recent decades this has been a huge issue (although it seemingly was not in prior decades, and for reasons that baffle me JFK still gets a pass in this area). We've nearly deposed a President in recent years over this, while in contrast a trial is going on in Italy over a politician whose behavior in this area was wild in the extreme. It isn't that something is being done in Italy so much as its the case that things have to get hugely out of hand before anything is done. Here, matters that are unseemly but not really threatening the nation can get you almost impeached.
Or take our insider trading laws. We've actually made it a crime to act on knowledge you pick up in the course of your employment. That's frankly amazing, and criminalizes a natural part of human nature. We tell people that they can't act on what they know, as that would be unfair to those who don't know, what they don't know. Fairness is nice, to be sure, but criminalizing knowledge is pretty extreme really.
Corrupt? I don't think so much. Puritanical is more like it, in these regards.
Friday, March 19, 1915. The Defense of India Act.
The Defence of India Act was enacted to provide the colonial government in British India with sweeping powers to enforce the law during the Great War, including independence activities.
Pluto was photographed for the first time.
Last edition:
Thursday, March 18, 1915. Disaster off the Dardanelles.
Labels: 1910s, 1915, 1919, boats and ships, Dardanelles, French Navy, Imperial Russian Army, Royal Navy, World War One
National Agriculture Week: A second post World War One homestead
Holscher's Hub: A second post World War One homestead:
An abandoned post World War One hay farm, now returned to pasture.
An abandoned post World War One hay farm, now returned to pasture.
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
Thursday, March 18, 1915. Disaster off the Dardanelles.
The French battleship Bouvet, British battleship HMS Irresistible and the HMS Ocean struck mines and sank off of the Dardanelles. The Gaulois was beached after striking a mine.
Loss of life was heavy.
The battleship HMS Dreadnought rammed and sake the U-29.
Russian fighter pilot Alexander Kazakov used a grapnel hook to hook his aircraft to a German Albatros in flight. The mechanism didn't work and he ended up ramming the plane.
In spite of stunts like that, Kazakov survived the war only to die in an airshow in 1919.
Last edition:
Saturday, March 13, 1915. Worries over Japan.
Tuesday, March 17, 2015
Television is stupid
Truly, amazingly stupid. So stupid, it's depressed the collective IQ of the population of the Western World 100 points. It's so darned dumb that its impact would be like burning 1,000 libraries at Alexandria.
It's dumb.
And getting dumber.
In 1961 the Chairman of the FCC, Newton Minnow, observed the following:
When television is good, nothing — not the theater, not the magazines or newspapers — nothing is better.
But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite each of you to sit down in front of your own television set when your station goes on the air and stay there, for a day, without a book, without a magazine, without a newspaper, without a profit and loss sheet or a rating book to distract you. Keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that what you will observe is a vast wasteland.
You will see a procession of game shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, mayhem, violence, sadism, murder, western bad men, western good men, private eyes, gangsters, more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly commercials — many screaming, cajoling, and offending. And most of all, boredom. True, you'll see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, I only ask you to try it.
Truer words were never spoken, and things have gotten infinitely worse since then. Indeed, the era that Minnow was writing about is now regarded as "The Golden Age of Television", with entire channels devoted to rerunning the very programs that Minnow complained about.
In comparison, the "vast wasteland" that Minnow wrote about has become some sort of tar pit of stupidity. Consider what's on.
There are, for example, an entire collection of "reality shows" based upon the goings of of allegedly "beautiful people" of one kind or another. Some, set in the epicenter of vapidity, Hollywood California, feature people whom we are clearly supposed to believe are beautiful, wealthy and interesting. They may be wealthy, but that's it. And yet the impressionable minds that watch this slop are fed hours upon hours of programming that this or that aging actress or personality must be beautiful, rather than plastic, and their sad lives of bitchiness and cattiness are interesting.
As part of that, I'd note, there's a clearly some sort of program going on, probably run by the UK's MI6, to export the village idiots of England to the United States. We're on to you, United Kingdom. It can't be the case that the US is lacking idiots, so this is clearly nefarious. Having a British accent doesn't make a person interesting, television it makes them English. They can stay home and pollute the BBC if they must be on television.
Or, for another example, take Guillianna and Bill. Here's a married couple that works on television or in entertainment, but they're so boring, they make oatmeal look fascinating in comparison. They're boring with a side order of dull, served on cardboard. Boring. And yet television serves up a series based on their boringness.
Or let's take TLC, which started off as "The Learning Channel". Now, it seemingly is focusing on people who are violating the laws of their states by having multiple boring spouses. Why is this on television? TLC virtually serves as some sort of propaganda channel for a lifestyle that is pretty uniformly regarded as horrific by those who escape it, and yet they serve it up every week.
Kids' programming doesn't escape this either. The dreaded Disney Channel looses nothing in methods to the glory days of Ford Motors. It's a factory, serving up show after show based on absurdly precocious children with bizarrely naive friend, living in homes with childlike almost stupid parents. Anyone who has watched more than two Disney Channel episodes ought to be able to write an entire series effortlessly.
Regular programming, to the extent it exists, is not much better. Ever single season television outdoes itself to be more "edgy" or "contemporary" by taking things further and further in a moral swamp, and portraying it as cool. The hallmark for this may be the former really popular series "Friends", which is supposedly really funny, but if you stop and consider what the real lives of somebody living in the fashion portrayed would be like, it wouldn't be so funny at all. Quite the contrary, actually.
Or even the alleged "news" now fails. Entire channels are more or less in the category of political cheerleaders for one political view or another, and not real news. Edward R. Murrow must be crying in the next world.
Probably ought to just turn the whole stupid thing off.
Ireland in film
Folks will notice that today I've either posted, or mentioned, a series of films that are set in Ireland.
A few days ago, I did a post on an entire series of movies which feature Americans crossing the border into Mexico. I suppose I could have done this the same way, but I've seen a lot more films on the cross border Mexican theme than I have ones set in Ireland.
Indeed it occurs to me that there's a lot of well regarded films about Ireland I just haven't seen, and at least one that I saw so long ago, I've forgotten it. I haven't seen Ryans Daughter, which a lot of people highly regard. I've seen The Field, but I saw it so long ago, I've forgotten it and I think I was rather distracted back when I saw it in the first place. I'll have to remedy these omissions.
There also some films that were filmed, but not set, in Ireland that I have seen, and might be worth mentioning just because of that, but which fit outside of the scope of what I'm addressing here with the Irish films today. One if the historical drama Barry Linden, which is well filmed in Ireland. Another is The Blue Max, the drama about a German World War One aviator, which was filmed over Ireland as it was much less developed, and therefore appeared right, than post World War Two Germany or France (the United Kingdom just stood in, interestingly, for Germany in Fury).
One I ought to see, but have not, is The Commitments, which is about an Irish soul band. It has a good reputation, but it's one I haven't made it around to. And one that I intend to see, but have not yet, is Cavalry, which is a new, and very highly regarded drama, about an Irish priest.
Of course, a lot of the films I've seen that have been listed in this series of movie threads are ones that I've seen on television (not all, however). Some of the ones noted here just don't get that much television play time. It's easier to catch the crossing into Mexico ones really. Anyhow, some interesting films here.
A few days ago, I did a post on an entire series of movies which feature Americans crossing the border into Mexico. I suppose I could have done this the same way, but I've seen a lot more films on the cross border Mexican theme than I have ones set in Ireland.
Indeed it occurs to me that there's a lot of well regarded films about Ireland I just haven't seen, and at least one that I saw so long ago, I've forgotten it. I haven't seen Ryans Daughter, which a lot of people highly regard. I've seen The Field, but I saw it so long ago, I've forgotten it and I think I was rather distracted back when I saw it in the first place. I'll have to remedy these omissions.
There also some films that were filmed, but not set, in Ireland that I have seen, and might be worth mentioning just because of that, but which fit outside of the scope of what I'm addressing here with the Irish films today. One if the historical drama Barry Linden, which is well filmed in Ireland. Another is The Blue Max, the drama about a German World War One aviator, which was filmed over Ireland as it was much less developed, and therefore appeared right, than post World War Two Germany or France (the United Kingdom just stood in, interestingly, for Germany in Fury).
One I ought to see, but have not, is The Commitments, which is about an Irish soul band. It has a good reputation, but it's one I haven't made it around to. And one that I intend to see, but have not yet, is Cavalry, which is a new, and very highly regarded drama, about an Irish priest.
Of course, a lot of the films I've seen that have been listed in this series of movie threads are ones that I've seen on television (not all, however). Some of the ones noted here just don't get that much television play time. It's easier to catch the crossing into Mexico ones really. Anyhow, some interesting films here.
Movies In History: Michael Collins
Michael Collins
This is a historical drama in film treatment of Michael Collins' life during the Anglo Irish War and the Irish Civil War. Collins, for those who might not know, was the military genius behind the IRA's terrorist campaign against the British, and also the subsequent military leader of the Irish Free State's successful struggle against the Irish Republican Army. For those unfamiliar with the history of those two struggles, that may be a bit confusing, in which case this film actually isn't 100% historically accurate.
Even so, it does a pretty good job of portraying the events from about 1916 through 1922, including contrasting Collins role in these events with those of Éamon de Valera, which is not an easy task really. De Valera comes out the worse in the treatment, which he tends to also in objective histories. The film does push this a bit further than it should, however, as it dramatically portrays de Valera as directly involved in Collins roadside assassination which is not true. De Valera undoubtedly knew nothing about that until after it had occurred.
Otherwise, keeping in mind the limitations of film, this film does a really nice job of portraying very complicated events, including events which were really psychological in nature. Irish penetration of the English police is well done. The terrorist nature of the IRA's role in the Ango Irish War is well portrayed. Material details are correct for the film.
This 1996 film is little known in the US, which is too bad as it is a good film with a good cast. Liam Neeson portrays Collins, whom he somewhat resembles. Alan Rickman portrays de Valera, whom he also somewhat resembles. Worth seeing.
This is a historical drama in film treatment of Michael Collins' life during the Anglo Irish War and the Irish Civil War. Collins, for those who might not know, was the military genius behind the IRA's terrorist campaign against the British, and also the subsequent military leader of the Irish Free State's successful struggle against the Irish Republican Army. For those unfamiliar with the history of those two struggles, that may be a bit confusing, in which case this film actually isn't 100% historically accurate.
Even so, it does a pretty good job of portraying the events from about 1916 through 1922, including contrasting Collins role in these events with those of Éamon de Valera, which is not an easy task really. De Valera comes out the worse in the treatment, which he tends to also in objective histories. The film does push this a bit further than it should, however, as it dramatically portrays de Valera as directly involved in Collins roadside assassination which is not true. De Valera undoubtedly knew nothing about that until after it had occurred.
Otherwise, keeping in mind the limitations of film, this film does a really nice job of portraying very complicated events, including events which were really psychological in nature. Irish penetration of the English police is well done. The terrorist nature of the IRA's role in the Ango Irish War is well portrayed. Material details are correct for the film.
This 1996 film is little known in the US, which is too bad as it is a good film with a good cast. Liam Neeson portrays Collins, whom he somewhat resembles. Alan Rickman portrays de Valera, whom he also somewhat resembles. Worth seeing.
Movies In History: The Informer
The Informer
This is the first of John Ford's two movies set in Ireland, the other being the "small story" The Quiet Man. T his movie is of an entirely different character.
Filmed in 1935, and set in 1920, this film is unabashedly pro Irish Republican Army and involves an IRA man who turns on his fellows. Victor McLaughlin, who typically was cast in a supporting role as an Irishman (he was a Canadian) is cast in the lead role as the simple minded Gypo Nolan, who wants to immigrate to the United States and who is duped, more or less, into betrayal. Nolan spends the rest of the film wrestling with his conscience as the IRA closes in on the identity of The Informer.
All in all, this film is well regarded for its time, and is an Academy Award winner, although its frankly really odd to see a film that's so unabashedly pro IRA. Filmed when it was, it was almost certainly filmed entirely on a film set, so we see very little of any place really. Dublin, where the film is set, is mostly a foggy grimy urban location which we never really get a very good look at. In terms of material details, they're probably more or less correct as there's very few of them, but at least in terms of clothing, the film does a really good job of getting the look right. The actual period photo below of British anti Republican agents in Ireland, for example, gives a pretty good idea of what characters in the film look like.
This is the first of John Ford's two movies set in Ireland, the other being the "small story" The Quiet Man. T his movie is of an entirely different character.
Filmed in 1935, and set in 1920, this film is unabashedly pro Irish Republican Army and involves an IRA man who turns on his fellows. Victor McLaughlin, who typically was cast in a supporting role as an Irishman (he was a Canadian) is cast in the lead role as the simple minded Gypo Nolan, who wants to immigrate to the United States and who is duped, more or less, into betrayal. Nolan spends the rest of the film wrestling with his conscience as the IRA closes in on the identity of The Informer.
All in all, this film is well regarded for its time, and is an Academy Award winner, although its frankly really odd to see a film that's so unabashedly pro IRA. Filmed when it was, it was almost certainly filmed entirely on a film set, so we see very little of any place really. Dublin, where the film is set, is mostly a foggy grimy urban location which we never really get a very good look at. In terms of material details, they're probably more or less correct as there's very few of them, but at least in terms of clothing, the film does a really good job of getting the look right. The actual period photo below of British anti Republican agents in Ireland, for example, gives a pretty good idea of what characters in the film look like.
All in all, a heavily dated film, but one worth watching if it happens to be on, if for no other reason than that it's well regarded for the time in which it was made.
Movies In History: The Quiet Man
The Quiet Man
Last August I mentioned in this series of threads a movie on Irish life that I think is better than this one, although this film is justifiably regarded as a classic. That movie is Durango, which all in all is a better movie.
Durango is set early in World War Two. The 1952 film The Quiet Man is filmed is set in a seemingly newly independent Ireland, but the exact year is never really revealed. It's probably, therefore, set in the 1920s, or maybe in the 1930s. An off reference to the Irish Republican Army, which at that time would have been set against the government of the Irish Free State, is included in the film, an orphaned part of a plot line that was abandoned as the film was made.
The film follows the adventures of "Trooper" Thorne, an Irish American boxer who has retired after a ring tragedy and who takes up residence in an Irish cottage near where his mother had been from. He's the "quiet" man of the movie, portrayed by John Wayne in this film directed by John Ford. Ford's film does a good job of showing the rural nature of Ireland at the time, which indeed was still the Ireland of the time in which the film was shot there. It's a charming, small story, film set in rural Ireland, and overall it does a good job of portraying it correctly, which isn't too surprising given that the Irish American Ford was enormously enamored of Ireland. The cast is excellent, and the material details are pretty good. It'll likely be shown all day today on some television channel, as it usually is on St. Patrick's Day.
Lex Anteinternet: Civil Holidays
Lex Anteinternet: Civil Holidays: Leann posted an item on her blog about Columbus Day, urging Congress to consider changing it to Indigenous Peoples Day . I'll confess ...
Today In Wyoming's History: Sidebar: The Irish in Wyoming. A St. Patrick's Day Observation during National Agriculture Week
The Kistler Tent and Awning building in downtown Casper Wyoming (the company still exists, but not in this location). Note the reference to Sheep Wagon covers, herder's tepees and lambing tents, all things that many an Irish immigrant to Wyoming became familiar with.
I linked this item (which is one of the most popular on the blog noted below) to this site way back when I first wrote it.
Today In Wyoming's History: Sidebar: The Irish in Wyoming: Just recently we posted our "green" edition of this blog with our St. Patrick's Day entry . Given that, this is a good time ...
I'm sure it's bad form to do that again, but today is St. Patrick's Day and its National Agriculture Week. What do the two have to do with each other? Well, quite a lot.
At least as late as the 1990s, agriculture made up the largest sector of the Irish economy. I don't know where it stands today, but Ireland has also undergone a tremendous economic and cultural revolution since that time, not all of which is good by any means. Perhaps Ireland is sort of a cautionary tale, on some things, today, as well as being an example of a host economic lessons of one kind or another.
Be that as it may, Ireland's history, as anyone who has looked at it well knows, has been far from pacific or bucolic. The Emerald Isle has a tragic history in the extreme, with its principal exports for many years including its young. Some of those people include my ancestors, on both sides of my family. Indeed, my great grandmother came from Ireland at age 3, with her sister who was 19. They were the only two members of that family that the family could afford to send to the United States. I don't know what became of the rest of them, save for one brother of hers who joined the English army and made a career out of it.
A common concept of the Irish in America depicts them in the urban setting, that was so common for many of them. And, indeed, on my mother's side that would be accurate, as they went to Montreal. But another very common path for a very rural people was to try to get some land and farm.
Indeed, the Irish were manic about agriculture and land. In Ireland, having land was paramount, and most of them didn't have it. To be able to obtain land was everything to many of them, and in the US they had that chance. Not just in the U.S., of course. This was also true of much of the English Empire and it was also true for all of North America. Mexico, for example, first drew the attention of Irish immigrants at the time of the Mexican War, where the Mexicans picked up on the fact that land could be a powerful inducement to desertion for an oppressed, land starved, Catholic, population. And it worked in some cases. Young Irish soldiers in the U.S. Army, crossing into Mexican towns to attend Mass, seeing attractive Mexican young ladies, and being offered free land. . . . that went a long ways towards breaking the bonds of loyalty, in some cases, for some so situated.
Anyhow, the Irish are part of the story of American agriculture in the west for that reason and they're particularly associated with the history of sheep ranching here. Sheep were an animal that they were already familiar with and they became one of the foundational pegs of Wyoming sheep ranching quite rapidly. The Irish and sheep were a story in Wyoming well into the 20th Century.
Now, of course, in the somewhat glum thread I've been sewing with here recently, it would be wholly impossible for an immigrant to come over and establish a viable ranching operation in the U.S., let alone become rich doing it as some Irish immigrants did. It isn't even really possible for the average American to get into it. That should give us some pause.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)