tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2497280090355319832024-02-07T11:08:18.361-08:00Window on the WorldUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-68952310015022575072018-08-14T06:33:00.002-07:002020-04-10T10:54:17.663-07:00"The Shoes on the Danube" and the Challenge of Preserving Holocaust History in Hungary<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEaJV98L10D29finwcnnqUIuFlwM83UEO7fY3S-Pbx201MjfRzNTlWjJFqrHBj_fLm59XsT7TCxXrdL6E4zxcdR4EoZYMhOAImvpm1AP26IhPOFZpTzD2HgPGMXfsDYyUeGMTSeinfSR4/s1600/IMG_3582.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEaJV98L10D29finwcnnqUIuFlwM83UEO7fY3S-Pbx201MjfRzNTlWjJFqrHBj_fLm59XsT7TCxXrdL6E4zxcdR4EoZYMhOAImvpm1AP26IhPOFZpTzD2HgPGMXfsDYyUeGMTSeinfSR4/s400/IMG_3582.JPG" width="300" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5zLgnOeTbFsYNPNVQzkHrXtN7peaX7u5I_wFFImD4CrGrNH_L8zzq_303omv83X_2WpDkGs59MH0wD9ABmH4ZoHF6-5e1etZsv8tsMUZcvOAGD55w-iV-cg1GcygpomtzfgA08cpkb_U/s1600/IMG_3579.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5zLgnOeTbFsYNPNVQzkHrXtN7peaX7u5I_wFFImD4CrGrNH_L8zzq_303omv83X_2WpDkGs59MH0wD9ABmH4ZoHF6-5e1etZsv8tsMUZcvOAGD55w-iV-cg1GcygpomtzfgA08cpkb_U/s320/IMG_3579.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Photos by L. Davis<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-oyCmw-4Bdr1lsgJPdaOxSUjqDtvJ7o8Kb0JUS4Qv7_4Q26BK57aLMQ_iNQD-9GsyjxU5XATi8zaGCYFXkQOHJKP3k6RLpWrcJBvW8CeWj8wzc92mlJhIIKmd3Jbf6Vuru0BkEbETGpk/s1600/IMG_3577.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1105" data-original-width="1600" height="441" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-oyCmw-4Bdr1lsgJPdaOxSUjqDtvJ7o8Kb0JUS4Qv7_4Q26BK57aLMQ_iNQD-9GsyjxU5XATi8zaGCYFXkQOHJKP3k6RLpWrcJBvW8CeWj8wzc92mlJhIIKmd3Jbf6Vuru0BkEbETGpk/s640/IMG_3577.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
On a July 2017 trip to Budapest, Hungary, I was struck by the beauty of this place that hugs the Danube River. The city is the product of the 1873 merger of two previously independent cities, "Buda" and "Pest," that were divided by the river. Today, "Buda" represents a quiet, residential section of the city (upscale in parts) while "Pest" represents a total repudiation of Hungary's communist past: it is full of swanky hotels, bars, restaurants and retail outlets that dazzle the eyes of tourists from all around the world. As a "when in Rome" type of tourist I was hoping to sample the local goulash but was instead distracted by the array of non-Hungarian food that was available. Along with friends with whom I was traveling, we dined at a very good Middle Eastern restaurant (run by a hardworking Palestinian family) that served excellent falafel and hummus. At the Central Market I ate fresh fruit and bought plenty of the famous Hungarian paprika to bring home to my wife. However, as a historian I knew that I would have to reconcile the bright lights of Budapest with a darker reality that was the purpose of my visit in the first place: to study the Holocaust in this relatively small corner of Central Europe.<br />
<br />
A simple memorial on the banks of the Danube tells of the gruesome fate of Budapest's Jewish community during the last year of World War II. "<a href="http://www.yadvashem.org/articles/general/shoes-on-the-danube-promenade.html" target="_blank">The Shoes on the Danube Promenade</a>" was completed in 2005 on the Pest side of the river, a short walk from the Hungarian Parliament building. Accompanying the shoes are three plaques in Hungarian, English and Hebrew (see English version above) that clearly state what happened on this very spot and along the riverbank: pro-Nazi Arrow Cross militiamen shot Jews and threw them into the Danube in a frenzy of murder that gripped the city after the Arrow Cross Party came to power under the auspices of the Nazis in October 1944. <br />
<br />
This memorial is powerful in its simplicity. However, it is limited in explaining the complexity of the events that led to the genocide of the Jewish population of Budapest and who led this horrifying endeavor. Preserving the memory of those murdered is the function of sites such as these; providing historical context is another matter entirely. The context is quite chilling and when explained brings out aspects of the Holocaust in Hungary that are not easily discernible to the casual traveler.<br />
<br />
The <a href="https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005264" target="_blank">background to the slaughter of Budapest's Jews</a> hinged on political events that triggered an intense social backlash that led to genocide. Until October 1944 Jews in the city lived in relative safety, unlike their counterparts elsewhere in the country who had been rounded up by Hungarian gendarmes (this action was supervised by the elements of the German SS) between May and July and sent to Auschwitz (about 440,000 Jews were deported, most to be killed in the gas chambers there). A public announcement by the Hungarian viceroy, <a href="http://www.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft%20Word%20-%206429.pdf" target="_blank">Miklos Horthy</a> (Hungary was an ally of the Third Reich), to contact the Allies to work out a peace deal enraged Adolf Hitler, who sent troops to occupy Hungary to ensure that it remained in the Axis fold. After toppling the government and putting a new one in the hands of <a href="http://www.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft%20Word%20-%206063.pdf" target="_blank">Ferenc Szalasi</a> and his fascist, anti-Semitic Arrow Cross Party, the fate of Budapest's Jews was sealed. The reign of terror that Hungarian Arrow Cross members visited on the the Jewish population was made more lethal through the direct collaboration of non-Jewish citizens in the killing and dispossession of the Jewish population.<br />
<br />
The murder of approximately 80,000 Jews in Budapest is a fact. However, the new authoritarianism that is currently sweeping Central Europe--most notably in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/world/europe/poland-israel-holocaust.html" target="_blank">Poland</a> (a country that had been lauded as a democratic success story by many in the West)--is now embodied in Hungary in the person of its Prime Minister, Viktor Orban. Orban has not publicly defended anti-Semitism but has been skillful in playing it to his advantage. <a href="http://www.france24.com/en/20180719-hungary-israel-orban-netanyahu-controversial-visit-trump-jerusalem-diplomacy" target="_blank">On a recent trip to Israel</a>, he reiterated his wish for stronger ties with that nation and then visited the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial. In response, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu called Orban a<a href="http://www.france24.com/en/20180719-hungary-israel-orban-netanyahu-controversial-visit-trump-jerusalem-diplomacy" target="_blank"> "friend of Israel"</a>. But it is clear that Orban is not a friend to Hungary's Jews. He has remained silent as funding for the <a href="http://hdke.hu/en/about-us" target="_blank">Holocaust Memorial and Documentation Center</a> has declined steadily since he took office while the new state-sponsored <a href="http://www.terrorhaza.hu/en" target="_blank">House of Terror</a> museum has become the place tourists are encouraged to visit to get a slug of information regarding the war and its aftermath. In short, the museum conflates the Nazi and Soviet regimes and plays them both as oppressors of the Hungarian people--the Nazis before 1945 and the Soviets afterwards. No mention is made of the disturbing history of anti-Semitism that was codified into law under Horthy's rule in the 1920s and 1930s that made the actions of the Arrow Cross possible. In addition, Orban failed to condemn the recent awarding of the Order of Merit of the Knight's Cross to <a href="https://www.jta.org/2016/08/23/news-opinion/world/u-s-holocaust-museum-slams-hungarian-award-to-racist-journalist" target="_blank">Zsolt Bayer</a>, a virulent anti-Semitic journalist.<br />
<br />
In order to understand the history behind memorials like"The Shoes on the Danube Promenade" a common public understanding must be taught in schools, supported by public officials, and made a part of the national historical narrative. There was a bright moment in the 1990s when the post-Soviet era included free elections and a brief reckoning by Hungarians of the murder of over half a million Hungarian Jews. The Holocaust Memorial and Documentation Center was created during that decade along with a Holocaust Commemoration Day. The current authoritarian moment threatens to destroy this reckoning with this painful past and negates the meaning that the shoes along the Danube represent. The preservation of this monument can start with reestablishing the proper historical context (historians are central to this effort), but it will take the efforts of Hungarian citizens themselves to protect the memory of those murdered along this iconic river.<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-19361229427225665972017-05-10T06:55:00.000-07:002017-05-10T07:04:38.996-07:00The Ethics of "Mapping" Mass Violence<br />A thought-provoking look at attempts by scholars, artists and others to bring an understanding of war and mass violence to those places that don't often experience it. Here, a commentary on one attempt to "graph" the violence in Aleppo onto the cities of London and Berlin. What are the ethical issues that arise when attempting to explain violence spatially? <div>
<br /></div>
<div>
From the post by Derek Gregory, "Aleppo in London and Berlin," from the blog "geographical imaginations: war, space and security":<br /><br />"A common response to mass violence elsewhere is to imagine its impact transferred to our own lives and places. It’s a problematic device in all sorts of ways. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki US media became obsessed with imagining the impact of a nuclear attack on US cities – though, as I’ve also noted elsewhere, there were multiple ironies in conjuring up ‘Hiroshima, USA’ – and in the wake of the US-led invasion of Iraq there were several artistic projects that mapped the violence in Baghdad onto (for example) Boston, New York or San Francisco..."<br /><div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a href="https://geographicalimaginations.com/2017/05/09/aleppo-in-london-and-berlin/">https://geographicalimaginations.com/2017/05/09/aleppo-in-london-and-berlin/</a><div class="m_-4757477405920271302gmail-" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="m_-4757477405920271302gmail-_1mf m_-4757477405920271302gmail-_1mj" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit;">
<div style="font-size: 14px;">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-46260729796884712782016-07-26T12:17:00.000-07:002016-07-26T12:17:02.666-07:00Robespierre and Memory in France: Reflections on a Debate<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Robespierre_crop.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Robespierre_crop.jpg" width="239" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;">Robespierre circa 1790 (image is in the<br />public domain)</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/robespierre_maximilien.shtml" target="_blank">Maximilien Robespierre</a>'s role in the French Revolution has fascinated historians, ideologues, politicians and history buffs for a long time. He has been the subject of serious scholarly works and has been represented in popular culture. This past June, a sharp-edged debate arose in the French press over Robespierre's place in the Revolution, specifically during the Reign of Terror. To Americans reading the back-and-forth in <i><a href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/" target="_blank">Le Figaro</a></i>, France's center-right daily newspaper, it might seem like a tempest in a teapot. To the French, who have witnessed the current Republic struggle with questions about the future of the European Union, the plight of the sons and daughters of immigrants living on the fringes of the nation's cities, shocking acts of terrorist violence and a resurgent right-wing Front National, the question of what Robespierre's participation in the Terror should mean has been taken seriously.<br />
<br />
How did this recent debate over Robespierre's place in the national memory begin? It was through an avenue that French public intellectuals have used to engage the nation since the late nineteenth century -- through a public declaration addressed to a person in power. In this case, it was a June 14 <a href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/vox/politique/2016/06/13/31001-20160613ARTFIG00254-madame-hidalgo-une-rue-de-paris-doit-porter-le-nom-de-robespierre.php" target="_blank">letter</a> to Paris mayor <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/20/paris-attacks-mayor-speech-terrorism-anne-hidalgo" target="_blank">Anne Hidalgo</a> that was signed by thirty scholars and teachers calling for a street, place or square in the capital to be named in Robespierre's honor. What is central to this request is its determination to combat the ill-repute to which Robespierre's name has been held for a long time.<br />
<br />
The signatories of the letter refer to twentieth century politics as the starting point to argue that Robespierre deserves this recognition. At the end of World War II when the Paris city government was in the hands of the socialists and communists, both parties supported the idea of creating a "Place Robespierre." The return of the right to power in 1951 scuttled the plan, leaving Robespierre's memory to be disconnected from that of Republican heroes like <a href="https://www.marxists.org/archive/jaures/" target="_blank">Jean <span style="font-family: inherit;">Jaur</span><span style="line-height: 23.4px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">è</span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;">s</span></a>. The result, in their view, has been unfortunate, since it has amounted to a rejection of France's revolutionary history. They argue that other major cities in France, like Marseille, have established places or streets carrying Robespierre's name. They simply ask, "Why not Paris?"<br />
<br />
The controversial nature of the French Revolution has been a mainstay of French political and academic life for over two centuries. The signatories seek to correct misperceptions of Robespierre and insist that he was never a "dictator" or "<i>deus et machina</i>" (this term and italics belong to the signatories) of the revolutionary drama, asserting that "...Robespierre had defended, with his partisans, a real political project founded on the will to defend and to construct a Republic of which the first principle had to be social equality." Besides, in their view, controversial actors from both sides of the revolutionary drama, including King Louis XVI and Danton, have been honored with "bridges, avenues and squares" that "transmit their memory."<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
The letter places Robespierre within the intellectual history of the eighteenth century. He was an admirer and "heir" of the Enlightenment who believed that the principles of liberty and equality could be balanced; he was a stringent opponent of arbitrary behavior of functionaries of the state; he was in favor of the rights of Jews and against slavery; he was against capital punishment. In addition, he was, according to the letter, "a product of the contradictions and complexities of the times," but was also dedicated to "genuine republican convictions that should be made known to the public." This last point is echoed in the final plea to "reconcile" Robespierre's place within the First Republic with that of ordinary Parisians.<br />
<br />
In an <a href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/vox/histoire/2016/06/16/31005-20160616ARTFIG00132-gueniffey-robespierre-incarne-d-une-facon-chimiquement-pure-l-idee-de-la-table-rase.php" target="_blank">interview</a> published a week after the letter to Hidalgo was published, Patrice Gueniffey provided a rebuttal of the claims made in the letter. Gueniffey is an academic at the L'Ecole des hautes etudes en science sociales (EHESS). He was asked questions that gave him the opportunity to highlight the cleavages in the politics, intellectual culture and historiography of the Revolution that have roiled generations: "What place does Robespierre occupy in the Republican memory?" "Do the petitioners who demand a street in Robespierre's name reflect a classic vindication of the communists?" "Was Robespierre responsible for the Terror?" "Would you say that the Great Terror was a proto-totalitarian experiment?" The questions played into preconceived notions of Robespierre held by many in the media and in academia.<br />
<br />
Gueniffey's response began with a nod to the historiography of the late nineteenth century, when a "republican consensus" was formed that was based "on the exclusion of Robespierre from the pantheon of the great men of the decade 1789-1799." In his view, this consensus on the Revolution placed men like Robespierre and his ally turned nemesis <a href="http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/whic/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?zid=6f4277af73b795f9bb2a65f47027f20a&action=2&catId=&documentId=GALE%7CK1616000166&userGroupName=k12_histcombo&jsid=892d6e43f1c2ff1cfdd21021b4168578" target="_blank">Georges Danton</a> into two camps: the first being comprised of those who defended the nation from invasion by the Prussians and Austrians and who resisted Robespierre (Danton and others) and the second including only Robespierre, who "embodied" the civil war and the Terror. For his efforts, Danton was thereby honored with a <a href="http://paris1900.lartnouveau.com/paris06/ici_et_la_monuments/danton.htm" target="_blank">statue</a> in Paris in 1889, the centennial of the Revolution. Robespierre was then declared to be at fault for the Revolution's most extreme failures.<br />
<br />
Robespierre was a singular force in the events of the Terror in Gueniffey's intepretation. For example, Robespierre was responsible for Law of 22 Prairial (10 June 1794), which suppressed due process for those accused of crimes. The Great Terror originated at this point and let loose the guillotine. Gueniffey insists that the Great Terror was the "direct will" of Robespierre whereby it became "an inherent part of the Revolution," having become less an instrument of punishing enemies but was now meant only to "paralyze the opposition."<br />
<br />
The politics of postwar France also factor in Gueniffey's response to the letter. In his view, the French Communist Party and its followers (he seems to be implying that all of the petitioners fall into this category) not only are driving the call for recognition of Robespierre but are also responsible for creating a "paradox" in their argument: "...these petitioners belittle the historical role of the Incorruptible in order to defend him. They shrink [his role in the Revolution] in order to render him more presentable." In short, he believes that they are embarking on a "rehabilitation" of the Terror without taking responsibility for it. This point allows Gueniffey to make the broader claim that the debate around Robespierre carries deeper ideological ramifications, the most forceful being that Robespierre presented a model that was copied word-for-word by Lenin and the Bolsheviks during the Russian Revolution: "the rhetoric regarding the [need for a] scapegoat, the punitive tribunals, a system of surveillance and of informing [on the citizenry]." The only factor that separates Robespierre from Lenin and the Bolsheviks is the fact that the Jacobins failed "to form a homogenous and centralized party."<br />
<br />
<i>Le Figaro</i> has done a service to both sides by publishing the letter to the mayor in support of recognition of Robespierre and the response from a prominent opponent (the downside being that the content of the interview questions Patrice Gueniffey answered were leading and were not of a dispassionate nature). At the very least, this controversy should open up new avenues for reevaluating Robespierre's place in France's national memory. A superficial glance at responses to the current debate on Twitter reveals that the French have overwhelmingly internalized the generalizations made by Gueniffey. A sampling of attitudes on Twitter does not amount to a scientific study, but it does point to a general mood that prevails regarding Robespierre.<br />
<br />
The petitioners make the better case that Robespierre's role in the Revolution and in the national memory should be reconsidered. Of course, naming a street or place after the revolutionary leader is the immediate goal of the letter's signatories and the recognition of this by the mayor's office would be an important start toward providing an intellectual space for a new narrative of Robespierre to emerge that would challenge the superficiality of Gueniffey's interpretation.<br />
<br />
One way to view this problem is by considering how both sides reference the chronology of the Revolution to make their respective cases. The letter to Mayor Hidalgo is a call to consider Robespierre within a broader context that would include his intellectual grounding in Enlightenment thought and his politics before the Terror, which included stances against the death penalty and slavery. In this interpretation of revolutionary events, Robespierre's pre-1789 life would have to be taken into consideration as a starting point if a fair analysis is to be drawn. Certainly, the petitioners would have to explain Robespierre's role in the Terror, but would be able to do so more convincingly if the full scope of the revolutionary drama was folded into the recognition that those in leadership positions were driven in many respects by events far outside of their control. If Robespierre used a particular ideological framework to make sense of the whirlwind around him, that does not make him an unusual historical figure. But that is only part of the story.<br />
<br />
The problem with the Gueniffey's argument is that he pins his interpretation of Robespierre on a tiny sliver of chronology--1793 to 1794--that strains to support generalizations that rest on an assumption that ideas (dangerous in regards to Robespierre) float freely throughout history regardless of specific political, cultural and social contexts. This allows him to place Robespierre and Lenin in the same category and to conflate the French and Soviet revolutionary traditions. The result of the mixing and matching of two complex revolutionary eras obscures the origins of modern totalitarianism and makes it appear to be based upon decisions made by one French revolutionary during a tumultuous, violent period of the late eighteenth century. <br />
<br />
Curiously, Robespierre's standing as a historical figure gets a major boost though Gueniffey's argument. He sees Robespierre as ten feet tall; he was the driver of the Terror and is responsible for its most egregious excesses (in contrast to his claim that the petitioners have had to denigrate Robespierre's role in the Terror in order to save his reputation). The problem here is that the complexity of the Terror goes underappreciated if one places such a large degree of responsibility on the shoulders of one prominent member of the Committee of Public Safety.<br />
<br />
The debate over Robespierre's legacy will not be over even if Mayor Hidalgo decides to ignore the letter of June 14. However, a positive response on her part would provide a space within which a discussion can ensue about how the Revolution and Republic should be memorialized. Such a debate should include and transcend the question of whether or not Robespierre deserves a street or public place in Paris.<br />
<br />
Works Cited:<br />
<br />
Corbi<span style="line-height: 23.4px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">è</span></span>re, Alexis. "Madame Hidalgo, une rue de Paris doit porter le nom de Robespierre," <i>Le Figaro</i> (14 juin 2016).<br />
<br />
Perrault, Guillaume, "Gueniffey: 'Robespierre incarne d'une fa<span style="line-height: 23.4px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">ç</span></span>on chimiquement pure l'id<span style="line-height: 23.4px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">é</span></span>e de la table rase,'" <i>Le Figaro</i> (20 juin 2016).<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-67747170192075264712015-04-28T11:03:00.002-07:002015-04-28T11:03:33.684-07:00"Never Give Up!" Ben Ferencz and His Lifelong Defense of Human Rights<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4bDbzztQafq5uVrcdOo9nyqYSQLxaC5umyNdZ4pV1tRm9aMu9QyZWdid4WPZzsLEqO9V3U1zIW41gGfRZkHW9194lrDmQWGcNkMN8zY38r4n3HNK9VKmTtEm2xwjSE_AcBY0k0gKv3yA/s1600/Prosecutor_Benjamin_Ferencz_at_the_Einsatzgruppen_Trial.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4bDbzztQafq5uVrcdOo9nyqYSQLxaC5umyNdZ4pV1tRm9aMu9QyZWdid4WPZzsLEqO9V3U1zIW41gGfRZkHW9194lrDmQWGcNkMN8zY38r4n3HNK9VKmTtEm2xwjSE_AcBY0k0gKv3yA/s1600/Prosecutor_Benjamin_Ferencz_at_the_Einsatzgruppen_Trial.jpg" height="246" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Prosecutor Ben Ferencz at The Einsatzgruppen Trial (circa 1947-8)<br />Photo: Creative Commons</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
Most Americans believe they live in a world that is on the brink of catastrophe. The media is saturated with images that seem to portend a future when war, terrorism and mass murder will destroy the relative comfort and peace that most of us take for granted. But what if there are people in our world who have witnessed the worst in human nature but have chosen to see a future when humanity will eventually triumph over those who deny basic human rights to millions in order to achieve power for selfish, destructive reasons?<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I met such a person last night. His name is Ben Ferencz, a former Nuremburg Trials prosecutor who spoke at an event sponsored by <a href="https://www.salemstate.edu/25422.php" target="_blank">Salem State University's Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1FNmR27ZCIoS3LBmHQnLW6ORTyT6E76uVYE34W0oBgRRYol0x80Z34ahwmJwVP9QCiH3sYxrmqoaJFPalMm1yplCOYgN6DQv3aZuif1QUDPW8QEABgqyRS9_jxYUqClysgv7BQQSLznY/s1600/IMG_0970.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1FNmR27ZCIoS3LBmHQnLW6ORTyT6E76uVYE34W0oBgRRYol0x80Z34ahwmJwVP9QCiH3sYxrmqoaJFPalMm1yplCOYgN6DQv3aZuif1QUDPW8QEABgqyRS9_jxYUqClysgv7BQQSLznY/s1600/IMG_0970.JPG" height="298" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Former Nuremberg prosecutor Ben Ferencz (center) at "Nuremberg and Now: Genocide and the International Courts," sponsored by the Salem State University Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies. On Mr. Ferencz's right is Dr. Chris Mauriello, Co-Coordinator of the Center and Professor of History. Bakhtiyar Tuzmukhamedov, Appeals Judge, UN International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and for the former Yugoslavia is on Mr. Ferencz's left. Salem, MA. April 27, 2015. Photo courtesy of Larry Davis.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
I must admit that although I have taught history to college students for over twenty years, I knew precious little about Mr. Ferencz's accomplishments. A brief sketch: in 1943 he enlisted in the Army after graduating from Harvard Law School and under the command of General George S. Patton saw combat in some of the fiercest fighting of World War II. Upon being honorably discharged in 1945, he was recruited by General Telford Taylor to prosecute what became known as The Einsatzgruppen Case. His <a href="http://www.benferencz.org/#bio" target="_blank">website</a> points out the enormity of the crimes he and his associates uncovered at the war's end:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
"Ferencz was sent with about fifty researchers to Berlin to scour Nazi offices and archives. In their hands lay overwhelming evidence of Nazi genocide by German doctors, lawyers, judges, generals industrialists, and others who played leading roles in organizing or perpetrating Nazi brutalities. Without pity or remorse, the SS murder squads [Einsatzgruppen] killed every Jewish man, woman, and child they could lay their hands on...It was tabulated that over a million persons were deliberately murdered by these special 'action groups.'" </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Mr. Ferencz's opening statement at the Einsatzgruppen Trial can be accessed <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E5QWY6hQUY" target="_blank">here</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-a6aOp13x4GqHAyJ4dB0D3EhSn4siIJpZLsL-HqwDyNZugQYw9YjJvU3TYvHhJUSVOFBWB-kKtvjBDzxK8oqBBDpBzN4BmBqTtgRj5nrS590pQED7FS6BEUVbgbgiqPMiaPsSZlPavxw/s1600/Otto_Ohlendorf_at_the_Nuremberg_Trials.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-a6aOp13x4GqHAyJ4dB0D3EhSn4siIJpZLsL-HqwDyNZugQYw9YjJvU3TYvHhJUSVOFBWB-kKtvjBDzxK8oqBBDpBzN4BmBqTtgRj5nrS590pQED7FS6BEUVbgbgiqPMiaPsSZlPavxw/s1600/Otto_Ohlendorf_at_the_Nuremberg_Trials.PNG" height="200" width="151" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Otto Ohlendorf, SS Brigadefuhrer. Ohlendorf was the chief defendant at The Einsatzgruppen Trial. He showed no remorse for his actions and told Mr. Ferencz that American Jews would endure suffering because of prosecutor's work.<br />Photo: Creative Commons</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I entered the lecture hall expecting to see a man who is ten feet tall. After all, Mr. Ferencz was only twenty-seven years old when he was named prosecutor in what eventually became known as the Einsatzgruppen Trial (it was also his first case). Instead, I saw a diminutive man mingling with the crowd, a man of exceptional good humor who struck those of us who met him as a humble advocate for the importance of educating future generations in the need to respect human rights.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
At ninety-five years of age, Mr. Ferencz took the microphone not as a weary chronicler of past atrocities but instead offered a clarion call to those in the audience to look to "law" not "war" as the answer to the violence and indifference to human rights that plague the world today. He didn't shield his audience from the difficult reality he experienced seventy years ago as a GI and prosecutor. He searched newly liberated concentration camps for evidence to use in court against the perpetrators of horrific crimes while seeing the dead, and nearly dead, bodies of those who suffered the cruelest of fates. As a prosecutor, he looked directly into the eyes of the killers and confessed to his audience that as a former soldier he fantasized about killing them himself. After The Einsatzgruppen Trial (twenty-two defendants were charged, with thirteen sentenced to death), he dedicated his life to building the framework for the international courts that today work to bring to justice the perpetrators of war crimes in places like Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I must admit that I am a jaded college professor. War? Genocide? Mass killing? All in a day's lecture. But I must also face that fact that I haven't seen anything remotely related to the crimes that have killed millions since the Armenian genocide. I've traveled, to be sure, but have not been a witness to history in the way that Mr. Ferencz has; his words forced me to confront my cynicism about the future of human rights on this planet. He stated plainly that during the trials he was a defender of "civilization" against genocide and crimes against humanity (and stands by this today). This is not a quaint philosophical point to bandy about at a cocktail party. His defense of law, reason, compromise, and human rights have deep roots in the Enlightenment. Why not defend this tradition? After all, what is left if we abandon these ideals? His final comments left me with a lot to think about: "You cannot kill an ideology with a gun," "Mass murderers did not have horns--many Nazi perpetrators possessed doctoral degrees and thought they were doing the right thing by their country." His solution is just the beginning. The killers are people, too. Get to them while they're young. Teach them the value of compromise, the love of peace and a hatred of war.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Mr. Ferencz fired up his audience with three final pieces of advice when battling on behalf of human rights: </div>
<div>
1.) Never Give Up! </div>
<div>
2.) Never Give Up! </div>
<div>
3.) Never Give Up! </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-79468471040428477182015-03-03T16:55:00.002-08:002017-08-31T09:15:53.234-07:00One Woman and Two Men in a Cramped Apartment: Sex and Marriage in 1920s Moscow<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://explore.bfi.org.uk/sites/explore.bfi.org.uk/files/styles/sas_polls_large_film_image/public/image/bed-and-sofa-bfi-00o-7kp.jpg?itok=mxPI2ssm" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="252" src="https://explore.bfi.org.uk/sites/explore.bfi.org.uk/files/styles/sas_polls_large_film_image/public/image/bed-and-sofa-bfi-00o-7kp.jpg?itok=mxPI2ssm" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Lyudmila Semyonova as Liuda in "Bed and Sofa" (1927)<br />
Creative Commons photo</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<b style="text-align: justify;">"Marriage was oppressive to women first because, in the household just as in the workplace, women were viewed as inferior, subject to the rule of their husbands. In addition, monogamous marriage led spouses to feel ownership of one another, encouraging the belief that each had rights over the other."</b><br />
<b><span style="font-size: x-small;">From Caitlin Vest, "Alexandra Kollontai and the 'Woman Question': Women and Social Revolution, 1905-1917" <a href="https://www.lagrange.edu/resources/pdf/citations/2011/11_Vest_History.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.lagrange.edu/resources/pdf/citations/2011/11_Vest_History.pdf</a></span></b><br />
<br />
<a href="http://womenineuropeanhistory.org/index.php?title=Alexandra_Kollontai" target="_blank">Alexandra Kollantai</a>'s socialist feminism rang loudly within the ideological ferment of the Russian Revolution of 1917. In many ways, she influenced early Soviet attempts to improve the lot of women in the new society created out of the debris of the tsarist state. Russian women before the Revolution did not enjoy legal rights--their legal status was defined by their fathers, brothers and other male "guardians" if unmarried, and by their husbands after marriage. The idea that traditional, "bourgeois" marriage was now outdated and should be transformed was not only an idea held by Kollantai. <a href="https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/bio/index.htm" target="_blank">Vladimir Lenin</a> and his wife, <a href="http://links.org.au/node/1544" target="_blank">Nadezhda Krupskaya</a>, had tried to further Kollantai's vision of a new Soviet woman by supporting the creation of daycare centers to allow women to work and by supporting laws that would compel men to support pregnant wives and girlfriends through a type of child-support program. Women were also given the right to divorce. The tumultuous period following the establishment of the Soviet Union in 1922 put the issue of women's rights on the social and cultural radar screen, with mixed success.<br />
<br />
Looking back on the 1920s through the lens of the visual arts provides a fascinating look into the "new" society created by the Soviets. Recently I watched "Bed and Sofa," a classic silent film from 1927 that was directed by Abram Room. The symbolism of the film is rich, most of which cannot be dissected in a blog post. However, the overarching theme is how an ordinary woman fared during a time of change that promised so much to so many.<br />
<br />
The plot of the film was considered scandalous by many at the time of its release:<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #4c4c4c; font-family: , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 19px;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #4c4c4c; font-family: , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 19px;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #4c4c4c; font-family: , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 19px;">"Russian writer/director <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/movies/person/108822/Abram-Room/biography" target="_blank">Abram Room</a></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4c4c4c; font-family: , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 19px;"> never again made anything as good--or as highly individual--as his 1927 silent film "Bed and Sofa." In this one-of-a-kind satire of the Moscow housing shortage, a married construction worker invites an old pal to stay with him. The friend not only accepts the worker's hospitality, but the favors of his wife as well. Impregnated, the wife tires of being a pawn for two rampaging male libidos and leaves both men, seeking a new life of her own." Hal Erickson, <a href="http://www.fandango.com/bedandsofa_52622/plotsummary" target="_blank">http://www.fandango.com/bedandsofa_52622/plotsummary</a></span></span></div>
<br />
Kolya and Liuda are a young married couple living in a one-room apartment in Moscow. He has a career as a builder and works supervising the remodeling of the Bolshoi Ballet theater. His behavior is childish at times; he pulls pranks on Liuda and treats her more like a servant than a wife. Kolya's job allows him to venture out of the apartment to enjoy the bustling metropolis outside their cramped apartment. Abram Room's scenes of Moscow in summer are a delight. The viewer immediately senses the city becoming a modern metropolis (you see scaffolding on buildings and workers scurrying everywhere). Room clearly wants it known that Kolya and the men he works with are masters not only of their homes, but also of the public square. Unbeknownst to Kolya, the control over his life and his wife will be upended in the course of events.<br />
<br />
Kolya's wife, Liuda, is overshadowed by him early in the film. Her confinement to the one-room apartment is mental, not physical. Kolya does not use physical coercion to get her to embrace subservience. Her world is defined by the walls of the apartment, symbolically decorated by the pictures that hang upon it. The magazines she reads give her a narrow perception of the world outside. She spends a lot of time gazing out of the window, imagining the world outside that Kolya takes for granted on a daily basis. What makes the film fascinating to watch is her eventual awakening as a woman who can exist outside the confines of her apartment. However, for most of the film, she spends her waking hours cooking, cleaning and doing other mundane chores.<br />
<br />
Things rapidly change for the couple upon the arrival of Kolya's army buddy, Volodya, who arrives in Moscow after a train ride that represents a classic view of a country bumpkin looking to the city not only for a job but for the dynamism it provides. He lands a job and searches for lodging (the film makes a subtle critique of the severe housing shortage in Moscow a full decade after the Revolution). He bumps into Kolya on the street, who enthusiastically offers the apartment's sofa to his friend. Kolya's generosity is on full display here. The sofa is to be Volodya's "kingdom." Much to Liuda's annoyance, she is now responsible for cooking and cleaning for two men, and her loneliness deepens.<br />
<br />
The love triangle is set into motion when Kolya is sent away on business. Volodya takes it upon himself to entertain the lonely Liuda by taking her on a day trip that includes a flight on a plane and a visit to the movies. This is one of two times in the film that Liuda is seen in public--it is also the happiest we see her in the film, as she finds herself outside of her self-imposed mental and physical prison. In the plane, she can see Moscow, but it cannot experience it close up like her husband and Volodya can. She does not realize this, because the excitement of the experience overwhelms her. That evening, Volodya <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnQKk1CF2Pk" target="_blank">seduces</a> her and when Kolya returns from is trip, he bluntly tells the befuddled husband what transpired between him and Liuda.<br />
<br />
The fascinating twist in this story has to do with the new domestic arrangement that the three set up in the apartment. Kolya is hurt, but because of the housing crunch has nowhere to go; Liuda offers him the sofa while Volodya moves to the bed. Over time, the strains in the friendship between the two men soften somewhat, as they spend evening after evening playing checkers while ignoring Liuda, who must endure her new "husband"--Volodya--who proves to be more demanding and dismissive of her than Kolya had been. Liuda's routine does not change. Effectively shut out of this fraternity, she gazes out of the window at a world that seems to be forever out of her reach.<br />
<br />
The director, Room, is satirizing the new shifts in the law that occurred in the 1920s as the Communist Party and Soviet state attempted to engineer changes in the structure of the family. Ideologically, there were moves to encourage more Soviet women to enter the workplace and to remake the "bourgeois" institution of marriage that had, in the eyes of Marx and Engels, as well as Lenin, Krupskaya and Kollantai, enslaved women and reinforced male patriarchy. Old attitudes die hard, and in Room's view, at least in this film, male domination of the home was ripe for satire.<br />
<br />
Once the two men realize Liuda is pregnant, they decide that she is to have an abortion. She is left out of this conversation. Under Soviet law at the time, the mother could name the father, who could then be held responsible for the child support. Both men want nothing to do with the pregnancy. Liuda agrees to the abortion, but with misgivings. The <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSaBSFAICy0" target="_blank">abortion clinic scene</a>, while not especially disturbing, does subtly highlight the plight of women who took this route, but the viewer can see Liuda's anxiety mounting. While waiting her turn in the clinic, she opens a window and sees a boy playing with a doll and two babies lying quietly in their bassinet. She leaves the clinic right before Kolya and Volodya arrive there to see her. The nurse asks who they are and they both respond at the same time, "husband."<br />
<br />
Liuda arrives back at the apartment, packs her things, leaves a short note and quickly departs for the train station. The train ride out of Moscow is in direct contrast to the train ride Volodya took into Moscow at the start of the film. The difference here is that Volodya had a plan--to find a job and live in the city. The ending of the film appears to be a triumph for Liuda, who smiles as the train rushes forward toward an unknown destination. Is she finally free to shape her own destiny? Critics of the film stated upon its release that the ending was a condemnation of the new Soviet order: opportunities to participate in the life of the Communist Party, to make a difference in the workplace, and to find a sense of solace in the home still eluded most women.<br />
<br />
How did the other sides of this love triangle cope with Liuda's absence? Kolya and Volodya decided to turn the apartment into their own bachelor pad. In this hilarious, absurd ending, fraternity trumps marriage and any relationship the men had with Liuda, monogamous or otherwise.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
This film, reflective of the massive social and cultural changes that shook Moscow in the 1920s, provides an absorbing story of gender roles and politics in a time and place much unlike our own.<br />
<br />
Find the English version of "Bed and Sofa" at Nexflix.com.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-49149001524192905712014-03-10T16:16:00.003-07:002014-03-10T16:20:57.920-07:00Crisis in Ukraine and the Rise of the Eurasian Union<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Maidan-Kyiv4649.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Maidan-Kyiv4649.jpg" height="267" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;">Funeral procession for <span style="background-color: white; text-align: left;">Mikhail Zhiznevsky, 25, a protester killed in Kiev in protests against pro-Russian president </span><span style="background-color: white; text-align: left;">Viktor Yanukovych (January 2014) (Photo courtesy of Mikola Vacilechko--Creative Commons)</span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Scenes of <a href="http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/19/live-video-from-kiev-and-images-of-violence-in-other-ukrainian-cities/" target="_blank">chaos in Kiev and across Ukraine</a> dominated world news in January and February. Ukraine's president, Viktor Yanukovych, who had passed decrees last fall extinguishing freedom of speech and assembly in an attempt to consolidate his pro-Russian dictatorship, was forced to flee the country after failing to sign a trade pact with the European Union. This action was seen by many in Kiev as the last straw. The ensuing crisis has led to a consideration of where the future of Ukraine lies--as a part of Europe or as part of the Russian sphere of influence.<br />
<br />
Timothy Snyder, professor of history at Yale University, wrote in a <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/mar/20/fascism-russia-and-ukraine/?pagination=false" target="_blank">piece in The New York Review of Books</a> that the future of the nation hinges on two possible paths Ukrainians may decide to follow if they are provided the freedom of choice. In Snyder's view, each path represents a legacy of the twentieth century that makes each path possible, with one potentially spelling trouble for Ukraine.<br />
<br />
The first path leads toward Europe and the European Union. In the eyes of many, this means, more or less, the following: "...something like the rule of law, the absence of fear, the end of corruption, the social welfare state, and free markets without intimidation from syndicates controlled by the president" (Timothy Snyder, <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/mar/20/fascism-russia-and-ukraine/?pagination=false" target="_blank">"Fascism, Russia, and Ukraine"</a> in <i>The New York Review of Books</i>). Certainly, this potential path is not without its perils. The EU economies have struggled (with few exceptions) for the past five years to register even modest growth, and it is unlikely that European taxpayers will jump at the chance to bail out the Ukrainian economy after watching EU countries like Greece and Spain lurch toward some sort of permanent stagnation. However, Ukrainian entry into the EU, if it ever were to happen, wouldn't be the worst fate.<br />
<br />
The real danger for Ukraine lies at the end of the second path, where Russia lies. Like the EU option, this path is also pockmarked with dangers that will take years to play themselves out. Russian president Vladimir Putin has been hard at work developing what Snyder calls a "rival project, based in Moscow, called the Eurasian Union." The ramifications of such a "union" on Ukraine would be immense. Whereas the EU does purport to stand for the rule of law (and its member nations largely do), the Eurasian Union "...is a hierarchical organization, which by its nature seems unlikely to admit any members that are democracies with the rule of law and human rights. Any democracy within the Eurasian Union would pose a threat to Putin's rule in Russia. Putin wants the Ukraine in his Eurasian Union, which means that Ukraine must be authoritarian..." (Timothy Snyder, <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/mar/20/fascism-russia-and-ukraine/?pagination=false" target="_blank">"Fascism, Russia, and Ukraine"</a> in <i>The New York Review of Books</i>). In short, any movement toward a true democratic order in Kiev must be destroyed as part of Ukraine's integration into this new commercial and political union. <br />
<br />
Putin's recent decision to occupy Crimea is a clear attempt to disorient the new government in Kiev and to prevent the consolidation of a democratic order in Ukraine. In a recent radio interview with the BBC, Snyder insisted that the divisions within the country between those who favor closer ties with Russia and those who seek entry into the EU can be dealt with through the democratic process and that the idea of an independent Ukraine remains strong on both sides. The question now is whether Putin has the wherewithal to force the nation toward Russia, the Eurasian Union and authoritarianism.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-90159697316470953912013-08-09T12:45:00.000-07:002013-08-09T14:34:11.862-07:00Auschwitz Journal<b> "...researchers have cataloged some 42,500 Nazi ghettos and camps throughout Europe, spanning German-controlled areas from France to Russia and Germany itself, during Hitler’s reign of brutality from 1933 to 1945." </b>--Eric Lichtbrau, "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/sunday-review/the-holocaust-just-got-more-shocking.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0" target="_blank">The Holocaust Just Got More Shocking</a>," <i>New York Times </i>(March 1, 2013).<br />
<br />
It has been over two years since I returned from a week-long visit to Poland, a trip that included visits to Holocaust sites in Warsaw, Kielce and Auschwitz. When I was there, I blogged twice (see my entries from April 17th and 18th, 2011), driven by the need to process what I had seen during difficult tours of camps, museums and monuments to immense human suffering. I was also egged on by my students back home, whom I encouraged to follow my odyssey through my blog. I also posted a few snippets of video (with my commentary) I had shot at Auschwitz and elsewhere and, judging from their reception when I got back, were received with a mixture of curiosity and awe. I vowed to finish my "trilogy" of Polish blogs within a week of returning, to offer a final tribute to those who had died at or had survived Auschwitz (as if the world was waiting with bated breath for me to finish!).<br />
<br />
Monday, April 18, 2011. This date marks my last blog from Poland. Since then I have been struggling to write about my visit to Auschwitz. My blogs from Warsaw and Kielce were written in the heat of the moment, as if I were a journalist working to meet a deadline set by a demanding editor. They reveal raw emotion in some places, as if I was trying to bear the weight of the terrible history I was contemplating. My difficulty may be rooted in the relief I felt in being back in the United States, safe in the sanctuary of my home with my wife and son, all too ready to jump back into a routine that kept me from facing what I had experienced.<br />
<br />
This visit was different from my first encounter with Auschwitz during the summer of 1998. In the midst of a whirlwind trip across Europe, my wife and I bundled ourselves onto the Paris-Barcelona overnight train, then flitted across Provence and Northern Italy, through Salzburg, then Vienna, and into Prague. We saw cities built by monarchs and others that were beginning to emerge from years of Communist neglect. Our backpacks wore us down; trains sped up our travel. We drank the local wines, sampled the best beer and ate sausages with sides of fat (my wife sensibly waved the latter off, leaving me to suffer self-induced bouts of indigestion) and, finally, arrived in Krakow, Poland. The town is small, pretty, and, in the late-'90s, a difficult place for foreign tourists to navigate. We searched for hours to find a hotel in a place where the people still exhibited a Communist-era wariness of foreigners. After finding suitable accommodation, we made plans to visit Auschwitz. The day we spent there was emotional, not likely to be forgotten once we were back in the safe confines of our hotel room. Or, for that matter, ever.<br />
<br />
When I returned in 2011, I was struck by what I had missed previously. I noticed how large the camp is--a large city of death with destroyed crematoria I was able to see up close; a pond where the ashes of hundreds of thousands of bodies were dumped; the fields where huge piles of bodies were burned. I was more sensitive this time around to the suffering of the children who died there. This was clearly due to the fact that I was now the father of a ten-year-old boy.<br />
<br />
I think the fact that I had developed a better framework for understanding the Holocaust since 1998 made the 2011 experience intellectually richer. I have read more closely about this period because of my interest in the subject and because my teaching required it. I find it difficult to write about Auschwitz because I teach the history of the Holocaust, as paradoxical as that might sound. I can compartmentalize it when I am teaching because I can couch the problem of the Holocaust within bloodless theories (was it devised and executed by Hitler? Or, was it largely the work of his lieutenants? Is the Holocaust unique or can it be compared to other genocides?). I must also consider my students, many of whom are interpreting this period of history for the first time (they have read numerous survivor accounts, but not the theoretical work produced by Holocaust and genocide scholars). Teaching does not require hours in the archives, like research does. It is possible as a teacher to immerse oneself in a difficult topic one day and then move on to another the next. To me, one of the primary goals of the historian--to write about historical topics dispassionately--seems like a herculean task when considering the pain, suffering and death Auschwitz represents.<br />
<br />
In the end, I am reminded of the sobering assessment of Primo Levi, the Italian Jew who wrote so jarringly about his experiences at Auschwitz. It's not a matter of whether ignoring the specter of the camps is possible or not. In Levi's view, we run the risk of losing much more than our delusions. He is calling on us to not slip into the mundane aspects of our lives that often take too much of our energy. He dares us to face inconvenient realities of the human condition:<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #181818; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #181818; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"> “It is neither easy nor agreeable to dredge this abyss of viciousness, and yet I think it must be done, because what could be perpetrated yesterday could be attempted again tomorrow, could overwhelm us and our children. One is tempted to turn away with a grimace and close one's mind: this is a temptation one must resist. In fact, the existence of the death squads had a meaning, a message: 'We, the master race, are your destroyers, but you are no better than we are; if we so wish, and we do so wish, we can destroy not only your bodies, but also your souls, just as we have destroyed ours.”</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #181818; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #181818; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><br /></span>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dxVE95di_EL76jBqFwTj3ga-agBgFqaJIwyIobNk3sMbCJvtoEolOA9qbYQPfQD_uQx72vcpxDLkIbgQesLoA' class='b-hbp-video b-uploaded' frameborder='0'></iframe><object class="BLOG_video_class" contentid="UPLOADING" height="266" id="BLOG_video-UPLOADING-1" width="320"></object><object class="BLOG_video_class" contentid="UPLOADING" height="266" id="BLOG_video-UPLOADING-2" width="320"></object></div>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-25958800479418592542011-04-18T21:27:00.000-07:002011-04-18T22:36:22.775-07:00Kielce Journal: The Holocaust and Anti-Semitism in PolandYesterday morning we left Warsaw and headed south toward the town of Kielce. The history of the town is mired in the destruction of Jewish lives and culture both during and after World War II. Before the war, the town had a vibrant Jewish community with an impressive synagogue. The population of this community stood at about 27,000. When the German occupation came, a ghetto was devised and the Jewish population was crammed into 5,000 houses. Deportations to Treblinka and other death camps followed. In a sickening example of German brutality, thirty pregnant women were shot in front of the synagogue. I have been teaching the history of the Holocaust for about eighteen years now, and I feel as though it is becoming <em>harder</em> to come to terms with what happened in these hellish years. In places like Kielce, Jewish life and culture were erased from the face of the earth forever; at the end of the war, only 400 Jews were left alive. The most difficult part of the day in Kielce revolved around discussions with the Polish tour guides and how they interpreted the destruction of Jewish life in the town both during and after the war. They were determined to leave us with the impression that most Poles shielded Jews from deportation by hiding them in their homes or through other means. This interpretation, however, flies in the face of historical research. It is true that there were dramatic examples of Polish families who risked their lives (the Germans shot entire families for this "crime") to help save Jewish lives. However, the evidence supports a darker reality: that a large number of Poles were involved in denouncing their Jewish neighbors and, in some cases, actively helping the Germans in their quest to solve the "Jewish Question." I don't mean to downplay Polish suffering during the war. It was unimaginable. But it doesn't address the part that anti-semitism played in the destruction of the Jewish community in Kielce and in other parts of Poland. Events that occurred after the war are also telling. In 1946 a pogrom took place in the town. Strange, given the fact that the Germany was defeated and the Soviet army had troops in Poland and much of Eastern Europe. We were told that the pogrom was the result of communist propaganda that reported that Catholic children were being kidnapped and murdered to satisfy Jewish rituals. Incensed at this, local Poles murdered Jews in full view of the police. The tour guides blamed the Soviets for the lies and that it was pure manipulation of the populace. Again, the evidence points in other directions. One interpretation points to the massacre of Jews being in revenge for bringing on the German occupation and the suffering of the Polish nation. Another interpretation focuses on the pogrom as an example of Poles identifying Jews as communists and therefore a threat to Polish independence from the Soviet Union. In both cases, anti-semitism was the common denominator. Anti-semitism was part of Polish (and European) culture for centuries. It cannot be whipped into existence through propaganda at a moment's notice. As for the synagogue, which stood as the pride of the Jewish community and was the site of terrible scenes of suffering during the Holocaust, it now stands as an archive, the symbols of Judaism stripped away. It's just another municipal building in a town with a cruel past.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com20tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-77897366862511295392011-04-17T12:01:00.000-07:002011-04-17T13:17:40.284-07:00Warsaw Journal: Poland Past and Present<div>Yesterday I arrived in Poland as part of a travel course organized by a close friend and colleague. The course includes 19 students who are studying World War II and the Holocaust. I am tagging along as co-leader of the trip. We are planning to stay in Poland until Thursday and will visit Warsaw and Cracow, with a trip to Auschwitz on Tuesday.</div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div>We arrived in Warsaw yesterday by way of Frankfort, Germany. Warsaw is a fascinating city--once rooted deeply in the past but lurching forward, away from its communist past. Everywhere you see signs that a new capitalist order has been embraced wholeheartedly, from the posters advertising the new Easter movie "Hop" to the brand new mall downtown that resembles Copley Plaza in Boston. In contrast, one cannot help but be reminded of Poland's turbulent past. Most of the city was destroyed by the Germans during World War II, leaving it a type of architectural patchwork. Neighborhoods may sport buildings from the prewar period, when Warsaw was called the "Paris of the East" because of its esteemed place in European culture. Then, just as quickly, our bus passes rows of communist-era apartment complexes that have been painted bright pastels, as if to say that the difficult years before 1989 could be swept away with a few buckets of paint. </div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div>However, despite the friendly exterior of most Poles I've met, it is difficult to ignore the weight of Polish history. Once part of the Russian empire, only to gain independence for a short time after World War I, the German invasion in September of 1939 wiped Poland off of the map and threatened to erase Polish nationhood forever. Examples are all around. Today we visited a museum dedicated to the suffering of Poland's Jews who were forced to live in the Warsaw ghetto under unimaginable conditions. Thousands of men, women and children faced starvation, disease and violence before being transported to Treblinka for extermination. In 1943 an uprising in the ghetto by Jewish resistance groups was ruthlessly crushed by the Germans. For me, it put to rest the erroneous assumption that the Jews went passively to their deaths. The bravery of those doomed fighters will always stick firmly in my memory. Despite the intense suffering of the ghetto and its place in Polish, European and world history, all is left of the ghetto today is two wall fragments, both of which are located next to a quiet apartment block. This in a city where,in 1939, on the eve of the war, close to 30% of Warsaw's population was Jewish. Today, approximately 5,000 Jews remain in the entire country. The Germans may have killed two million Jews in Poland proper between 1941-1945. The more I talk about it with my fellow historians and try to make some sense of this enormous crime against a people and their culture, the more inadequate the explanations of "why" seem. I'm wondering how I will fare at Auschwitz, since it has been 13 years since I last visited. I know so much more about the Holocaust and have been teaching it for years now, but somehow I wonder if I'll ever be able to comprehend the worst mass murder in history.</div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><div>I hope to continue blogging for the remainder of my stay in Poland. Stay tuned.</div>
<br /><div></div>
<br /><object class="BLOG_video_class" id="BLOG_video-FAILED" height="266" width="320" contentid="FAILED"></object>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-61244860179237939492011-03-23T14:50:00.000-07:002011-03-23T15:03:01.999-07:00Ideals, Oil and American Foreign PolicyAmerican foreign policy is a confused jumble. This fact has been underscored by the recent US involvement in the Libyan civil war. The American role in fighting Libyan dictator Muammar Quaddafi through the enforcement of a no-fly zone has made me wonder what the goals of US foreign policy should be in regards to the “Arab Spring” now shaking the governments of the Middle East and North Africa. More disturbing is the increasing lack of American moral authority in these regions of the world, where we have propped up oppressive dictatorships and monarchies in order to ensure political stability and the flow of oil to the West. The brave opponents of these regimes will be hurt in the long run if the US doesn’t determine a consistent foreign policy that buttresses the ideals that are supposedly at the heart of American engagement in the world: democracy and human rights. If the US doesn’t consider these ideals important in foreign policy, than why say that they are? Why not embrace the “national interests” argument and be open about the need to keep Libyan oil flowing, no matter if it means sacrificing the possibilities presented by the Arab Spring?<br /><br />It’s easy to see where American democratic rhetoric falls short on the ideals front. The situation in the West African nation Ivory Coast provides one example. Laurent Gbagbo, who became president in 2000, was defeated in an election held last November. The election was considered fair by international monitors, but Gbagbo decided to stay on. His security forces have used violence against citizens in the capital, Abidjan, resulting in hundreds of deaths. Alassane Outtara, who won the election, has been holed up in a hotel, protected by United Nations troops. The following quote from a <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/g/laurent_gbagbo/index.html">New York Times article</a> sums up the dire situation: “He [Gbagbo] has also brutally snuffed out dissent. One of the last peaceful, sustained expressions of public dissent in Abidjan — women protesting with branches symbolizing peace — was mowed down in volleys of machine-gun fire from Mr. Gbagbo’s security forces” (New York Times, online edition, March 23, 2011). Wouldn’t a no-fly zone have helped these heroic women resist this illegal regime? Or, has the US decided that national interests are more important than ideals?<br /><br />In addition to the bloody situation in Ivory Coast, Saudi Arabia recently sent troops into <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/bahrain/index.html">Bahrain</a>, a tiny island nation off the coast of the Arabian Peninsula. Bahrain’s Sunni monarchy has ignored the same anger and resentment that brought down dictators in Tunisia and Egypt. However, Bahrain is home to the American Fifth Fleet and is a banking center that also produces a respectable amount of oil. Thousands of Shiite protesters, calling for democratic reform, were brutally beaten and dispersed by security forces, with little protest from the United States. If our foreign policy goals in regards to Bahrain are to preserve American military bases there and to avoid embarrassing the Saudi monarchy in order to keep the oil flowing, then our policy has been a rousing success.<br /><br />The simple point is this: if President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have decided that American ideals of democracy and self-determination are at stake in Libya, then why do they not apply in Ivory Coast and Bahrain? If national interests (security, both physical and economic) are what really drives US foreign policy, do those people a favor who have decided to risk their lives resisting corrupt regimes in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt: level with them now about US intentions. Why give them hope if the Americans will be absent when they need the moral support to build a more humane, democratic world?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-49085687828918136672010-11-10T05:39:00.000-08:002010-11-10T05:41:54.109-08:00A Veteran Remembered<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3diPiNYx2LEeOj861bimA8f9PBvLnUEa9JTJr4wIm886oavHD45tXXOa0v2X_6h-Nnmi_BwbwSCWi4P9doTIH3LKPS8HtmTLhdMaC-nVVcmC0NpD0F39HBoMOe2gZ7jTnXJxGsRLkqQA/s1600/Dad_Army.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 257px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3diPiNYx2LEeOj861bimA8f9PBvLnUEa9JTJr4wIm886oavHD45tXXOa0v2X_6h-Nnmi_BwbwSCWi4P9doTIH3LKPS8HtmTLhdMaC-nVVcmC0NpD0F39HBoMOe2gZ7jTnXJxGsRLkqQA/s320/Dad_Army.JPG" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5537915597463639650" /></a><br /><br />On October 10, 1957, a letter arrived for my father, Laurence M. Davis, then an eighteen-year-old from Everett, Massachusetts. The contents of that letter changed his life--it was an induction notice from the United States Army. He had been drafted. Soon thereafter, he arrived in Fort Benning, Georgia, to begin basic training. For a kid who had never travelled much, mostly to the summer home of his parents in Hampton Beach, New Hampshire, the heat, snakes and southern accents of his fellow soldiers were a far cry from his staid New England surroundings. <br /><br />In his own recollection years later, his time in the army changed him into a man. His stories from that time were filled with a mixture of laughter, excitement and dread that mark the life of a soldier. He once told me that he was so homesick at Fort Benning that he often “cried into his pillow at night.” The challenge of being away from home was tempered by the many friendships he made during basic training. He met men from Appalachia who could not read; overweight men from privileged families who found boot camp hell on earth; and men who earned medals fighting in World War II and Korea. He attended cooks and bakers school and began a lifetime interest in cooking (although as a kid me and my brother were subjected to large quantities of spam and knockwurst, our own boot camp to muddle through). <br />Private Davis was part of the vaunted Third Division and he found himself in a mortar battery. He was stationed in West Germany during the “Berlin Conflict,” when the Soviets built the Berlin Wall and a war seemed a possibility at the time. He told me about the ways average Germans sought to escape from the East by climbing the barbed wire fence to the West or by pole-vaulting over it or digging tunnels under it. It was in West Germany that he met Elvis Presley and would insist to me that the King of Rock ‘n Roll was a dedicated soldier who received no special treatment (the army allowed Elvis to sing in the mess hall on Sunday mornings—quite a sight to see, my father mused quite often). <br /> <br />It was in the army, far from the discipline of my grandparents’ house, that he began to experience the freedom to make decisions for himself. He smoked and drank and raised hell, a common pastime for most soldiers. Once, on a weekend pass, he and two of his buddies decided to take in the local taverns and drink German beer. They bought lederhosen and tried to blend in with the locals. After quite a few stops, they found themselves in the middle of a dense forest. One of his friends spotted an inn and they quickly made their way inside and entered the bar. The customers stopped their conversations and stared at them while the bartender poured their drinks without saying a word. As they sipped their beer, my father turned around to see a roaring fire and, hanging above the mantelpiece, a life-size portrait of Adolf Hitler. They quickly finished their beers and left the inn, making their way back to base. Unfortunately, they missed roll call and my father lost a stripe—he was busted from sergeant to corporal, but came face-to-face with the legacy of World War II in that small German village. <br /><br />In the army he travelled to France, Belgium, Britain and throughout West Germany. He also travelled to Turkey as part of an honor guard (when he met my wife years later, he made her blush by bragging that he ate a certain part of a bull, a Turkish delicacy, which will remain nameless). This was heady stuff for a young man who had never travelled extensively. He became an expert on the parts of Europe that only a young soldier can appreciate. When I visited France for the first time he told me to visit the Pigalle. When I told him that it was the red light district of Paris, he replied that it was the best part of the city and that I shouldn’t miss it. To a twenty-year-old, I guess the Pigalle had everything else beat.<br /><br />The army was an important part of his life, and he could hardly contain his pride. He had a self-deprecating sense of humor and joked that peacetime soldiers such as he were “drugstore soldiers,” meaning those who could show off their uniforms at the soda fountain without fear of going off to war. His family was full of war veterans—his great uncle served in World War I, his three uncles in World War II and his brother and brother-in-law in Vietnam. When he died in January 2008 I was comforted to know that he would be eligible for a military funeral and a military marker. It got me thinking of the countless numbers of men and women who serve in the armed forces, some who fight in wars and most, like my father, who serve their country in peacetime without much notice. Veteran’s Day is the ideal time to recognize all who serve or have served this country. <br /> <br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-63956765447525292092010-10-13T06:53:00.000-07:002010-10-13T06:54:03.591-07:00Is the Era of American Dominance Over?<script type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8" src="http://static.polldaddy.com/p/3916549.js"></script><br /><noscript><br /> <a href="http://polldaddy.com/poll/3916549/">Is the era of American dominance over?</a><span style="font-size:9px;"><a href="http://polldaddy.com/features-surveys/">customer surveys</a></span><br /></noscript>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-39239581112355960532010-07-26T16:36:00.000-07:002010-07-26T16:46:28.597-07:00George Washington and the Cult of Personality at Mount Vernon<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikNDpg2fHdBdRYOWhx5fEZq2abuLZaUGRALNYgLIKA3_WvSI527_zS2enRjCQcEtJdTTErVmo-ZfgFaJJdfuAH56rcUatXbU4kMINndZkmmfYCT-7S8khnaiurxgeuMMG18f6qPSHCAPg/s1600/DSC06143.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikNDpg2fHdBdRYOWhx5fEZq2abuLZaUGRALNYgLIKA3_WvSI527_zS2enRjCQcEtJdTTErVmo-ZfgFaJJdfuAH56rcUatXbU4kMINndZkmmfYCT-7S8khnaiurxgeuMMG18f6qPSHCAPg/s320/DSC06143.JPG" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5498364057855128834" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmgryt19Y7D-EU5z3VVptJac0KCQB0VnmxflWC6Pf5f3WIODzIKpoNZByPmC0T4PS7An4NZ5JbuMNYgUls4DldYxhQsqUyKgKC1sEXS5jWliI558MVRY0jqFyBsOk6GR9S8lksXldei9o/s1600/DSC06141.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 240px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmgryt19Y7D-EU5z3VVptJac0KCQB0VnmxflWC6Pf5f3WIODzIKpoNZByPmC0T4PS7An4NZ5JbuMNYgUls4DldYxhQsqUyKgKC1sEXS5jWliI558MVRY0jqFyBsOk6GR9S8lksXldei9o/s320/DSC06141.JPG" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5498363741743473458" /></a><br />In a 1790 letter to David Stuart, George Washington wrote, “I can truly say I had rather be at Mount Vernon with a friend or two about me, than to be attended at the Seat of Government by the Officers of State and the Representatives of every Power in Europe.” After touring this beautiful place a few weeks ago, I can certainly understand the future president’s sentiment. Set along the Potomac River and featuring a long, grassy mall in front of the main house, it resembles a miniature Versailles. According to the <a href="http://www.mountvernon.org/">Mount Vernon Museum</a> website, “When George Washington lived here, Mount Vernon was an 8,000-acre plantation divided into five farms. Each farm was a complete unit, with its own overseers, work force of slaves, livestock, equipment, and buildings.”<br /><br />The museum and education center at Mount Vernon offers all kinds of interactive features, from short films about Washington’s life and career to typical museum exhibits. I expected the usual “cult of personality” that permeates school textbooks to exist here, and I wasn’t disappointed. This cult is the same type of phenomena that we saw most recently in the museums of the old Soviet Union. The leader is perceived as the paragon of virtue; he is summoned by the heavens to guide the nation through trying times; he possesses the wisdom to understand what the “people” need and how their needs are to be served; and, finally, any so-called character defects are not really defects at all, but merely limits placed upon the leader by retrograde cultural realities of the times within which they lived (read: Washington and slavery). I imagined walking through the museum and substituting the images of Vladimir Lenin for Washington. Certainly the Soviet people put the same faith in Lenin that the Americans put in Washington, with the same postmortem treatment of both men as saintly “fathers” of their respective nations.<br /><br />Whether the British sent their most competent generals to fight the Americans is beside the point in the museum’s version of the American Revolution. Washington was a natural military leader and was the architect of the defeat of Britain, “THE GREATEST MILITARY POWER IN THE WORLD!” according the short video on the Revolutionary War I watched with my wife and son. Important questions swirled in my brain: Did the British really want to pay the cost of defending the colonies, when the colonists made it clear that they wouldn’t pay their fair share in taxes to help defend the frontier? Was the TEA Party responsible for American resistance to the Stamp Act and other mean-spirited British attempts to raise taxes on freedom-loving Americans? (Sorry, wrong century. I forgot that the anti-tax sentiment in this country predates the first volleys at Lexington and Concord). As an unabashed Francophile, I was glad to see that the video acknowledged the French role in the final defeat of the British at Yorktown. No doubt the image of Louis XVI in the dining room of the main house at Mount Vernon and the close relationship between Washington and the Marquis de Lafayette (Lafayette did name his son George Washington Lafayette) attest to the deep involvement of the French in the struggle against Britain.<br /><br />I appreciated the earnestness of the volunteer and paid interpreters who seem to have dedicated their lives to teaching visitors about Washington while at the same time guarding against any attempts to reveal the human side of the man. One interpreter told me that the Washingtons loved to throw parties and that anyone could knock on the door and would be welcomed with open arms. Clearly this person didn’t read the impressive research done by historians on the social deference required by, and given to, prominent Virginians like Washington by those of inferior social rank. I wondered what he would have thought of me and my wife, great grandchildren of Italian, Irish, Swedish and Newfoundland immigrants (and, most distressing, Catholic!), tramping through his house with our t-shirts, shorts and flip-flops, wondering aloud where scenes from “National Treasure: Book of Secrets” were filmed (not inside the main house, much to George’s relief, I would guess). I don’t think the President would have opened the door if we came knocking in the heyday of Mount Vernon unless, perhaps, we offered our services as servants. <br /> <br />I was troubled by the museum’s exhibits on slavery. They offer a weak attempt to portray Washington as torn between his support for this immoral social, economic and cultural institution and the most important themes of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution--the belief in liberty and that all men are created equal (the issue of whether Martha was to be included was not addressed in the exhibits, as far as I can tell, but it was made known to me by an interpreter that she was quite the socialite). The fact of the matter is this: when Washington took possession of Mount Vernon, fifty slaves worked the land; when he died, over three hundred were working the plantation. I should note that Washington, to his credit, did make it known in his will that his slaves would be freed upon his death. However, there is no denying the fact that the wealth produced by Mount Vernon and enjoyed by Washington was done on the backs of slaves.<br /><br />The most moving part of the visit to Mount Vernon was our tour of the area where the unmarked graves of the slaves were located. It presents a stark contrast with the elegant mausoleum that houses the remains of Washington and his wife. The real story of the tragedy and triumph of American history can be found in this paradox: hardy slaves built this plantation into the prosperous, comfortable home that Washington cherished, while Washington himself fought a war to defend political principles that would one day be used to end human bondage in the United States. I was saddened to think that a wonderful opportunity was being lost. Why not bring this fact to the attention of visitors, who would gain a new perspective on Washington as a human being--a talented, social climbing, slave-owning, ambitious soldier and politician, and, all the same, dedicated to the ideals that animate the Constitution. Then Americans would appreciate the complexity of their history and the arduous road this nation has travelled since his death in 1799.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-81710792023255989882010-06-18T04:08:00.000-07:002010-06-18T05:13:07.454-07:00Old School Baseball with Bob Gibson and Reggie Jackson<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:relyonvml/> <o:allowpng/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;} @page WordSection1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} </style> <![endif]--> <p class="MsoNormal">About two years ago I watched a documentary about baseball in the 1960s hosted by Bob Costas.<span style=""> </span>In one segment, as Bob Gibson began his windup in a game in 1968, Costas began a long-winded analysis of what Gibson must have been thinking on the mound during that memorable season.<span style=""> </span>The United States was in the midst of the Vietnam War; the Civil Rights movement helped define the decade; Dr. Martin Luther King and Senator Robert Kennedy had been assassinated.<span style=""> </span>Costas turned his attention to Gibson and commented that he must have been thinking of these things as he pitched.<span style=""> </span>I realized recently, after reading <i style="">Sixty Feet, Six Inches: A Hall of Fame Pitcher and a Hall of Fame Hitter Talk about How the Game is Played</i>, that Bob Costas doesn’t understand Bob Gibson.<span style=""> </span>On the mound, one of the game’s greatest pitchers was preoccupied with one thing:<span style=""> </span>pitching his team to victory and winning the duel between pitcher and hitter.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The book, an extended interview with Gibson and Reggie Jackson, features the two stars discussing subjects as varied as the mechanics of pitching and hitting, the importance of the count for pitchers and hitters, the good old days of bean ball, surviving racism in baseball, how greatness is defined and other aspects of national pastime.<span style=""> </span>The book is not for the casual fan.<span style=""> </span>However, it will entertain and enlighten those who are steeped in baseball history and understand the complexity of the game.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">As I read the book, I was drawn in by the “old school” feel of the interview.<span style=""> </span>At some points I was convinced that somehow my late father, a dedicated fan if there ever was one, had extended conversations with these men before I stepped onto a baseball diamond as a kid.<span style=""> </span>Gibson’s and Jackson’s <span style=""> </span>attitude that baseball is a sport to be respected and that your body and talent can take you far if you nourish both reminded me of lessons my father imparted to me when I played youth league ball.<span style=""> </span>At one point, Jackson, who is now a special advisor to the Yankees, tells the reader that he admonishes his players to “Swing the bat!”<span style=""> </span>It’s common sense--you can’t hit the ball if you don’t swing the bat.<span style=""> </span>But how many times have we watched big leaguers watch the ball sail past them on a full count?<span style=""> </span>If I had a nickel for every time my father said the same to me and my teammates (he was a coach for twenty years), I’d be very rich.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Gibson, true to his personality, seldom minces words and doesn’t suffer fools gladly.<span style=""> </span>However, he comes across here as likeable (I doubt the batters he faced would agree with me).<span style=""> </span>His insistence on mastering the fundamentals and then employing them in the duel with the hitter is what many pitchers lack today, in his view.<span style=""> </span>For example, pitchers today develop a windup that doesn’t adequately disguise the pitch that is about to be thrown.<span style=""> </span>For Gibson, a complicated windup is the key to keeping the batter off balance:<span style=""> </span>“I like the idea of having a lot going on in your windup, and the hitters trying to figure out where the ball’s coming from and when it’s coming.<span style=""> </span>Man, with a big windup the hitter sees all this stuff going on in front of him, knees and elbows…all this crazy whirling motion…and then boom!<span style=""> </span>Here it comes at ninety-five miles an hour.”<span style=""> </span>Today, pitchers are encouraged to be “economical” in their windup, in effect stripping away an important advantage that pitchers once enjoyed.<span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I was also surprised to learn that Gibson had only two pitches, the fastball (two-seam and four-seam varieties) and a slider.<span style=""> </span>For Gibson, intimidating the batter was important, but he was also keenly aware that ball placement was critical.<span style=""> </span>He liked to pitch hard to the outside, but would claim the inside when the batter leaned too far over the plate.<span style=""> </span>Of course, his view of what constitutes “inside” is definitely not how it is defined today.<span style=""> </span>As he acknowledges, pitching inside Gibson-style will get you into a fistfight or thrown out of the game.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Gibson and Jackson discuss at length their strengths and weaknesses as players.<span style=""> </span>For Jackson, many of his recollections reveal the confidence (his detractors might say arrogance) that defined him as a player:<span style=""> </span>“As a hitter, what I had to learn, mostly, was what I could do and what I couldn’t do.<span style=""> </span>A good pitcher may have an advantage with a big fastball or breaking ball, but I had an advantage, too…I could hit a fly ball and get it out of the ballpark,” and “It took a while, but eventually I came to realize that there was something else in my favor:<span style=""> </span>My weakness—my inability to handle the ball inside—was one that most pitchers were reluctant or afraid to expose.”<span style=""> </span>As I read this passage, I chuckled about the time I was watching a game with my father and Jackson was batting for the Yankees in Fenway Park.<span style=""> </span>My father put Jackson’s weaknesses in his own unique perspective:<span style=""> </span>“Yeah, the guy can hit, but he runs like an ol’ lady!”<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The old school approach is also expressed in their views of the state of the game today.<span style=""> </span>The emphasis on pitch counts, the computerization of the game, the reliance on scouting reports:<span style=""> </span>they acknowledge that the information provided by these methods shouldn’t be ignored, but they long for the days when players would spend more time<i style=""> watching</i> opposing pitchers and hitters in action.<span style=""> </span>That’s the fun of playing—sizing up your opponent.<span style=""> </span>The obsession with pitch counts exasperates Gibson, who was known to pitch up to 130 pitches a game (back when pitchers were expected to pitch nine innings) and once pitched fourteen innings in one game.<span style=""> </span>The need to coddle pitchers (and, by extension, all players) concerns both Gibson and Jackson, who point to the money factor in baseball—avoid breaking the merchandise, since large contracts are at stake.<span style=""> </span>Both call on owners and managers to expect more from their players and to let them play to the best of their ability, injuries be damned.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Gibson and Jackson encourage players and fans to appreciate the complexity of baseball.<span style=""> </span>A good player works on mastering not only the physical requirements of hitting, pitching, fielding and base running, but develops an understanding of the mental and psychological aspects of baseball.<span style=""> </span>When is a hit-and-run play necessary?<span style=""> </span>What pitch can a batter expect when the count is three and two and bases are loaded in the seventh inning with two outs?<span style=""> </span>Gibson knew that intimidation wouldn’t be enough when facing some of the greatest hitters in baseball (Hank Aaron and Willie Mays, for starters).<span style=""> </span>Jackson knew that he had only seconds to figure out what pitch was coming his way, and that pitchers like Steve Carlton were not going to let up on him no matter what the score.<span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I have only two criticisms of the book.<span style=""> </span>First, I would have liked Gibson and Jackson to talk in greater detail about the players they mention in their interview.<span style=""> </span>For example, they both believe Juan Marichal was one of the great pitchers of all time, but we are given little understanding as to why they would hold him in such high esteem.<span style=""> </span>Second, the times in the book where they discuss racism in baseball comes in fragments and would be great fodder for another extended interview.<span style=""> </span>Gibson talks about his upbringing in Omaha, hardly the center of good race relations sixty years ago.<span style=""> </span>However, he does relate stories from his time on the Cardinals when white players did their best to welcome black players into their ranks as equals.<span style=""> </span>In one aside, Gibson relates stories of being in Florida for spring training and swimming and cooking out with his white teammates, which would have caused controversy in the 1960s.<span style=""> </span>For Jackson, who also felt the sting of racism in his upbringing and as a player, seems to have found solace in family and a few close friends.<span style=""> </span>I think it would be a great opportunity for them to expand on this often forgotten aspect of the game.<span style=""> </span>It would enlighten younger fans and players who may know little of the struggle African American and Latino players faced during the glory days of baseball.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Overall, the book is a good read and will bring you back to the days when baseball was a different world and was populated by many of the greats who fill the Hall of Fame.</p><p class="MsoNormal">For a video promotion of the book featuring Gibson and Jackson, click <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJlUD6o30rg&feature=player_embedded">here</a>.<br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-54278339137616837202010-06-04T10:30:00.000-07:002010-06-04T10:39:15.429-07:00Misguided PrioritiesLast month, I volunteered a few Sunday morning hours at <a href="http://boston.cradlestocrayons.org/">Cradles to Crayons</a>, an organization dedicated to helping Massachusetts families in need. My wife, son and in-laws were also there, filling large bags full of donated clothing, toys, and books for these families. We were invited to volunteer in response to the recent death of a family friend, who died much too young. It was a fulfilling experience, but in retrospect our efforts did not even begin to deal seriously with scourge of poverty experienced by many citizens of this state. According to the <a href="http://boston.cradlestocrayons.org/">Cradles to Crayon</a><a href="http://boston.cradlestocrayons.org/">s</a> website, “…each year, there are more than 100,000 Massachusetts children under 18 who experience poverty. And on any given night, over 1,200 families will be staying in publicly funded family shelters in Massachusetts.”<br /><br />I tend to see problems in a national and global perspective. Why does poverty continue to grow in this state and within this country as we continue to tout our economy as the strongest in the world? Drive through some of the suburbs of Boston and you will see wealth on an impressive scale that will make you quickly forget the difficult lives lived by people only a few miles away in Boston and in many suburban communities. In affluent America, there are roughly two types of people: those who take the opportunities presented to them for granted and those who will never see any substantial opportunities offered them in their lifetimes.<br /><br />A nation is judged by its priorities. Will we help those in need or will we ignore them? Will we continue to build communities that are essentially air-tight pockets of prosperity, made up of people who look and think like ourselves, that give us the excuse not to deal with the poverty that is allowed to persist on such a scale? Children living in shelters? Children without adequate access to nutritious food? Children who go to schools that are increasingly being denied the funding necessary to produce productive citizens? This is considered acceptable?<br /><br />Perhaps our priorities can be traced back to the development of the American psyche, when the myth was forged that anyone can make it in this country as long as they have the ambition and willingness to work hard. This sentiment was distorted by President Ronald Reagan, who openly declared that the poor deserved their condition because their lack of morals prevented them from accepting the unique American work ethic. The Tea Party movement has made this sentiment the cornerstone of their movement, combining a hysterical fear of the government with a racism that pits “hard-working” Americans (read: whites) against those who “milk” the system through government programs (read: people of color). I believe that the rugged individualism ideal in American culture has been misunderstood. In centuries past, farmers helped their neighbors bring in their crops; workers joined together to make sure that their pay and working conditions were fair. There was little of the hypocrisy of the morality police of today who deny that others deserve help while celebrating selfish materialism.<br /><br />American priorities nationally and internationally? We bailed out the banks and allowed them to make record profits while refusing to give Americans access to much-needed credit, the supposed purpose of the bailout. We spend billions of dollars each month to fight “forever wars” in Afghanistan and Iraq, the results of which will be years of high deficits and even less for those in need in this country. The supposed health care “reform” passed this year will force Americans to purchase private health insurance, which will most likely mean immense profits for that industry and high premiums for average citizens. President Obama, however, believes that this bill will solve the problem of Americans selling their houses to pay medical bills and will allow for better access to health care. We’ll see, but I’m certainly skeptical about this notion.<br /><br />How to change the nation’s priorities? I believe that government has the resources to help relieve poverty, as it has in the past (the New Deal and establishment of Medicare are just two examples), but it appears that Democrats and Republicans are more invested in making sure that corporate interests on Wall Street and elsewhere have their day in the sun. Perhaps the battle against poverty will continue under the auspices of organizations like <a href="http://boston.cradlestocrayons.org/">Cradles to Crayons </a>that provide a desperate lifeline to thousands of people. They deserve our unconditional support.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-16289031226122218112010-05-03T05:45:00.000-07:002010-05-03T05:46:04.156-07:00Poll: Is the new Arizona immigration law fair?<script type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8" src="http://static.polldaddy.com/p/3145416.js"></script><br /><noscript><br /> <a href="http://answers.polldaddy.com/poll/3145416/">In your view, is the new Arizona immigration law fair?</a><span style="font-size:9px;"><a href="http://polldaddy.com/features-surveys/">survey software</a></span><br /></noscript>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-23912642595427390372010-05-03T05:11:00.000-07:002010-05-03T06:37:44.252-07:00Is the new Arizona immigration law unconstitutional? Or racist?<p>In light of Friday's discussion of the new <a href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/sb1070s.pdf">Arizona Immigration Law</a>, I would like to give everyone an opportunity to provide their insight, since discussion was cut short by time constraints. The discussion became quite lively and it is my view that the issue is too important not to allow another outlet for people to express their views. I encourage everyone to participate, even if you are from one of my other courses or are a casual reader of this blog.<br /></p><p>For those of you who were not present in my World Civ. II course when the law was raised, the class discussed whether the new statute was constitutional and whether or not it would lead to racial profiling. Here is a snippet from the <a href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/conlaw/2010/04/arizona-immigration-law.html">Constitutional Prof Law Blog</a> that will sum up the most controversial part of the law:</p>The new Arizona law allows state officials to inquire into the immigration status of any person based upon "reasonable suspicion":<br /><br /><em>For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.<br /></em><br />I made it quite clear that I believe that the law will be proven unconstitutional and that it will lead to racial profiling. I concede that my opinion was in the minority in the discussion and that there is another side to the issue. For those who are reading this who are not members of my World Civ. course, the issue was raised within the context of a discussion of Nazism. In 1935, the <a href="http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/%7Ejobrien/reference/ob14.html">Nuremburg Laws</a> were passed, limiting the rights of German Jews significantly. I am therefore sensitive to any law that singles out one group of people and denies them legal rights. I am not saying that the U.S. is in danger of becoming a Fascist state; however, it is my view that laws like this present us with a slippery slope--today, one group, tomorrow, another. I believe as a nation we can come up with more sensible immigration policy that protects the rights of all.<br /><br />For a critique of the Arizona law, read Mike Saporito's blog, "<a href="http://sapblatt.wordpress.com/">What is Arizona Thinking?</a>".<br /><br />Feel free to take the poll above.<br /><em><br /><br /><br /></em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-249728009035531983.post-10521551351086984502010-04-26T16:06:00.000-07:002010-04-26T16:07:28.903-07:00Stay tuned...I will begin blogging soon. Please check back in May...Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0