Despite what some may think, I actually do like Christmas. I love Christmas music (by which I mostly mean Praetorius, Handel, Bach and Corelli), and I’m pretty much a sucker for Christmas movies.
This being the month when they all start oozing out of the airwaves, I thought I’d list some of my favorites.
Naturally, it can’t be Christmas without Dickens. There are a squillion iterations of A Christmas Carol. Purists always cite the 1951 Alastair Sim version (titled Scrooge), but I favor the 1999 TV production with Patrick Stewart as Scrooge. I think I like it because of the Cratchits. Richard E. Grant makes a super Bob, and Saskia Reeves has not been bettered as Mrs. Cratchit. Moreover, Trevor Peacock, Liz Smith (both recognizable to fans of The Vicar of Dibley) and Elizabeth Sprigs practically steal the show as the future ghouls disposing of Scrooge’s meager possessions.
Carol is the fallback position for every producer who wants a quick and dirty tear-jerker for the season. They hire some hack to put a “fresh” or “contemporary” spin on the tale. They’re stunningly ghastly. There’s one with Tori Spelling in the Scrooge role, Gary Coleman as the Ghost of Christmas Past and William Shatner as Christmas Present. ’Nuff said.
There’s also A Diva’s Christmas Carol, with Vanessa Williams as Ebony Scrooge (I’m not making this up); and Ebbie, with Susan Lucci as a department store owner who gets to change her clothes a whole lot; and Karroll’s Christmas; and—well, I’m making myself sick here.
The one exception to this rule of awfulness is Scrooged. I wasn’t a fan of Bill Murray until I saw this film, but he’s perfect. Plus, the dialogue is terrific. There’s one line that has imprinted on me: “The Jews taught me a word—it’s a great word: schmuck. I…was a schmuck…” Add in Carol Kane as the whacked-out Ghost of Christmas Present and you really have a classic. I can watch Scrooged again and again.
Actually, it’s interesting that most of the knock-offs are comedies. I suppose it’s partly because some of the actors (see Tori Spelling, above) are too lightweight to handle drama and the true darkness that pervades Dickens’ tale, the real bleakness of Scrooge’s life.
Also, most are for basic cable, and of course we don’t want near-tragedy when you’re trying to hawk SaladShooters and those hooks you can stick on your mantel.
Leaving Dickens, I’m probably the only person in America who isn’t a fan of It’s a Wonderful Life. It’s okay, but the one that I love is Miracle on 34th Street. The original, not the remake. It’s saved from complete treacly-ness by the fact that the acquittal of Kris Kringle can be explained by a confluence of totally cynical events (the judge needs to be re-elected; the postal workers want to offload all the letters to Santa on that guy in the news, etc.). Plus, there is no Kris Kringle but Edmund Gwenn.
And while I despise the recent remake of 34th Street, I find Dear God charming, and can watch it any time. Partly it’s Greg Kinnear and the collection of outcasts he works with at the Post Office (what’s not to love about Tim Conway as a letter carrier demoted for biting a dog?). But again, it’s that convergence of venal intentions that morph into doing-good that really makes it shine.
Meet Me in Saint Louis isn’t strictly a Christmas film, but it has one of the best songs ever: “Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas”. Also Margaret O’Brien. It was released in January 1945, when the country had been battered by the knowledge that the war hadn’t ended by Christmas, and in fact that Hitler’s Ardennes offensive (the Battle of the Bulge) had briefly looked like it would drive the Allies back to the sea. The wistful “From now on our troubles will be out of sight” must have captured what thousands of American families were hoping during that time.
The Bells of St. Mary's was also made during WWII (released January 1945). I prefer it to Going My Way—probably because of the presence of Ingrid Bergman. Also, there's never been a Christmas Pageant like the one at St. Mary's, ever. But there should be.
Desk Set, Trading Places and The Shop Around the Corner are also not strictly Christmas movies; it’s the setting for the plots. Desk Set’s classic scene is Katharine Hepburn getting spiffed at the office Christmas party and spewing back a cognitive test Spencer Tracy had given her earlier. It’s Tracy-Hepburn at their best. Plus, Joan Blondell rocks.
Shop was “remade” in 1949, as In the Good Old Summertime (frankly forgettable unless you’re a Judy Garland fan) and in 1998, as You’ve Got Mail; but neither touches the class of the original. Tom Hanks may be the latter-day Jimmy Stewart, but there’s nowhere near the charm quotient of Shop in that movie. (Plus, Shop is about poor people in love despite themselves; Mail is definitely about people so rich they really could buy love.) I’m frankly not that big a fan of Margaret Sullavan, or her character in the film, but the overall interaction is remarkably heart-warming. I especially love the scene where Mr. Matuschek goes off with the new delivery boy—two lonely men from opposite ends of the spectrum—for a scrumptious Christmas Eve dinner.
I have a special place in my heart for Trading Places—I worked on it during my stint in Hollywood. I never did understand the schtick on the commodities floor, but I believe Eddie Murphy nailed the whole brokerage gig when he told the Duke brothers that they were bookies.
The 1955 We’re No Angels gives us Humphrey Bogart, Aldo Ray and Peter Ustinov as three escapees from Devil’s Island who bring Christmas cheer to a kind family they plan to rob. A viper also plays a major role.
You can’t go wrong with a Bill Forsyth film, and Comfort and Joy doesn’t disappoint. It starts with radio presenter Alan Bird being blindsided by his klepto girlfriend moving out of his flat, and moves on to him solving an ice cream war of rival Italian families in Glasgow. A recipe for banana fritters figures heavily in the dénouement. The final scene with him sipping whiskey during his program on Christmas day is just as convivial as it gets.
Of course, it just wouldn’t be Christmas without the official Red Ryder carbine-action 200-shot range model air rifle. A Christmas Story is a classic in every sense of the word. Jean Shepherd’s narration sets the tone of that time when the media influences on children were limited to radio, magazines and the Saturday matinée. Young Ralphie struggles to make the world conform to his daydreams—and does a fairly good job of it most of the time.
There are many wonderful scenes in the film—the arrival of The Old Man’s Italian/fra-gee-lay Major Award, the raid by the Bumpuses’ dogs, Ralphie freezing when he finally makes it to Santa's lap in the department store—but I think the one I love the most is Christmas dinner in the Chinese restaurant. If that doesn’t embody the True Meaning of Christmas, then I don’t know what does.
If you get a chance to see any of these this season, see if you agree with me.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Friday, December 12, 2008
Cruising to Valkyrie
I told myself when I first discovered Tom Cruise was starring in the upcoming film about the 1944 plot to kill Adolf Hitler that I wasn’t going to go off the deep end. After all, Cruise might be able to capture the complex character of Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg; even if he is a foot too short…
But from what I’ve seen of the trailers for Valkyrie, with Cruise shouting & scowling—basically hamming it up, because you couldn’t possibly have an anti-Nazi hero without histrionics—I can’t decide whether to cringe or pound something.
I’m not all that fussed about him being a Scientologist; he’s an actor, after all, & one presumes an actor can manage a Roman Catholic.
It’s the parading about, being the freaking hero that’s such an abomination. Stauffenberg’s road to 20 July was long & difficult. For a deeply religious Catholic, a German officer imbued in the idea that duty means obedience to laws & leaders—concluding that the only action that would save Germany was a coup to assassinate Hitler (& Goering & Himmler, which was the plan) & replace them with a new government was wrenching.
It wasn't just an assassination; it was a coup. Assassination would have accomplished nothing but chaos; they wanted a constructive outcome that would save Germany from the destruction it was clearly headed for.
(& it's notable that it was the military, the group most closely bound by oath & sense of duty, to Hitler that made multiple attempts to remove him from power. Not civilians, not businessmen, not clergy; the military.)
Piecing together like-minded officers was a painstaking process & fraught with peril. Keeping a conspiracy secret in a police state is not easy, & the plotters needed enough high-powered leaders to form a post-Nazi government, as well as a plan for that government’s policies. One had to carefully sound out colleagues, because an officer's duty is to the state, & it would be the responsibility of any not a supporter to rat out the rest of them. (In the event, there were those who declined to participate; but they kept the secret.)
It wasn’t action-heroics, it was excruciatingly slow & intense.
The events of 20 July & its aftermath were tragic. Stauffenberg had time only to arm one of the two bombs in his briefcase. After he left the map room at Rastenberg, someone moved the briefcase behind a thick table leg, so that when the bomb went off, Hitler suffered only minor injuries. There was confusion in Berlin over how to carry out the coup, & in the end it was crushed before it really started.
Stauffenberg was shot late that night, his last words “Long live Germany!” He was lucky in his form of execution; hundreds were given show trials & hanged by piano wire from meat hooks. Others were thrown into prison, many executed just before Germany’s surrender in 1945. (Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, not at the heart, but implicated in the plot, was forced to commit suicide to spare his family being imprisoned.)
I suppose it’s the “Long live Germany!” that got Cruise. How could he resist such an exit line?
He’s told reporters that he was “amazed” to discover it was a true story. That just makes my teeth hurt.
Well, what’s done is done. They’re releasing the film on Christmas Day, & the studio hopes Cruise will be a big box office draw.
It’s just a pity that millions of people will learn about Stauffenberg & his comrades through this film, & that they’ll think Cruise is an accurate representation.
If they even care.
But from what I’ve seen of the trailers for Valkyrie, with Cruise shouting & scowling—basically hamming it up, because you couldn’t possibly have an anti-Nazi hero without histrionics—I can’t decide whether to cringe or pound something.
I’m not all that fussed about him being a Scientologist; he’s an actor, after all, & one presumes an actor can manage a Roman Catholic.
It’s the parading about, being the freaking hero that’s such an abomination. Stauffenberg’s road to 20 July was long & difficult. For a deeply religious Catholic, a German officer imbued in the idea that duty means obedience to laws & leaders—concluding that the only action that would save Germany was a coup to assassinate Hitler (& Goering & Himmler, which was the plan) & replace them with a new government was wrenching.
It wasn't just an assassination; it was a coup. Assassination would have accomplished nothing but chaos; they wanted a constructive outcome that would save Germany from the destruction it was clearly headed for.
(& it's notable that it was the military, the group most closely bound by oath & sense of duty, to Hitler that made multiple attempts to remove him from power. Not civilians, not businessmen, not clergy; the military.)
Piecing together like-minded officers was a painstaking process & fraught with peril. Keeping a conspiracy secret in a police state is not easy, & the plotters needed enough high-powered leaders to form a post-Nazi government, as well as a plan for that government’s policies. One had to carefully sound out colleagues, because an officer's duty is to the state, & it would be the responsibility of any not a supporter to rat out the rest of them. (In the event, there were those who declined to participate; but they kept the secret.)
It wasn’t action-heroics, it was excruciatingly slow & intense.
The events of 20 July & its aftermath were tragic. Stauffenberg had time only to arm one of the two bombs in his briefcase. After he left the map room at Rastenberg, someone moved the briefcase behind a thick table leg, so that when the bomb went off, Hitler suffered only minor injuries. There was confusion in Berlin over how to carry out the coup, & in the end it was crushed before it really started.
Stauffenberg was shot late that night, his last words “Long live Germany!” He was lucky in his form of execution; hundreds were given show trials & hanged by piano wire from meat hooks. Others were thrown into prison, many executed just before Germany’s surrender in 1945. (Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, not at the heart, but implicated in the plot, was forced to commit suicide to spare his family being imprisoned.)
I suppose it’s the “Long live Germany!” that got Cruise. How could he resist such an exit line?
He’s told reporters that he was “amazed” to discover it was a true story. That just makes my teeth hurt.
Well, what’s done is done. They’re releasing the film on Christmas Day, & the studio hopes Cruise will be a big box office draw.
It’s just a pity that millions of people will learn about Stauffenberg & his comrades through this film, & that they’ll think Cruise is an accurate representation.
If they even care.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
To hell in a lager bottle
So, as long as I’ve got a theme going here, the WSJ has a harrowing, statistics-studded report on the drinking habits of Europeans. Apparently the Journal is so fascinated by the subject they commissioned a market research company to survey citizens of 13 EU countries, plus Russia, Turkey, Switzerland & the US.
Dunno what the driving force behind the paper’s interest is, but they conclude that the Euros are headed for a culture of binge drinking.
Seems that the population across Europe leans towards either abstinence or overindulgence.
“’It's hard for me to accept that there are this many teetotalers in Europe,’ said Mark Hofmans, a managing director in GfK's Brussels office who analyzed the survey results. ‘But we are seeing a trend where there are some people who never drink and some people that when they drink, they drink a lot.’”
Well, I certainly can vouch for the binge drinking in Britain, but it appears that Italy & Spain are leading the way to switching from wine to beer.
& it’s astonishing how many respondents judge that they aren’t impaired until they’ve consumed five or more drinks. I’d really hate to be at the bars where those folks are sucking them down.
However, if they’re focusing on beer, then perhaps that means the price of wine will go down & I can get a bottle of Cordon Rouge for less than $30.
So, not a total loss, then.
Dunno what the driving force behind the paper’s interest is, but they conclude that the Euros are headed for a culture of binge drinking.
Seems that the population across Europe leans towards either abstinence or overindulgence.
“’It's hard for me to accept that there are this many teetotalers in Europe,’ said Mark Hofmans, a managing director in GfK's Brussels office who analyzed the survey results. ‘But we are seeing a trend where there are some people who never drink and some people that when they drink, they drink a lot.’”
Well, I certainly can vouch for the binge drinking in Britain, but it appears that Italy & Spain are leading the way to switching from wine to beer.
& it’s astonishing how many respondents judge that they aren’t impaired until they’ve consumed five or more drinks. I’d really hate to be at the bars where those folks are sucking them down.
However, if they’re focusing on beer, then perhaps that means the price of wine will go down & I can get a bottle of Cordon Rouge for less than $30.
So, not a total loss, then.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
To hell in a Sidecar
Well, as if that whole penis restaurant thing wasn’t enough, Eric Felten reports that the state of drinks in hotel bars is, well, on the whole dire.
I’ve never had a Sidecar; my only association with it is that it was Auntie Mame’s eye-opener after a night of boozing with the literati of Prohibition-era New York. It was when her nephew Patrick displayed to his trustee his bartending abilities learned while making Sidecars for Auntie Mame and her actress friend Vera that he got shipped off to boarding school. Of the Americano I have no knowledge whatsoever. I do like Campari and various things, but I’ve never had the mixture he talks about.
(Actually, I’m not sure I’ve ever even had sweet vermouth.)
Felten tested grand old and high-end hotels in New York, DC, Palm Beach, Dallas, Chicago, LA and San Francisco. (All on the Journal’s nickel. Damn, I want this man’s job.) New York scored the highest, & the rest basically pretty much tanked.
He only mentions the Mayflower in DC. I wonder if he went to the Willard, which has a rich history in both politics and booze—symbiotic pursuits if any ever existed. (I used to join a group of regulars on Christmas afternoon at the Round Robin bar; they were a quite diverse collection of characters and the bartender took pix each year and distributed them to us the next. She always swore she’d not be around by the next Christmas, but she was.) It’s a classy joint, with classy drinks to match, although of course I was drinking champagne.
In general Felten found the hotels' ambiance better than the bartending capacities. He doesn’t mention age as a factor, but from his descriptions most of the staff he encountered would appear to be under 35, and utterly disinterested in the craft of mixing drinks. Showmanship?—yes. Snagging big tips?—absolutely. Making classic cocktails?—not so much.
One excuse he got for no Americano (at the Top of the Mark, if you please) was that the recipe wasn’t in their computer.
That pretty much sums it up.
This is really quite sad, considering that you pay a premium of at least 100% for any food or drink item when you buy it in a hotel instead of the open economy. Not all of that overage should be for the atmosphere; you should be able to get a drink as tony as the environment.
I myself have salted away enough to have a drink in the bar of the Hotel del Coronado. And, one summer while waiting tables at the O club at Norfolk Naval Station, I literally saved up my coins (I could not believe what cheap bastards naval officers are) to treat a friend to a liqueur at the Williamsburg Inn after a performance of Much Ado about Nothing at the Virginia Shakespeare Festival at William & Mary. You’re paying for the whole package—atmosphere, service and good drinks; and you should get them, whether it’s chump change for you or a week’s tips.
Well—here’s what you can do: test all the hotel bars in your area. See what you find. & then let us know. You’ll be doing the country a big favor.
I’ve never had a Sidecar; my only association with it is that it was Auntie Mame’s eye-opener after a night of boozing with the literati of Prohibition-era New York. It was when her nephew Patrick displayed to his trustee his bartending abilities learned while making Sidecars for Auntie Mame and her actress friend Vera that he got shipped off to boarding school. Of the Americano I have no knowledge whatsoever. I do like Campari and various things, but I’ve never had the mixture he talks about.
(Actually, I’m not sure I’ve ever even had sweet vermouth.)
Felten tested grand old and high-end hotels in New York, DC, Palm Beach, Dallas, Chicago, LA and San Francisco. (All on the Journal’s nickel. Damn, I want this man’s job.) New York scored the highest, & the rest basically pretty much tanked.
He only mentions the Mayflower in DC. I wonder if he went to the Willard, which has a rich history in both politics and booze—symbiotic pursuits if any ever existed. (I used to join a group of regulars on Christmas afternoon at the Round Robin bar; they were a quite diverse collection of characters and the bartender took pix each year and distributed them to us the next. She always swore she’d not be around by the next Christmas, but she was.) It’s a classy joint, with classy drinks to match, although of course I was drinking champagne.
In general Felten found the hotels' ambiance better than the bartending capacities. He doesn’t mention age as a factor, but from his descriptions most of the staff he encountered would appear to be under 35, and utterly disinterested in the craft of mixing drinks. Showmanship?—yes. Snagging big tips?—absolutely. Making classic cocktails?—not so much.
One excuse he got for no Americano (at the Top of the Mark, if you please) was that the recipe wasn’t in their computer.
That pretty much sums it up.
This is really quite sad, considering that you pay a premium of at least 100% for any food or drink item when you buy it in a hotel instead of the open economy. Not all of that overage should be for the atmosphere; you should be able to get a drink as tony as the environment.
I myself have salted away enough to have a drink in the bar of the Hotel del Coronado. And, one summer while waiting tables at the O club at Norfolk Naval Station, I literally saved up my coins (I could not believe what cheap bastards naval officers are) to treat a friend to a liqueur at the Williamsburg Inn after a performance of Much Ado about Nothing at the Virginia Shakespeare Festival at William & Mary. You’re paying for the whole package—atmosphere, service and good drinks; and you should get them, whether it’s chump change for you or a week’s tips.
Well—here’s what you can do: test all the hotel bars in your area. See what you find. & then let us know. You’ll be doing the country a big favor.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
GM Redux
Well, GM has truly turned on the groveling. Now that they claim they need $4B just to get to 31 December (& another $4 to make it through another month), they’ve suddenly discovered that mistakes indeed were made.
Emphasis on the past tense.
As reported by Reuters & other media, they took out a full-page ad in trade rag Automotive News. They took out a print ad, probably hoping that would limit the distribution of their mea culpa.
As in so many things, they were wrong.
In the ad they confess to having “disappointed” & even “betrayed” customers by turning out gas-guzzling behemoths & other pieces of junk over the past 30 years.
“At times we violated your trust by letting our quality fall below industry standards and our designs became lackluster,” the ad says.
Again—emphasis on the past.
It moves quickly on to whine, “Despite moving quickly to reduce our planned spending by over $20 billion, GM finds itself precariously and frighteningly close to running out of cash.”
& so we should let bygones be water under the bridge, & so on, & fork over our money to keep them operating.
It doesn’t seem to actually say why we should do that, although it does remind us that “millions of jobs” are at risk—their fall-back extortion threat.
It’s amazing what the fear of losing his corporate suite can do to propel a CEO to pretend to level with his customers, past & prospective. Our Congressweasels have pretty much decided to bag the idea that the auto industry focus on energy-efficient vehicles & are about to hand over $15B out of the $25B they set aside for retooling to GM & Chrysler to help get them through the night.
(They’re calling the money “loans”; but who among us believes we’ll ever see it again?)
But apparently they’re seriously considering tying that largesse to giving the sack to Rick Wagoner.
They should stipulate that he & his executive team should spend time in prison, making lots of new potential car-buying friends, until their companies have repaid these “loans”.
Emphasis on the past tense.
As reported by Reuters & other media, they took out a full-page ad in trade rag Automotive News. They took out a print ad, probably hoping that would limit the distribution of their mea culpa.
As in so many things, they were wrong.
In the ad they confess to having “disappointed” & even “betrayed” customers by turning out gas-guzzling behemoths & other pieces of junk over the past 30 years.
“At times we violated your trust by letting our quality fall below industry standards and our designs became lackluster,” the ad says.
Again—emphasis on the past.
It moves quickly on to whine, “Despite moving quickly to reduce our planned spending by over $20 billion, GM finds itself precariously and frighteningly close to running out of cash.”
& so we should let bygones be water under the bridge, & so on, & fork over our money to keep them operating.
It doesn’t seem to actually say why we should do that, although it does remind us that “millions of jobs” are at risk—their fall-back extortion threat.
It’s amazing what the fear of losing his corporate suite can do to propel a CEO to pretend to level with his customers, past & prospective. Our Congressweasels have pretty much decided to bag the idea that the auto industry focus on energy-efficient vehicles & are about to hand over $15B out of the $25B they set aside for retooling to GM & Chrysler to help get them through the night.
(They’re calling the money “loans”; but who among us believes we’ll ever see it again?)
But apparently they’re seriously considering tying that largesse to giving the sack to Rick Wagoner.
They should stipulate that he & his executive team should spend time in prison, making lots of new potential car-buying friends, until their companies have repaid these “loans”.
Monday, December 8, 2008
The cost of bargains
Erika Hayasaki of the LA Times gives us a follow-up report on the mob that trampled to death a Wal-Mart employee at in Valley Stream, NY, on Black Friday.
You know, that’s the incident where a horde of shoppers, enticed by ludicrously low prices (for a limited time) on toys, electronics & other goods, swarmed into the store upon opening, each member intent on getting the loot s/he needed…
Here’s the video Hayasaki mentions of rescue workers trying to resuscitate Jdimytai Damour, 34. What you don’t see in this video is that while the attempt was going on, the store was crammed with shoppers continuing to fill their carts with schlock.
When I first heard about the killing, I harkened back to the 80s, when parents first seemed to go murderously ballistic in attempts to get Cabbage Patch Kids (which weren’t even being offered at discount). The image of one tearful woman sobbing to a reporter that all the other parents were awful because their kicking & clawing resulted in procuring a doll, while hers hadn’t, has stuck in my head ever since.
This woman just didn’t make the connection between her (unsuccessful) barbarism & that of the successful barbarians.
& here’s what I find interesting about this particular report: Hayasaki follows Nakea Augustine, 26—who jumped the line in order to get a good shot at the loot she wanted. At opening, she described how she just kept moving so she wouldn’t fall & be trampled like others she saw (but didn’t try to help).
In fact, “Augustine saw Damour sprawled out. She managed not to step on him.”
Instead, she “raced for the toy section & snatched up a bike, a dollhouse & 10 Hannah Montana dolls for $5 a piece.” She stayed in the store for two hours, buying $495 worth of merchandise just as the store closed—it being a crime scene & all.
So, Augustine (& the rest of those who didn’t let a little thing like homicide slow down their pursuit of bargains) was appalled at the behavior of everyone around her, but has no sense at all that she was one of the barbarians.
I despair. I absolutely despair.
You know, that’s the incident where a horde of shoppers, enticed by ludicrously low prices (for a limited time) on toys, electronics & other goods, swarmed into the store upon opening, each member intent on getting the loot s/he needed…
Here’s the video Hayasaki mentions of rescue workers trying to resuscitate Jdimytai Damour, 34. What you don’t see in this video is that while the attempt was going on, the store was crammed with shoppers continuing to fill their carts with schlock.
When I first heard about the killing, I harkened back to the 80s, when parents first seemed to go murderously ballistic in attempts to get Cabbage Patch Kids (which weren’t even being offered at discount). The image of one tearful woman sobbing to a reporter that all the other parents were awful because their kicking & clawing resulted in procuring a doll, while hers hadn’t, has stuck in my head ever since.
This woman just didn’t make the connection between her (unsuccessful) barbarism & that of the successful barbarians.
& here’s what I find interesting about this particular report: Hayasaki follows Nakea Augustine, 26—who jumped the line in order to get a good shot at the loot she wanted. At opening, she described how she just kept moving so she wouldn’t fall & be trampled like others she saw (but didn’t try to help).
In fact, “Augustine saw Damour sprawled out. She managed not to step on him.”
Instead, she “raced for the toy section & snatched up a bike, a dollhouse & 10 Hannah Montana dolls for $5 a piece.” She stayed in the store for two hours, buying $495 worth of merchandise just as the store closed—it being a crime scene & all.
So, Augustine (& the rest of those who didn’t let a little thing like homicide slow down their pursuit of bargains) was appalled at the behavior of everyone around her, but has no sense at all that she was one of the barbarians.
I despair. I absolutely despair.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Historical parallax
It’s the 67th anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. So it’s interesting to be reminded that Japan as a nation still refuses to own up to its past. A WSJ piece notes the firing of the commander of Japan’s Air Force for winning a history essay contest by writing that FDR “entrapped” Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor and that Japan’s foreign adventures in the 1930s and 1940s did not constitute aggressive warfare.
It’s notable that General Tamogami Toshio was given the sack over this, because the Japanese have never really absorbed the idea that, starting with the invasion of Manchuria and continuing with attacks on China, Southeast Asia & islands all the way to spitting distance of Australia, they were doing anything wrong. Tamogami’s views are shared by many of his countrymen.
Two years ago then-Prime Minister Koizumi Junichiro sparked outrage in the rest of Asia, Australia and the US when he publicly visited the Yasukuni Shrine. The source of the controversy lies in the fact that Yasukuni, a memorial to the fallen of WWII, enshrines convicted war criminals as well as soldiers.
In Japan Koizumi was seen as a courageous leader honoring the fallen, even if it meant pissing off pretty much everyone else involved in the Pacific theatre.
As the Journal’s Walter Kozak points out, Japan isn’t the only country to skew history. I actually had a laugh at the Taiwanese museum that lauds Chiang’s valiant fight alone against the Japanese and the Communists. The sorrow is that way too many Americans swallowed and continue to swallow that bilge.
The Germans indeed have owned up to the past, although it took them a generation—and the student uprisings of 1968—to make it happen.
There is controversy over FDR’s announcement—surprising to both Churchill and Stalin—at Casablanca in 1943 that the Allies would accept nothing less than unconditional surrender by Germany; no negotiated peace. The argument runs that this forced the Germans to fight to the bitter end because they had no hope of bargaining with their enemies.
Well, even with unconditional surrender, even with their homeland literally nothing but rubble, even with complete occupation by four enemy armies—none of which featured in the peace following WWI—for 20 years the Germans denied that they’d caused their own destruction. When they said they were sorry about the war, what they were actually sorry about was that it ended the way it did.
And that attitude persisted until the late 60s, when the scales finally fell from their eyes.
(My view is that there was no real alternative to that policy, if the nations of the world wanted to avoid another global conflagration in 20 years’ time.)
The Austrians, as Kozak notes, are still playing the role of first martyrs to Nazi tyranny. You should read William L. Shirer’s account of the arrival of German troops in Vienna in 1938 for a description of how “tyrannized” the Austrians felt.
And lest you think that we in the US are immune to collective amnesia, look at how we acknowledge our history of human chattel slavery, or at how long it took Japanese Americans to receive compensation for their forced removal from their homes and businesses to concentration camps in pretty much the most desolate parts of the country the US military could find.
I also weep at how this administration is violating not just the Constitutional rights of American citizens, but also trampling completely the Geneva Convention in its treatment of prisoners of war. We decry—rightly so—the barbarities practiced by Japan on our POWs during WWII, but call what’s going on at Guantanamo and “third-party” countries vital to national security.
I really, really wish we would learn from history.
It’s notable that General Tamogami Toshio was given the sack over this, because the Japanese have never really absorbed the idea that, starting with the invasion of Manchuria and continuing with attacks on China, Southeast Asia & islands all the way to spitting distance of Australia, they were doing anything wrong. Tamogami’s views are shared by many of his countrymen.
Two years ago then-Prime Minister Koizumi Junichiro sparked outrage in the rest of Asia, Australia and the US when he publicly visited the Yasukuni Shrine. The source of the controversy lies in the fact that Yasukuni, a memorial to the fallen of WWII, enshrines convicted war criminals as well as soldiers.
In Japan Koizumi was seen as a courageous leader honoring the fallen, even if it meant pissing off pretty much everyone else involved in the Pacific theatre.
As the Journal’s Walter Kozak points out, Japan isn’t the only country to skew history. I actually had a laugh at the Taiwanese museum that lauds Chiang’s valiant fight alone against the Japanese and the Communists. The sorrow is that way too many Americans swallowed and continue to swallow that bilge.
The Germans indeed have owned up to the past, although it took them a generation—and the student uprisings of 1968—to make it happen.
There is controversy over FDR’s announcement—surprising to both Churchill and Stalin—at Casablanca in 1943 that the Allies would accept nothing less than unconditional surrender by Germany; no negotiated peace. The argument runs that this forced the Germans to fight to the bitter end because they had no hope of bargaining with their enemies.
Well, even with unconditional surrender, even with their homeland literally nothing but rubble, even with complete occupation by four enemy armies—none of which featured in the peace following WWI—for 20 years the Germans denied that they’d caused their own destruction. When they said they were sorry about the war, what they were actually sorry about was that it ended the way it did.
And that attitude persisted until the late 60s, when the scales finally fell from their eyes.
(My view is that there was no real alternative to that policy, if the nations of the world wanted to avoid another global conflagration in 20 years’ time.)
The Austrians, as Kozak notes, are still playing the role of first martyrs to Nazi tyranny. You should read William L. Shirer’s account of the arrival of German troops in Vienna in 1938 for a description of how “tyrannized” the Austrians felt.
And lest you think that we in the US are immune to collective amnesia, look at how we acknowledge our history of human chattel slavery, or at how long it took Japanese Americans to receive compensation for their forced removal from their homes and businesses to concentration camps in pretty much the most desolate parts of the country the US military could find.
I also weep at how this administration is violating not just the Constitutional rights of American citizens, but also trampling completely the Geneva Convention in its treatment of prisoners of war. We decry—rightly so—the barbarities practiced by Japan on our POWs during WWII, but call what’s going on at Guantanamo and “third-party” countries vital to national security.
I really, really wish we would learn from history.
Restaurant news
"The food in China is remarkable and so much more varied than what you get in Chinese restaurants in the U.S." So says the Journal’s Alan Paul, writing on the ex-pat life in China.
This is his intro to getting cooking lessons prior to his family’s departure from the country. However, my eyes kind of froze when he was talking about the penis restaurant and I found it hard to move on to the actual lesson.
The foodies may be less imaginative than I and able to proceed on with concentration to the dumplings and the chopping of the meat.
Wonder how long it'll take for one of those specialty restaurants to open in New York or LA?
This is his intro to getting cooking lessons prior to his family’s departure from the country. However, my eyes kind of froze when he was talking about the penis restaurant and I found it hard to move on to the actual lesson.
The foodies may be less imaginative than I and able to proceed on with concentration to the dumplings and the chopping of the meat.
Wonder how long it'll take for one of those specialty restaurants to open in New York or LA?