Today's mail brought the newsletter of the U.S.S.MURRAY Association,
whose members are former crewmen of the destroyer (DD 576). The
newsletter contained a list of the names of members who had recently
passed away. My first level of interest was to identify the names of
the men with whom I served, old shipmates who shared a liberty, a
late watch or lent a hand in heavy weather. A silent farewell.
The more I stared at the the list the more I was struck by the
variety of ethnic and national backgrounds that the names represented.
Irish, English, Italians, Swedish, German, Eastern European, Hispanic
were all represented. Immigrants and the sons and grandsons of
immigrants from all over the old world.
I was reminded of a poem I read in high school called "Americans
All," by Minna Irving, recognizing how diverse our immigrant
population was.
I offer, in remembrance of shipmates lost, it's last stanza :
"So when on the horizon rises
A war-cloud to threaten the land
with Liberty's native-born children.
Shoulder to shoulder they stand.
For America ready to battle,
for America ready to fall,
Not Russian, nor Swedes or Italians Americans all."
Worth a thought in our current anti-immigrant climate fueled by the
descendant's of immigrants.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Copenhagen, GOD, & Global Warming
Currently, representatives from 170 countries are meeting in Copenhagen to confer with
respect to climate change, its causes, what aspects are man made and what steps may be
taken to ameliorate the problem.
With respect to whether such a change is happening, the evidence is
manifest. What is yet to be determines is the extent of man made
activities as a cause and what can be done to limit this effect.Lastly,
some projections as to what possible consequences may result from a too
feeble response.
A formidable body of scientists have urged that drastic steps be taken
to reverse or at lest slow the change which they regard as potentially
catastrophic.
In opposition to this group are the doubters, those who reject all
evidence of man-made contribution to the problem and the business and
monied interests who contend that to pursue the suggested remedies
would be ruinous, cost vast sums, damage industries and cost jobs.
Some even poll the American public for it's collective opinion, as if the weight
of opinion should control scientific realities.
In 1660, Blaise Pascal, a French mathematician and theologian
advanced a proposition, which came to be known as "Pascal's
wager." The proposed wager was a bet - If there is a GOD and you
follow the church you will gain paradise. On the other hand if you
reject the church you will gain some minor indulgences in this life
and lose nothing if there is no GOD. However, if you choose wrongly
and there is a GOD you have gambled away an eternity in paradise and
suffer an eternity of torment, for the sake of a few minor indulgences.
Applying this reasoning to the current global warming issue is a good
fit. If the scientists are correct then logic compels us to take
steps, drastic or not, to keep the planet habitable. If they are wrong
and we follow their advise we will have added some layers of hardship
and difficulty to our lives to no purpose. If, however, they are
correct and we ignore their suggestions, we imperil the very survival
of life on this planet.
With those odds and the magnitude of the bet, which side appears the
more rational ?
respect to climate change, its causes, what aspects are man made and what steps may be
taken to ameliorate the problem.
With respect to whether such a change is happening, the evidence is
manifest. What is yet to be determines is the extent of man made
activities as a cause and what can be done to limit this effect.Lastly,
some projections as to what possible consequences may result from a too
feeble response.
A formidable body of scientists have urged that drastic steps be taken
to reverse or at lest slow the change which they regard as potentially
catastrophic.
In opposition to this group are the doubters, those who reject all
evidence of man-made contribution to the problem and the business and
monied interests who contend that to pursue the suggested remedies
would be ruinous, cost vast sums, damage industries and cost jobs.
Some even poll the American public for it's collective opinion, as if the weight
of opinion should control scientific realities.
In 1660, Blaise Pascal, a French mathematician and theologian
advanced a proposition, which came to be known as "Pascal's
wager." The proposed wager was a bet - If there is a GOD and you
follow the church you will gain paradise. On the other hand if you
reject the church you will gain some minor indulgences in this life
and lose nothing if there is no GOD. However, if you choose wrongly
and there is a GOD you have gambled away an eternity in paradise and
suffer an eternity of torment, for the sake of a few minor indulgences.
Applying this reasoning to the current global warming issue is a good
fit. If the scientists are correct then logic compels us to take
steps, drastic or not, to keep the planet habitable. If they are wrong
and we follow their advise we will have added some layers of hardship
and difficulty to our lives to no purpose. If, however, they are
correct and we ignore their suggestions, we imperil the very survival
of life on this planet.
With those odds and the magnitude of the bet, which side appears the
more rational ?
Monday, December 7, 2009
NAPLES LIBERTY
One aspect of my liberty in Naples has gone unrecorded for a
variety of reasons, some valid, some not. Perhaps out of a sense of
propriety or embarrassment, Now long inappropriate, an episode almost
forgotten.
One of the imperatives on liberty is sex, and after a few weeks of
bouncing around the Med, it was high on our list of priorities.
Exactly how we got to the place I don't recall, probably our guide,
the friendly street boy was a familiar reference.
It was as I recall a rather dismal room, divided by sheets suspended
by wires, but sailors were not interested in the decor. The girls were
young, but then so were we, 20 years old navy men on our first "Med"
cruise. Sailor sex especially just ashore on liberty sex is rather cut
and dry, not exactly, wham, bam, thank you maam ! But that is pretty
close to the mark. A quick mechanical, or animal release, and then on
to the bar.Quick and impersonal as hell !
I was surprised by the girl, looking up at me, suddenly saying "Kiss
me." She was not new to her profession and the request confused me
but she said again with some urgency "Kiss me" and then I had a quick
insight that she needed a fantasy to help her with her profession; not
yet hardened to an unemotional, yet intimate act of sex with a total
stranger. I hesitated, then kissed her lightly, a peck- then with more
genuine participation as it became for an instant, a shared passion,
and therapy for both of us, the lonely sailor and the young unhappy
hooker- all for 1,000 lira.
variety of reasons, some valid, some not. Perhaps out of a sense of
propriety or embarrassment, Now long inappropriate, an episode almost
forgotten.
One of the imperatives on liberty is sex, and after a few weeks of
bouncing around the Med, it was high on our list of priorities.
Exactly how we got to the place I don't recall, probably our guide,
the friendly street boy was a familiar reference.
It was as I recall a rather dismal room, divided by sheets suspended
by wires, but sailors were not interested in the decor. The girls were
young, but then so were we, 20 years old navy men on our first "Med"
cruise. Sailor sex especially just ashore on liberty sex is rather cut
and dry, not exactly, wham, bam, thank you maam ! But that is pretty
close to the mark. A quick mechanical, or animal release, and then on
to the bar.Quick and impersonal as hell !
I was surprised by the girl, looking up at me, suddenly saying "Kiss
me." She was not new to her profession and the request confused me
but she said again with some urgency "Kiss me" and then I had a quick
insight that she needed a fantasy to help her with her profession; not
yet hardened to an unemotional, yet intimate act of sex with a total
stranger. I hesitated, then kissed her lightly, a peck- then with more
genuine participation as it became for an instant, a shared passion,
and therapy for both of us, the lonely sailor and the young unhappy
hooker- all for 1,000 lira.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Definitions
Recently, some TV programs were preceded by a caveat to the effect that some of the pictures to be broadcast are “graphic” and advised discretion. Since, by definition, all pictures are graphic, it would seem this warning is in fact meaningless. If the purpose was to alert the viewer to the fact that some of them may find the pictures repulsive, offensive, shocking, vile, salacious or reprehensible, that should have been the message. English has the largest vocabulary of any language in use yet occasionally we find ourselves unable to say exactly what we mean.
In Mac Beth, Shakespeare writes “...sleep that knits up the raveled sleeve of care...”, using raveled to describe something that has become undone. Later, much later, someone decided unraveled would be more accurate. Yet current dictionaries define “raveled” and “unraveled” as meaning the same thing.
Some years ago after the word inflammable was misinterpreted to mean non- combustible, leading to several disastrous conflagrations; linguists, threw up their hands and concocted the term “flammable” hoping to remove the confusion. Today “flammable and inflammable are defined as meaning precisely the same thing. Distinctions without a difference. Impossible to be incorrect.
In Mac Beth, Shakespeare writes “...sleep that knits up the raveled sleeve of care...”, using raveled to describe something that has become undone. Later, much later, someone decided unraveled would be more accurate. Yet current dictionaries define “raveled” and “unraveled” as meaning the same thing.
Some years ago after the word inflammable was misinterpreted to mean non- combustible, leading to several disastrous conflagrations; linguists, threw up their hands and concocted the term “flammable” hoping to remove the confusion. Today “flammable and inflammable are defined as meaning precisely the same thing. Distinctions without a difference. Impossible to be incorrect.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Small talk with a Stranger
Today, as I sat in a doctor's waiting room, two other patients
endeavored to strike up a conversation, their opening gambit "aren't
things bad ?" Whether they were soliciting agreement or disagreement
was hard to tell but since, predictably, the doctor's TV was set to
Fox News, I assumed the former. I usually try not to converse with
people in doctors waiting rooms; firstly, they are sick or they
wouldn't be there, secondly, if their cue comes from the program on
TV, odds are I will probably disagree with them and thirdly, my
instinct is to either tell them to "shut the fuck up" or pantomime
George Carlin's motion of ultimate dismissal. Most usually, I do a
banal nod and grunt (a republican signal of dismissal.)
Today I felt mildly combative and a bit irritated, so I ventured "how
come?" wearing my I just left the mother ship expression. My first
interrogator, an oriental woman of indeterminate age, turned
immediately defensive, as if she had given an immigration official a
wrong signal, quickly backed up saying " I'm only 50 but I think so,
it's bad.' she left shortly thereafter, appointment apparently
abandoned.
Feeling elated after this encounter, I was primed when a man of my
approximate age, entered the room, attired in a shirt sporting a golf
logo and pricey loafers. To my surprise he opened with the same
gambit, adding "I feel sorry for these young people who can't find a
job." Tough to find a riposte but I countered "I've been unemployed
any number of time's, it's not such a big deal." this had the intended
off putting effect and he concentrated on his golfing magazine,
probably an article dealing with how bad things were on the links,
I remained quiet until my name was called and I went off to attend to
the business which prompted my visit in the first place.
endeavored to strike up a conversation, their opening gambit "aren't
things bad ?" Whether they were soliciting agreement or disagreement
was hard to tell but since, predictably, the doctor's TV was set to
Fox News, I assumed the former. I usually try not to converse with
people in doctors waiting rooms; firstly, they are sick or they
wouldn't be there, secondly, if their cue comes from the program on
TV, odds are I will probably disagree with them and thirdly, my
instinct is to either tell them to "shut the fuck up" or pantomime
George Carlin's motion of ultimate dismissal. Most usually, I do a
banal nod and grunt (a republican signal of dismissal.)
Today I felt mildly combative and a bit irritated, so I ventured "how
come?" wearing my I just left the mother ship expression. My first
interrogator, an oriental woman of indeterminate age, turned
immediately defensive, as if she had given an immigration official a
wrong signal, quickly backed up saying " I'm only 50 but I think so,
it's bad.' she left shortly thereafter, appointment apparently
abandoned.
Feeling elated after this encounter, I was primed when a man of my
approximate age, entered the room, attired in a shirt sporting a golf
logo and pricey loafers. To my surprise he opened with the same
gambit, adding "I feel sorry for these young people who can't find a
job." Tough to find a riposte but I countered "I've been unemployed
any number of time's, it's not such a big deal." this had the intended
off putting effect and he concentrated on his golfing magazine,
probably an article dealing with how bad things were on the links,
I remained quiet until my name was called and I went off to attend to
the business which prompted my visit in the first place.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
SAND HILL CRANES
This morning the first sound I was conscious of was of a sand hill
crane clearing his throat, making that strange rattling sound of
theirs but in a low, soft, tentative way-- not with the usual urgency
when they have something significant to say. It got me thinking. Did
they settle on that sound first thing or did they try a variety of
other sounds before they all agreed to use that one ? After all
they're really ancient breed and what with the great variety of
sounds birds are capable of producing, you know , song birds, parrots
and the like, it seemed the sand hills probably had a lot of choices
to consider before they decided on their throaty warble rattle.
Strange though !
Which, in turn, brought me back to an earlier concern, nicknack (see)
Knick kack as alternatively defined and spelled by Webster's New World
Dictionary; a definition masquerading as a tautology- bad start- a
small ornamental article or contrivance; gimcrack; trinket, also
spelled -etc. I found all of this astounding. No credit or derivation
as to how all this wonderful stuff came about- or who contrived the
alternate spelling with the silent "K" ? Probably some Teutonic "K"
hater.
My mother filled our house with volumes of this useless junk and I
used to marvel at all of the wonderful questions it would provoke.
firstly, why ? the purpose of all of this useless, non-utilitarian
stuff. Sure, it gave rise to other industries, shelf manufacturing,
five and dime stores (now called Dollar Stores), feather duster, dust
rags, even those things now advertised on TV - the cleaning thing from
Germany (where they make good stuff.) Well that's the idea.
It congers up visions of my mom, shopping and "window shopping"; back
during the depression when times were really tough and bring home this
useless, garish ugly stuff- to then be displayed and regarded until some
hoped for event like an earthquake (rare in the Bronx in those days)
or some clutsy (Klutzy) event came alone and reduced the clutter to a
sweepable jumble.
And where were the factories producing truckloads of this commodity
with which to fill the windows of the 5 & 10 (now $ 1.00) Did they
employ great mobs of underutilized people, yearning for a living or
was it a product of elves, those little guys who work the North Pole
ore Christmas, something to keep them busy in the off season ?
crane clearing his throat, making that strange rattling sound of
theirs but in a low, soft, tentative way-- not with the usual urgency
when they have something significant to say. It got me thinking. Did
they settle on that sound first thing or did they try a variety of
other sounds before they all agreed to use that one ? After all
they're really ancient breed and what with the great variety of
sounds birds are capable of producing, you know , song birds, parrots
and the like, it seemed the sand hills probably had a lot of choices
to consider before they decided on their throaty warble rattle.
Strange though !
Which, in turn, brought me back to an earlier concern, nicknack (see)
Knick kack as alternatively defined and spelled by Webster's New World
Dictionary; a definition masquerading as a tautology- bad start- a
small ornamental article or contrivance; gimcrack; trinket, also
spelled -etc. I found all of this astounding. No credit or derivation
as to how all this wonderful stuff came about- or who contrived the
alternate spelling with the silent "K" ? Probably some Teutonic "K"
hater.
My mother filled our house with volumes of this useless junk and I
used to marvel at all of the wonderful questions it would provoke.
firstly, why ? the purpose of all of this useless, non-utilitarian
stuff. Sure, it gave rise to other industries, shelf manufacturing,
five and dime stores (now called Dollar Stores), feather duster, dust
rags, even those things now advertised on TV - the cleaning thing from
Germany (where they make good stuff.) Well that's the idea.
It congers up visions of my mom, shopping and "window shopping"; back
during the depression when times were really tough and bring home this
useless, garish ugly stuff- to then be displayed and regarded until some
hoped for event like an earthquake (rare in the Bronx in those days)
or some clutsy (Klutzy) event came alone and reduced the clutter to a
sweepable jumble.
And where were the factories producing truckloads of this commodity
with which to fill the windows of the 5 & 10 (now $ 1.00) Did they
employ great mobs of underutilized people, yearning for a living or
was it a product of elves, those little guys who work the North Pole
ore Christmas, something to keep them busy in the off season ?
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Why not a Tie ?
It was said that nature abhors a vacuum and sports fans abhor a tie.
Yet with the sole exception of baseball, where extra innings can continue
ad infinitum, sports contests in the United States used to tolerate
ending in a tie. Now, with the heavy influence of statisticians odds
makers and gamblers; sporting events; football, basketball, hockey,
and soccer have all added provisions to the rules to eliminate the
possibility of a contest ending in a tie. Overtime periods some for
fixed periods, some with "sudden death " conclusions, still others
with "shootouts" as methods for providing a final resolution and no
ties.
Yet in the remote years of my youth, a football game between two
champion teams, ranked 1st and 2nd in that particular year, each with
Heisman winners on their squads, played a game know for years as the
"Game Of The Century," to a 0-0 tie. The year 1946, the teams Army,
no.1, undefeated, Notre Dame, no.2, undefeated. Army's backfield
included Doc Blanchard (Heisman 1945) and Glen Davis (Heisman 1946).
Notre Dame quarterback, Johnny Lujak (Heisman 1947) A duel of
quarterbacks and sterling defensive play in an era before 2 platoons
and free substitution, where both offense and defense were played by
the same squad. So, stats, percentages, standings be dammed, for the
love of the game what's wrong with a tie ?
Yet with the sole exception of baseball, where extra innings can continue
ad infinitum, sports contests in the United States used to tolerate
ending in a tie. Now, with the heavy influence of statisticians odds
makers and gamblers; sporting events; football, basketball, hockey,
and soccer have all added provisions to the rules to eliminate the
possibility of a contest ending in a tie. Overtime periods some for
fixed periods, some with "sudden death " conclusions, still others
with "shootouts" as methods for providing a final resolution and no
ties.
Yet in the remote years of my youth, a football game between two
champion teams, ranked 1st and 2nd in that particular year, each with
Heisman winners on their squads, played a game know for years as the
"Game Of The Century," to a 0-0 tie. The year 1946, the teams Army,
no.1, undefeated, Notre Dame, no.2, undefeated. Army's backfield
included Doc Blanchard (Heisman 1945) and Glen Davis (Heisman 1946).
Notre Dame quarterback, Johnny Lujak (Heisman 1947) A duel of
quarterbacks and sterling defensive play in an era before 2 platoons
and free substitution, where both offense and defense were played by
the same squad. So, stats, percentages, standings be dammed, for the
love of the game what's wrong with a tie ?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
