Parking in the Park 

By Patrick F. Cannon

I see that they have made some changes to the plans for the Obama Presidential Center/Library/Museum that will be built in Jackson Park in Chicago. As my readers may know, I am not a fan of the ever-increasing scale of these monuments. Obama’s is estimated to cost $500 million now, but don’t be surprised if it ends up even higher. To be fair, construction money is being raised by private donations. The people of Chicago, Cook County and the State, however, will be on the hook for “infrastructure” improvements, which could well add hundreds of millions to the cost.

One positive in the new plan – parking is being moved underground, much as it was many years ago at the neighboring Museum of Science and Industry. But the complex is still being largely built on once sacrosanct park land. This makes it all the more confusing that Friends of the Park (FOTP), the organization formed to protect our sacred parks, has decided not to go to court to prevent the complex from being partially built on park land; what’s more, a park designed by the legendary landscape architects Frederick Law Olmstead and Calvin Vaux, who are most famous for their Central Park in Manhattan.

(One comment about the design: if it’s going to be in the park, then it should be as unobtrusive as possible. None of the structures should be above the tree line. The tower, or do they call it a Belvidere? has actually gotten taller in the redesign.)

As you may recall, FOTP was mainly responsible for preventing the proposed George Lukas’ – he of the Star Wars franchise – Museum of Narrative Art from being built on a parking lot just south of Soldier Field. Their reasoning had to do with the ordinance that decreed that the lakefront be “forever open and free.” As they saw it, this privately-funded museum was a completely different proposition than the privately-funded Art Institute, Field Museum, Shedd Aquarium and Adler Planetarium. Perhaps FOTP should change its name to Friends of the Parking Lot?  At any rate, Lukas eventually tired of the delays and decided to build his museum in Los Angeles.

While I think former President Obama – a truly historic figure whose political career began in Chicago – should get his complex in Chicago, Jackson Park is not the best location. The argument that it will spur economic development is spurious. The community directly west of the site, Hyde Park, is home to the University of Chicago and is decidedly not in need of any economic development; if anything, it may be overdeveloped. Indeed, some 200 UC professors have signed a petition urging that a new site be found.

If you want to find a site that would spur development, you need only ride the CTA Green Line from Oak Park to 63^rd and Ashland in Chicago. Keep your eyes open along the way and you’ll see any number of sites (many of them already vacant and owned by the city) where economic development is actually needed. Speaking of 63^rd and Ashland, does not Englewood need development more than Hyde Park?

But it really isn’t about economic development, is it?  Former President Obama wants his complex in Jackson Park because it’s the most attractive physically; and in a location where access would be considered relatively safe for out-of-town visitors. It will also be just down the street from the Museum of Science and Industry, forming its own “museum campus” with that busy venue. Of course, if you want to be near the ultimate museum campus, there is that parking lot just south of Soldier Field…

Copyright 2018, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

 

Hail and Farewell 

By Patrick F. Cannon

Orin Hatch, born in the old Pittsburgh of smoke and fire like yours truly, has announced he’s retiring from the Senate after serving seven terms representing Utah. When he fades into the lobbying sunset, he will have been the longest serving Republican in history.

In 1976, he ran against incumbent Democrat senator Frank Moss, who had served for a mere three terms. Nevertheless, Hatch ran as a strong supporter of term limits, promising he wouldn’t overstay his welcome.  One supposes he decided that 42 years was the proper limit for him, even if Moss only deserved three.

Now, Hatch has had a decent record in the Senate. He was great friends with Ted Kennedy, despite having little in common politically. Perhaps their greatest collaboration was to pass legislation to provide expanded health care for young children. On most matters, he voted as you would think any loyal Republican would.

Had he left after five terms, he wouldn’t have been among the first to openly support Trump’s candidacy. I confess I was surprised when he did so. As a Mormon (all of Utah’s congressional delegation are Mormons), I would have thought Trump’s record of marriage infidelity and heroic locker room boorishness would have caused Senator Hatch to recoil in horror. Instead he put partisanship ahead of principle.

Permit me a moment of cynicism. Would Hatch have endorsed Trump if he had already decided to retire after this term was up? I notice that the President’s most vociferous critics in the Republican Party are members who won’t be seeking reelection.  Or did he decide to retire now in embarrassment at what his endorsement has wrought?  Had Hatch actually believed in term limits, the President would have been some other Utahn’s problem.

Although I understand the arguments against having term limits, I don’t find them compelling. What have the experience and wisdom of our current legislative leaders – at both the Federal and state levels – given us? Have they really solved the health care problem? Immigration? The deficit?  Has any important legislation been passed on a bipartisan basis?

If we had reasonable term limits – on the Federal level, I would suggest six terms for the House and three for the Senate – none of the current leadership would still be in office. We would have said a fond farewell to Nancy Pelosi, Paul Ryan, Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell; and to their tired ideas and rhetoric. Most of the Illinois delegation would be gone too, including the Senate’s preeminent attack dog, Dick Durbin.

For Illinois, I would suggest four two-year terms for House members and three four-year terms for Senators. I believe this would sweep the current leadership clean. Maybe fresh leaders could actually try to solve the state’s serious fiscal problems. If their political ambitions weren’t satiated, the departed could always run for statewide or Federal offices. Maybe the voluble Durbin could be replaced by the taciturn Madigan?

Of course, I’m under no illusions that the politicians are going to impose term limits on themselves. In Illinois, as you may know, they have done everything they can to prevent a term limit initiative from appearing on the ballot. They do this, of course, because they know that it would easily pass, as it has in 15 states thus far. In Illinois, just a little democracy is considered quite enough.

Copyright 2018, Patrick F. Cannon

 

The Way You Look Tonight 

By Patrick F. Cannon

I was reading the Chicago Tribune the other day and – don’t ask me why – I started reading an interview with a singer/songwriter of apparent fame. I got as far as his contention that the times were too serious for romantic ballads before I moved on to the cartoons. Somehow, Mr. Boffo always restores my temper.

As even a cursory examination of the works and opinions of contemporary American artists and critics should tell you, Donald Trump has cast a pall over the country, or at least those parts of it left of center in politics and the arts. Even works created long before President Trump was even born seem somehow to comment on his curious methods of governance. I recall one denizen of the Hollywood intelligentsia who immediately increased her visits to her therapist when he was elected. By the way, I also think he’s a disaster, but one that we’ll survive much as we survived James Buchanan, Warren Harding and Bill Clinton.

Back to ballads. Recently, I was watching Swing Time, a Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers movie of 1936. All of their movies had similar plots, designed to make it possible for them to sing and dance with some plausible excuse. Here are some of the lyrics of one of the songs:

Some day, when I’m awfully low

When the wind is cold

I will feel aglow just thinking of you

And the way you look tonight

The music here was by Jerome Kern, with lyrics by Dorothy Field (extra credit for you if you started humming the melody). When this romantic ballad was popular in 1936, Hitler had remilitarized the Rhineland; Japan was waging an undeclared war in China; Italy had conquered Abyssinia; the Spanish Civil War was beginning; and unemployment here was 17 percent (it’s about four percent now).  Oh, and the safety net of Social Security would not begin paying any benefits until 1940.

Yet, somehow, the spark of romance hadn’t died. Here are lyrics from an earlier year (1923) by America’s greatest songwriter, Irving Berlin, who, like Cole Porter, wrote both music and lyrics:

What’ll I do when you are far away

And I am blue

What’ll I do…

When I’m alone with only dreams of you

That can’t come true

What’ll I do

Again, extra marks for humming along. By the way, a Google search for these songs will let you listen to versions by people like Fred Astaire, Judy Garland, Willie Nelson, Frank Sinatra, Tony Bennett (hale and hearty now in his 90s), Linda Ronstadt and even Rod Stewart. Good old You Tube!

By contrast, here are some of the lyrics from Ms. Taylor Swift’s little ditty, “Look What You Made Me Do”:

I don’t like your little games, don’t like your tilted stage

The role you made me play of the fool, no, I don’t like you

I don’t like your perfect crime, how you laugh when you lie

You said the gun was mine, isn’t cool, no, I don’t like you (Oh!)

 

But I got smarter, I got harder in the nick of time

Honey, I rose up from the dead, I do it all the time

I’ve got a list of names, and yours is in red, underlined

I check it once, then I check it twice, oh!

Ms. Swift, who is now 28 and thus full of wisdom and experience, despite her only advanced education being a wish to be famous, also penned these unforgettable lines:

She’s not a saint and she’s not what you think

She’s an actress, She’s better known

For the things she does on the mattress

Soon she’s gonna find stealing other people’s toys

On the playground won’t make you many friends

She should keep in mind, She should keep in mind

There is nothing I do better than revenge

These lines are from her song “Better than Revenge.” Far from longing for her lost love, as in the Berlin song, she is looking to get even. One wonders why she continues to seek relationships with men who seem bound to betray her. Is she a glutton for punishment, or simply an artist looking for inspiration? Of course, she’s by no means alone in her self-involved rants. The current pantheon of popular artists of both sexes has created a new culture of complaint. A good example of how far away we’ve gotten from any kind of romantic impulse is a recent survey that reported that 25 percent of women think a man complimenting them on their looks is committing sexual harassment, as does a single man offering to take an unmarried woman out for a drink.

I must say that I’m in complete agreement with the Lerner and Lowe song that declares “I’m glad I’m not young anymore.”

Finally, I don’t mean to suggest that no good songs are being composed. Broadway is still producing new musicals, although original movie musicals are rare. Many of them have good and even great songs, but they have a limited audience and rarely appear at the top of any charts. Before the rock and roll era, many of the hit songs came from Broadway and Hollywood. No more.

I often wish that young people would broaden their tastes to include the great American music of the past, but I increasingly think this is a vain hope for a generation a majority of which can’t even name the three branches of government. In this, they are more like President Trump than they think.

######

Copyright 2018, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

 

 

 

Take the Good with the Bad 

By Patrick F. Cannon 

Instead of making resolutions for 2018, let’s see where we are as it begins. How does the balance scale look?

On one side, Donald Trump is still president. Another interesting fellow, Kim Jong-un, continues to build big rockets and nuclear bombs instead of feeding his people, who seem to starve with smiles on their faces. He claims the recent United Nations sanctions are an act of war, but I guess he doesn’t realize that the UN has utterly failed in its stated mission to bring peace to the world, so they might as well declare war; on the other hand, they’ve managed to build a fine bloated bureaucracy, which we are pleased to pay for.

On a positive note, Robert Mugabe has been removed from power in Zimbabwe, although it remains to be seen whether the new folks will be any better. Oops! I almost forgot about Putin. I’m afraid he puts the scale far out of balance.

Despite what Nancy Pelosi and the other ancients in the Democratic Party like Dick Durbin are saying, almost everyone is going to be paying less income tax next year. Rich folks will indeed benefit the most because – wait for it – they already pay by far the most. As I think I’ve mentioned here before, the highest 10 percent of earners pay 70 percent of the income taxes. The claim that their reduced taxes will be on the backs of the poor is false and Nancy and Dick know it. Let me remind them that the lowest 45 percent of income tax filers pay no tax at all, and that nearly 20 percent actually get cash under the earned income tax credit provision, which has not changed.

My argument with the new tax law isn’t that it’s unfair, but that it will increase the deficit unless economic growth reaches at least 4 percent on a sustained basis, which is questionable. When is the national debt too much?  If economics were an exact science, economists would tell you, but in fact they differ widely on its long term effect. But here’s something to consider: the Federal government is currently paying an average of 2.293 percent interest on the money it borrows. This is historically low – a more typical average would be more like 5 percent. What happens to the deficit if interest rates are doubled, a not unlikely event? Let’s call the tax reform shakily balanced for the moment.

(As an aside, if you watch the local and national TV news, you would think that the Republican congress had actually passed a tax increase. Why is this, I wonder?)

There is some good news. Unemployment is about as low as it gets, and people who had stopped looking for work are returning to the work force. Employers are actually having trouble filling some jobs, which results in increased wages (wage stagnation has been thought a problem for many years). Stock prices are rising, which benefits not only individual investors, but the many people who are in the market through 401-K and other retirement plans.

The poverty rate in the US has declined from 15.1 percent in 2010 to 13.5 percent in 2017.  People living in abject poverty worldwide have decreased from about 25 percent in 2000 to 9.5 percent now. In most cases, hunger is more related to political upheaval than an actual lack of food. In our own country, childhood hunger is almost always caused by family dysfunction.

Another plus: Americans are the most generous people in the world. Not only do they help people in need, but they support medical research, education and the arts to an astonishing degree. And let me brag about our writers. The British Man Booker literary prize was only opened to Americans two years ago. Americans have won the prize in each of those two years!  Last year’s winner, George Saunders (for Lincoln in the Bardo), is from the south Chicago suburb of Oak Forest.

In Chicago sports, the Cubs made it to the NLCS and the Black Hawks to the NHL playoffs. The Bears as usual disappointed; the White Sox did too, but at least seem to have some hope for the future. After a dismal start, the Bulls have come alive, but like the Sox it’s probably “wait till next year.” On balance, the year could have been better, but we live in hope!

Finally, it hasn’t been a good year for sexual predators, primarily in the arts, media and entertainment. Women (and men in some cases) now seem emboldened to blow the whistle as never before. This is all to the good, but lets hope the innocent – and there will be innocents – do not go down with the guilty as they did in the McCarthy era. In any event, men will have little excuse in 2018 for using their power to abuse women and young boys.

Taking all of this into account, not sure how the scales will balance in the New Year. Of course, if it weren’t for Donald Trump…

######

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

Happy Holidays, Folks! 

By Patrick F. Cannon

Well, another year has passed, so I thought I’d bring you all up to date on the family as the holidays approach. As usual, there wasn’t a dull moment for our relatives. First the bad news: old Uncle Abner won’t be with us this year – once again, the Parole Board turned him down. I guess he’ll have to serve the full sentence. Heck, he’ll only be 70 when he gets out. If he watches his health, he ought to be able to enjoy some of the cash he has stashed away. He still refuses to tell me where it’s hid, despite me telling him inflation is eating away at it, and I’d be happy to invest it for him. Oh, well, he’s as cantankerous as ever.

Daisy Mae is pregnant again. Not sure who the father is this time either. As you know, all her kids look just a little different. I call them the rainbow coalition. She’s a worker though. Taking an online course in beauty culture, using money borrowed from the government. She says no one every pays off them loans, so it’s like a free education. Aren’t these young folks smart?

As you know, young Georgie is in the army. He made it all the way to corporal before he got busted back to private for drinking on duty. At least they didn’t give him a dishonorable discharge like his brother Amos. I guess they treat drunkenness and attempted murder different.

You probably heard that Aunt Nellie got married again. You kinda lose track, but I think this might be number six. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that her former husbands all died suddenly.  At least they all left her some money. Maybe she’ll have better luck this time. The new husband looks healthy enough.

I’m proud that the family remains on the cutting edge of social change. Cousin Charlie announced that he was changing his name to Charlene. Guess we’ll all have to bone up on our pronouns. I suggested to Charlene that the beard might be considered odd for a lady, but he’s (she’s?) quite fond of it, reminding me that the carnival that comes through town still features a bearded lady. So, it looks like a career change might be in the offing too.

I’m sure you’ve seen all the media stories about son Ralphie. As you know, he’s the only member of the family to graduate from college – and Harvard no less. He’d already graduated by the time they found out he’d phonied up his transcripts and ACT scores to get in, and by then were too embarrassed to go public. Ralphie says the trick is to get in. After that you don’t have do much, since they think you’re already smart enough.

Anyway, Ralphie’s now got the record for the greatest Ponzie scheme in history. Unlike old Madoff, he got away to Russia with the dough before it was discovered, so all that education sure paid off.  That picture of him and Putin riding those white horses bare-chested made all the papers. Funny though, when we tried to get a passport to visit him, we got turned down. I complained to our Congressman, and he told me he was surprised too, since he thought they would be happy to see us leave the country. Not sure what he meant by that.

Finally, I hope you won’t believe that story about wife Rosie being found naked with the preacher. She told me it was just a new way or praying; something about going back to the innocence of Adam and Eve before they ate the apple. She said it made her feel so good she might try it again.

Well, that’s all for this year. You have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. As for me, I can’t wait to see what the future has in store for Yokum family.

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

 

 

Look Ma…No Hands! 

By Patrick F. Cannon

When they work, computers are wonderful tools. They’re a Godsend for writers. I say this as someone who started writing longhand (including, if you can believe it, college papers), then learned how to type on a manual typewriter; progressed to electric, then the miracle of the IBM Selectric; embraced word processing; and finally, several generations of desktop and laptop computers, the most recent of which is now under my fingers.

I can still manage to write in cursive, as taught by the good nuns of various schools and orders. I no longer own any kind of typewriter, although I understand that many folks collect them, including Tom Hanks. They were, after all, wonders of mechanical design. Like all mechanical contraptions, they sometimes broke down, but nothing was lost except ones temper. When a computer fails, however, disaster may well ensue.

If you work with computers extensively, more than likely you have experienced a disastrous meltdown or two. Years ago, I wrote a brochure text of at least 5,000 words, which somehow disappeared from the computer’s memory. I had to rewrite the whole damn thing again, now under deadline. And it wasn’t by any means the only time technology has and continues to betray me.

That’s why I’m more than a little skeptical about the looming arrival of the driverless vehicle. General Motors tells us that they plan to have one available by 2019; Google, Tesla, Uber and others are already testing them. And, of course, passenger cars already have some of the features – automatic braking, lane warnings, etc. – that will be required for driverless cars. Even with the small numbers now on the roads, there have been failures and accidents. Imagine, if you dare, what will happen when the majority of vehicles – including massive trucks – are careening at high speeds on the nation’s highways when there’s a massive software meltdown?

Can’t happen? Really? Ask the many airlines whose reservation systems have crashed; or the NSA or Pentagon when their sensitive files have been hacked; or the many banks and other corporations whose customer information has been stolen or held for ransom. The systems that will control our vehicles will be highly complex, and will include radar, highway sensors, in-vehicle processors and that strange unearthly phenomenon called “the cloud.” Are you willing to bet your life that all of it works all of the time?

People who read this blog regularly will know that I often heap scorn on the science deniers – those people who, despite all evidence to the contrary, continue to oppose child vaccination; believe that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) will cause us to grow two heads; or that human activity has nothing to do with climate change, or even that the earth was created in seven days. And while I applaud the safety features that can help prevent accidents – and the more efficient and cleaner power plants that will power our cars and trucks – I still want to have my hands on the wheel.

And not only for my peace of mind. There are times when driving a capable car is a pleasure. Although it frightens my wife Jeanette, I look forward to driving in the Laurel Highlands of Western Pennsylvania enroute to a family reunion. Driving past the most beautiful thoroughbred horse farms in the world near Lexington, Kentucky never gets old. And I’ll always remember a trip in early spring through Austria from Vienna to Salzburg and on to Munich. The world was turning green, but there were still patches of snow in the meadows.

Now, you might say that you could enjoy the view more if you didn’t have to drive the car. But I’m afraid most people would just stare at their phones, check their e-mails, text their friends and relatives or play video games. You know, the stuff they already do while actually driving. So we want to give up yet another of our freedoms for this?

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

 

Too Taxing for You?

By Patrick F. Cannon 

As the Republicans in the House and Senate wrangle over the final form of the so-called tax reform bill (reform takes 500 pages?), I thought I would throw out some facts that you might find of interest.

Approximately 45 percent of taxpayers pay no income tax at all. Indeed, nearly 20 percent are eligible for the earned income tax credit – in effect, they not only pay no taxes but the Federal government actually gives them money! In addition, most are also receiving food, housing and other assistance. The new tax bill would not fundamentally change any of this.

Nor is it likely to fundamentally change who actually pays the income taxes. The top earners – the reviled one percent – pay 40 percent of the total, while the top 10 percent pay 71 percent. The problem isn’t who pays the taxes – the problem is a Congress that historically doesn’t seem to care if the income and expenditure columns match.

Of course, this doesn’t mean that the lowest earners don’t pay any taxes. The payroll tax – for Social Security, Medicare, unemployment and disability insurance, etc. – is paid by everyone who gets a paycheck. The rate is currently 7.65 percent, matched by the employer. Taxable income is currently capped at $127,200. I have always thought that one way to make the fund at least partially viable would be to eliminate the cap. It wouldn’t exactly be fair, but hey, everyone likes to soak the rich, right?

Here’s one for you Illinois residents. We have the fifth highest tax burden of all the states, and the highest paid state employees at an average of nearly $60,000 a year (adjusted for cost of living). They also enjoy much better health benefits than you do (unless you too work for the State or are a member of Congress). Oh, and they have pretty nice pensions. Alas, there still isn’t enough in the pension funds to pay them without even more tax increases. Why be number 5 when you could be numero uno? Then at least we could lead the country in something.

Although it can be a bit more complicated, you can now deduct your state income and local property taxes from your Federal return. Although hard to believe, the Illinois income tax rate of 4.95 percent is not even close to the highest (thank you California); it is the total tax burden that gets us to number 5.  Although it’s hard to predict what the final tax bill will look like, one version would eliminate the deduction for state income taxes and limit the real estate tax deduction to $10,000. If you’re in Wyoming, Texas, Nevada, Florida or Alaska, this would be a matter of little concern.

As a matter of interest, the average deduction for real estate taxes in Illinois is $6,500. I couldn’t find a breakdown, but I suspect the average is higher in Chicago and the so-called collar counties. In any event, for most taxpayers, the $10,000 limit would not be a problem. Again, it will be the upper middle class and the wealthy who would be most affected.

Are you sufficiently bored? I am, but let me leave you with this final thought. I’m retired and I’m not the least bit tempted to move south, but I know quite a few people who have established permanent residency in states like Florida and Texas to avoid Illinois’ high taxes. In many cases, they get to spend the good weather months in the Chicago area before heading south for the winter (six months and 1 day is the usual). And I won’t even begin to talk about the cost of doing business in Illinois. Let me close by mentioning that my son lives in Florida. He works for one of America’s major banks, which is in the process of moving all their computer operations from high tax areas to the Sunshine State. People are even moving to Wisconsin and Indiana, for God’s sake!

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

Give Thanks 

By Patrick F. Cannon

Note: This is from last year, with changes as necessary. It still expresses my thoughts about my favorite day.

It has always been good advice to stay away from politics while you’re enjoying your Thanksgiving turkey dinner. The holiday is meant to be a time to give thanks for our blessings, which our politicians have decidedly not given us for many years. So, let’s toss them aside and celebrate Thanksgiving properly.

First of all, let’s give thanks for the amazing turkey. Over the years, farmers have taken a wild bird of amazing toughness and developed one that, properly cooked, can be sublime. I can say that because I have been responsible for making the family turkey for many decades, and it always turns out to be edible, despite my feeble culinary talents.   Were Keats alive today, he would certainly write an “Ode to the Gobbler.”

(Of course, the noble bird isn’t perfect. I had a neighbor during my brief period of living in Albert Lea, Minnesota, who had been the county sheriff. He was part Native American and had a dry sense of humor. After he retired, he decided to raise some turkeys on an acreage he then owned. One night, there was a violent thunderstorm. His herd of turkeys became frightened and herded together, to the point that they smothered each other and mostly died. Sheriffy, as the locals called him, never ate turkey again. He told me their stupidity lost him a lot of money and thereafter he only ate ham for Thanksgiving.)

By tradition, so many side dishes are made that the most finicky of eaters can be satisfied. Even the vegetarians (how sad to be one on Thanksgiving) can find enough to eat. And when all are satisfied, my wife Jeanette and I have at least two more turkey dinners to enjoy, not to mention the turkey soup that the carcass so generously provides.

Around the dining table (made larger for the occasion by a small table) will be our daughter Elizabeth and her husband, the inimitable Boyd; my niece Eve O’Brien and her husband Tim; their son Patrick (one of many Patrick’s in the family) and his wife Amy, in from St. Louis; and our very close friends, Ed and Barb Swanson, from far away Northbrook. My son Patrick (yet another of that noble name) is in Florida recuperating from minor surgery so couldn’t make it this time. If politicians are discussed at all, it will be only to make fun of them.

In addition to being thankful for our families and friends, we can find much else to be grateful for. Amidst all the world’s problems, there is cause for optimism. For example, abject poverty in the world has been reduced from more than 50 percent 50 years ago to less than 15 percent today. In addition to inventing the more obvious technologies that have transformed computing and communications, American scientists have developed medicines and techniques that have helped people around the world live longer and healthier lives. And our agricultural scientists, despite the science deniers who oppose advances like GMOs, are helping farmers feed an increasing world population with an ever declining availability of tillable land.

Our own country is now essentially energy independent; indeed, we are in a position to export fuel. Free market capitalism and some government programs, even though often poorly run, have helped reduce actual poverty to about five percent. Unemployment is about as low as it can get. Recent research has concluded that dysfunctional families are the only remaining significant cause of childhood hunger. Oh, and before I forget, Northwestern is 8 and 3, and still has Illinois to play!

Finally, I would like to remind everyone that Americans are the most generous people on earth. Our donations of cash and labor help not only our fellow citizens, but people around the world. In addition to social services, our cultural institutions and great universities – the best in the world — are the creations of generous philanthropy.

I could go on. Just remember if you will that Thanksgiving is just that, a day to, as the old song says “accentuate the positive.” Let politics intrude on another day.

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

 

 

Have a Seat 

By Patrick F. Cannon

I see it as my mission in life to think about things that would never occur to anyone else. For example, I just sat down at my desk and began typing on my laptop. Sat down at my desk on my office chair. Now, I know how the chair got there. I bought it at an office supply store. But what of chairs as things? Why do we have them? Where did they come from? Have you never wondered who made the first chair, and why?

People interested in such questions might well begin exhaustive researches in the collections of famous libraries and universities around the world; or simply Google “chair” and have done with it. I am in the enviable position of having a veritable archive in my own memory, in a brain that has soaked up most of the world’s knowledge in the course of a life of constant study.

Let me suggest first of all that there are really only three kinds of chairs: easy, hard, and those designed by artists and architects. As this last category is fairly recent, let me get it out of the way first. Such chairs are notable for being both expensive and uncomfortable. Italian designers in particular seem dedicated to the proposition that a proper chair must be an object of great sculptural beauty first. Indeed, you would be hard pressed to discover a way to actually sit on one. To these great artists, it is the idea of the chair that is important, not its utility.  Bravissimo, I say!

Architects, it must be said, do intend their chair designs to be sittable, if barely. The legendary German architect, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe – famous for his dictum that “less is more” – designed his famous Barcelona chair for a German exhibit at the 1929 world’s fair in that city. It has a simple, elegant design, favored by the kind of people who put abstract paintings on their white walls. It works best as an object, since getting in and out of it is something of a chore. But then, what can you expect for a mere $5,760?

Another great architect who has advanced the art of chair making is the by now ubiquitous Frank Gehry, he of the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao Spain, the Disney concert hall in Los Angeles and the Pritzker Pavilion in our own Chicago. Before his architecture became fashionable, and he thus had a lot of free time on his hands, the avuncular Gehry designed a chair made out of cardboard. The idea, one supposes, was to make a cheap and (maybe) comfortable chair for the masses. To prove his point, you can buy one now for a mere $5,900. It would go well with your Barcelona chair and Jackson Pollack painting, and set you back far less than a cardboard Brillo box by Andy Warhol.

(Although a bit larger than a chair, one could also complete ones ensemble with a bright red Kiss Sofa, said to be based on Marilyn Monroe’s lips. It can be had for only $7,400, but really should be complemented by a Mark Rothko color field painting in blue. Sitting on it would make real the famous admonition.)

Lest I be accused of favoritism, as I have written a bit about his architecture, I must point out that Frank Lloyd Wright’s prairie period (1900-1915) high-backed dining chairs are notorious for their discomfort. Even the great man himself refused to sit upon them, and eventually blamed their design on one of his minions, Walter Burley Griffin as I recall.

But back to history. Cave men, at least from the evidence of their drawings, had no chairs. They sat upon the earth or whatever surface was handy. From looking carefully at surviving bas reliefs, it would seem that the Babylonians, Assyrians, and Hittites had a place to sit, even if only for the king and his ilk. The Greeks mostly sat on what looks like benches or bleachers, as did the early Romans. The Egyptians are a different story, if one is to believe Cecil B. DeMille, well known for the historical accuracy of his movies. If you’ve seen his classic “Ten Commandments,” you’ll remember Pharaoh Ramses, played by the eerily Egyptian-looking Yul Brynner, sitting upon a gaudy throne as he ordered the slaughter of the innocents.

It is to King Arthur that we owe the famous round table and chairs, now beloved of banquet halls around the world. Most illustrations I have seen show chairs of goodly heft, with Lions heads carved at the end of the arms. This chair form proved remarkably durable, since kings and other nabobs adopted somewhat larger versions for their thrones and the lower orders tended to emulate the furniture of their betters.

Chairs finally become less hefty in the 18^th Century Georgian era due mainly to the legendary Thomas Chippendale. Basing his designs on Chinese models, his chair backs had delicate designs, although the seats were large enough for the hefty bums of the era. Originals are quite expensive, but beware of forgeries advertised on E-Bay. By the way, Tom was something of an eccentric, given to dancing around in the nude clothed only in a formal collar and black tie.

Perhaps the most famous chair of the modern era is the Barcalounger reclining chair. Many a poet has mused while dozing off in its embrace. As it can be had with motorized reclining, it is the perfect marriage of art and science. Perhaps some day it might sprout wings and fly one to heavenly bliss!

######

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon