The Bogeyman is Coming 

By Patrick F. Cannon

People who know me are familiar with one of my favorite sayings: “It’s an ill wind that blows no good.” While I think Donald Trump’s election was regrettable, the fear it engendered has at least had some positive effect on some sectors of the economy.

When I visited my son in Florida recently, he told me a very sad story. A daughter of a friend of his is an actress, married to an actor who is having a run of good luck, i.e., he has a recurring role in a successful television series. Since acting is a precarious profession at best, this run of good fortune should have had them over the moon. But no, she was so horrified by Trump’s victory that she has had to double her weekly visits to the therapist to four. Only by seeking these hours of expensive bucking up is she able to face the day.

I should have thought that Los Angeles area therapists of all kinds were already at full stretch caring for the tender egos of the entertainment industry. Perhaps you watched the Academy Awards – almost every presenter and recipient seemed obsessed with the election. Their therapists no doubt clapped their hands in glee as they saw the palpable fear emanating from the stage.

The other industry seeing a bump is a bit less obvious. Most folks are unaware that there is an industry dedicated to survival. They provide products and services for those who might be or feel threatened by natural disasters – a legitimate concern in some areas – and those who fear that the government is somehow out to get them. The industry gained some momentum when President Obama was elected. As you may recall, there was widespread fear that he was going to send his minions around the county to confiscate the fire arms of law abiding citizens. It didn’t happen, of course, and Obama is safely gone.

As it happens, one of the companies in this business, Day One Gear, is located in Forest Park, IL, where I live; indeed, the owners live just down the block. They drive (of course) three off road vehicles. Among their license plates are those that read “Day One” and “Bug Out.” No doubt they were among the exhibitors at a recent trade show for survivalists held at a Chicago area fair grounds. A few were interviewed for a story in the Chicago Tribune and commented that they were starting to see liberals appearing at the show for the first time. As fear of Obama recedes, the tides have rolled in with Trump. As I said, it’s an ill wind.

Let’s see how President Trump has succeeded in imposing his totalitarian will upon the country. His ban on immigration from certain countries has been tied up in the courts for weeks. His second executive order may in fact be upheld eventually because he seems to have the authority under existing law. (The “Rule of Law” apparently only applies when you agree with it, an attitude that both the former and current presidents share.). Just a few days ago, the new health care law meant to replace the hated Obama Care failed in the House of Representatives. To his credit, President Trump spread the blame for this – first blaming the Democrats and then the Republicans.

Although he rails against “fake news,” he has yet to shut down the New York Times, or jail any of its reporters, much less have them murdered as his buddy Vladimir Putin is so fond of doing. He is, of course, rolling back regulations on the environment and other areas, but his should come as no surprise, since the Republican Party has been advocating this for years. Since voters around the country have given them the presidency and control of both houses of Congress, you can expect more of the same.

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

Go Cats! 

By Patrick F. Cannon

My alma mater, Northwestern University, was chosen this year to participate in the NCAA basketball tournament for the first time in its history. Then, to add icing to the cake, they won their first game. They gamely lost their second game to the number one seed, Gonzaga, whose only prior claim to fame was its most famous attendee, Bing Crosby. This came just after an even more momentous event: the first World Series victory by the Chicago Cubs since 1908.

As any sports fan knows, these highs are to be cherished because, alas, history tells us that they will not last. For the young men who played for Northwestern, the education they receive in return for their hard work, will last.  Although the numbers can fluctuate from year to year, nearly 100 percent of Northwestern’s basketball and football players will graduate.

I saw another statistic about Northwestern recently. Someone went to the trouble to look at all the Illinois high school athletes who had received football scholarships, and determined that only 12 percent could have been admitted to Northwestern.

I don’t mean to suggest that Northwestern is unique in graduating its athletes. Duke University, for example, graduates a high percentage of its athletes, but it also indulges in a practice for its basketball team that has become known as “one and done.” It does this to take advantage of the National Basketball Association’s (NBA) policy of not drafting or employing players unless they have attended college for one year or simply sat out for a year after graduating from high school. To take advantage of this absurd policy, Duke and other “basketball schools” (Kentucky comes to mind) knowingly recruit players who they know in advance will stay only for the mandatory year, then opt for the draft.

Most of these young men are African-Americans. The most talented among them have been groomed since their skills first became apparent by coaches, family, street agents and other assorted hangers on, who all hope to get their share when their protégé signs that big contract. They all conspire to keep their charges just eligible enough academically to get accepted to a major college, which in turn strives in turn to keep the young man eligible for that one year. Courses designed to do just that are readily available.

Chicagoans will be familiar with the case of Derrick Rose. He was a “one and done” with the University of Memphis. In 2007-08, he led the team to the NCAA championship game, which they lost to Kansas. It was later discovered that someone else had taken Rose’s SAT test, and Memphis was required to vacate the entire season by the NCAA. By then, Rose had signed a lucrative contract with the Chicago Bulls, unconcerned that his cheating had cost Memphis so dearly (an unconcern that seemed to extend to almost everything in his career).

Fortunately, the graduation rate for African-American athletes is increasing, if still below that of other ethnicities. But the reality is that the very best of them will always be under pressure to take the money and forget the education. I happen to think it’s a bad bargain, since so few actually make it or have long careers. In the end, though, it’s their decision.

To me, the true hypocrisy is dual: the NBA for its senseless policy of not permitting high school graduates from going directly to the NBA; and our universities for hiring athletes rather than educating students.

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

 

Starting At the Bottom 

By Patrick F. Cannon

Unlike President Trump, most of us had to start at the bottom and work our way up. Therefore, I must most sincerely apologize for last week’s history of hats. I certainly should have begun my history of apparel at the bottom with the lowly shoe, and only then worked my way upwards. Since you have had to forgive me for much of what I write in this space, I hope you will indulge me once again.

There is no convincing evidence to suggest that the cave dwellers wore shoes (or didn’t for that matter). As you know, they covered the walls of their caves with quite convincing drawings of cows and other ruminants. No self portraits, alas. It makes one wonder how later artists knew what they looked like, but that’s a mystery for another day. Anyway, as they were hunters and gatherers, their feet no doubt developed sufficient calluses to obviate the need for additional protection. Which makes me to wonder how they cut their nails, since all they had were those flinty things? Hmmm.

The first actual evidence of shoes in northern climes came with the discovery of a well preserved pre-historic body in the Alps. I have written of this before, but when an ancient glacier melted, it uncovered the body of a poor fellow who had been waylaid by a band of ruffians, bopped on the head unto death, and left to become one with the glacier. When discovered recently by Swiss mountaineers, he was wearing what were obviously primitive shoes, as well as a jaunty hat. The shoes consisted of a piece of leather gathered about the poor fellows ankles and held in place by what we might now call a shoelace; simple, surely, but presumably adequate enough for trekking up and down the Alps.

In last week’s article, I outed the Assyrians, Egyptians and Babylonians as early hat wearers. Ancient carvings also reveal that they invented the sandal. I’m sure most of us have had the experience of stepping barefooted on a sun-roasted sand beach. Just imagine living on such a surface! Early carvings show stick figures hopping about wildly. Researchers originally thought they were performing a ritual dance, but later concluded they were trying to traverse the hot desert sands. Later carvings showed similar figures strolling jaunty jolly on those same sands, but now with what we now know as sandals upon their feet.  Hieroglyphs give credit for this foot saving innovation to Ibn El Beer Kun Schtok.

Shoes gained a separate sole upon the rise of Christianity. As time passed, they became ever more sophisticated. By the time of King Henry VIII, they were made of the finest leathers, often adorned with rare jewels. Alas, poor Henry was too fat to see his feet, but they were the envy of his courtiers. About this time, the sock was invented. To be blunt, even Kings rarely washed and shoes began to exude rare odors. Putting a bit of fabric between the foot and the shoe helped somewhat; it also obscured the related fact that feet and ankles were not only gamey but grimy.

Just when women became obsessed with shoes is unclear. Shoes that survive from the reign of the self same Henry show the high heel for the first time. In addition to adding a bit of height to aristocratic ladies, it made their legs a bit more fetching. Not in public, of course, but perhaps in the privacy of the bed chamber? It is reported in court chronicles that Ann Boleyn owned no fewer than 300 pairs of shoes, the highest number recorded until eclipsed in our own time by the legendary Imelda Marcos.

Due to the efforts of our forbearers, we now have a bewildering variety of foot wear to choose from. I myself still own two pairs of fine business shoes, now dusted off only when a rare formal occasion demands. For daily wear, I favor a pair of sturdy walking shoes; when they wear out, I spring for a new pair. A couple of years ago, giving in to pressure from loved ones, I bought a pair of blue suede loafers for summer wear. I wear them only when I visit my son and brother in Florida every year, and for the odd garden soiree. I do not own a single pair of sneakers, which should only be worn by tennis players and children.

In closing, I should mention that modish young men seem to have abandoned the sock when wearing sneakers, loafers and boat shoes. On the other hand, I have noticed that some elderly men wear black socks with their sandals. What next, I wonder?

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

Hats Off! 

By Patrick F. Cannon

Although it’s impossible to know for certain, there seems to be no evidence that cave men wore hats. I suspect that their simple tools were unequal to the task of cutting hair, so there was a sufficient mop on top to keep away the cold.

Ruins scattered about the Middle East provide evidence that ancient civilizations like the Assyrians, Babylonians and Egyptians liked to have a hat or headdress to complete their outfits. I suspect the lower orders had to make do with a bit of cloth to keep the Sun at bay. I understand the modern version is called a bullmoose.

If one is to believe later artists, Jesus favored a hatless page boy, as did his disciples. His Roman overlords also seemed to favor the hatless look, although for formal occasions a simple laurel wreath was deemed de rigueur. The wreath also tends to adorn the numerous portrait busts of Romans one sees in the antiquities collections of biggish museums.

By the Middle Ages, however, hats were fairly common. Kings, of course, wore crowns, which were considered the top hats of the time. The court jester (see Danny Kaye’s movie of the same name) wore the first of the silly hats, which featured multiple pom poms. The lower nobility were allowed to wear lesser crowns called cornets as a way of blowing their own horns. The serfs had to make do with hats made from the local grasses, thus the term “serf and turf.”

With the Renaissance came new prosperity and the first recorded hat craze. Fine wool and silk were used and jaunty feathers began sprouting. Initially, all were a bit on the floppy side, but the invention of the blockhead permitted shaping and stiffening. The famed Three Musketeers brought hat fashion to new heights, making France the center of the chapeau industry. By the middle of the 18^th Century, a gentleman could choose between the bicorn, tricorn or unicorn. The bicorn could be worn fore and aft or side to side, depending upon the whim of the owner. Women’s hats became fantastical creations, and were often topped with birdcages (real birds included) or model ships at full sail.

This excess came to a halt with the American and French revolutions. In France in particular, fancy hats went away with the heads of their owners. As the 19^th Century progressed, hat rationalization proceeded apace, and men everywhere were adorned with the Derby (called a Bowler in England, for reasons that seem sensible to them), the Homburg, the Top Hat, the Trilby and the classic Fedora, all made of felt in the blockhead technique.

As a young lad starting out in the business world in the mid 1960s, these styles were still au currant. After Memorial Day, they were replaced with straw hats, including the stiff brimmed Boater. But woe betides the heedless chap who wore them after Labor Day! But had I just been a bit more alert, I would have noticed that change was afoot. John F. Kennedy, a hero to the young, had taken to going bare headed! Although I had myself bought a fedora, eventually I felt empowered enough to consign it to the top of the closet.

(I must pause here to pay tribute to the French beret. After some 500 years, it still has its adherents. It’s particularly popular in military circles, since it provides a certain jauntiness that the old caps lacked. They are still worn by civilians, of course, and their effect is heightened by a burning cigarette hanging from ones lip, in the manner of Jean Paul Belmondo, or his spiritual father, Jean Gabin.)

Fashions, of course, come and go. For example, the fedora seems to have made a comeback, albeit in a miniature form, atop the heads of slight young men called hipsters. No one had ever adequately explained just what a hipster is, but it seems to have something to do with wearing black and displaying copious tattoos.

But for the last several years, it is the cap, not the hat, which has gained the most favor. Its rise has been insidious. Perhaps you recall Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds? Early on, we see a few birds here and there, just as we might on a normal day. Then, slowly but inexorably the number of winged creatures increases until their numbers become ominous. Just so with the ubiquitous baseball cap. When returning from Florida recently by air, I counted 16 heads with caps upon them in the seats in front of me, including on three women. They didn’t attack me, but I was fearful.

As a young lad, I played some baseball and proudly wore the game’s signature cap. I remember you had to shape the bill to fit the current fashion. When I stopped playing (curses on the hated curve ball), I stopped wearing its caps. I confess that I now wear similar caps when I play golf. When I leave the course, they return to their rightful place in the trunk of my car.

There was a time when wearing any kind of hat indoors was considered boorish. I can recall when gentlemen took their hats off even when they entered an elevator, much less a restaurant. Now, one sees baseball caps on the heads on men and women of all ages in even the best restaurants. And though the bill was meant to keep the sun out of ones eyes, the most fashion forward of cap wearers reverse it, presumably to keep it off the backs of their necks. I haven’t checked, but perhaps artificial light has unseen rays that addle the brain. There must be some reason why caps never leave heads.

The lack of dress codes generally gives us freedoms we should all embrace. Artfully torn jeans, liberal sentiments or obscene epithets on our T-shirts, $300 sneakers, copious tattoos – all let us advertise a new kind of individualistic uniformity, one that lets us relax as we escape the shackles of a more restrictive if more elegant and decorous past.

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

 

Editor’s Note: Mr. Patrick Cannon, the proprietor of this space, has fled to warmer climes, leaving to me the task of imposing upon your time to read his weekly missive. In this case, it’s yet another chapter in his unneeded history of the world. I make no claims on the accuracy of what follows, except to say that I take exception to his fiction that Carlyle, that besotted Scot, had anything to do with inventing the term “Middle Ages.” It was Edward Gibbon who thrust it upon the world, albeit quite by accident. It seems he presumably meant to write “Muddle Ages,” but his pen failed him when scribing the “u”, leaving off the upward sweep, which resulted in the copyist thinking it was an “i”. I have this from that unimpeachable source, Wikipedia.

Chapter Six

The Middle Ages

By Patrick F. Cannon

We historians constantly strive to keep things simple. When the profession was struggling to come up with a handy name for the period between the Dark Ages and the Renaissance, one of our brighter luminaries (Carlyle, as I recall) said: “You know, it was a period midway between the birth of Christ and this very day, so why not call it the Middle Ages?” So there it is. What could be simpler?

Of course, like much of history, this may well have to be reevaluated in the future. Imagine the historian of the 30^th Century. He asks himself why everyone calls the Middle Ages the Middle Ages when to him the Middle Ages would have been the 15^th Century, which we now know as the Renaissance. One could of course get bogged down with such questions; so we must let the historians of the future do what we ourselves do today – change history to suit the needs of the times.

Such questions aside, when did it begin? Most competent authorities believe the Battle of Hastings was the true beginning of the Middle Ages, since it isn’t easy to think of anything important happening before 1066.

William the Conqueror, by the way, wasn’t always known as William the Conqueror. He started as simple William, Duke of Normandy. He often walked the beaches of his realm and wondered what lay beyond the horizon (actually, on a clear day he could see what lay there; it was England). As a young lad, he had heard tales of the strange goings on over the water and determined some day to extend civilization to the heathens there. When he discovered that they didn’t speak French, the die was cast.

Offering the usual incentives of plunder and free land, he gathered an army and set sail in 1066. After a trouble-free passage, he landed on the coast, which seemed the most sensible approach. King Harold, who had just defeated Tostig and Harold Hardrada (no relation) of Norway, soon learned of this new threat to his throne and turned to face the new invaders. The two mighty hosts met at Hastings. The Normans prevailed and Harold was killed in the battle. His son, known as Childe Harold, escaped and went into exile.

Harold was the first known victim of that well- known truism: always avoid war on two fronts. Poor Harold (as he’s come to be known) really can’t be blamed, since he simply wasn’t aware that William was on his way. When he found out, flush with his victory, he coined what has become a very popular British expression – “Bloody Frogs!”

It took William a few years to conquer the entire country, greatly facilitated by the construction of the Tower of London in 1067. When the Saxons rebelled in 1070, they chose as their leader Hereward the Wake, with predictable results. After their defeat, the Saxon nobles disappeared into Sherwood Forest, where they subsisted for the most part by robbing the rich and getting rich themselves. One of their numbers, Robin of Locksley, uncharacteristically shared a bit of his ill-gotten gains with the poor and has been famous ever since, if more or less unique.

Relations between the Normans and Saxons improved somewhat under Richard I, who is known as the Lion Hearted. After returning from the Crusades (and a spell of captivity for ransom in Germany), Richard pardoned all the Saxons, making Robin Earl of Locksley. Other of his followers were handsomely rewarded as well. Friar Tuck became Bishop Tuck, and Little John became Big Bad John.

After the Lion Hearted died, his Brother John was crowned King and it rather went to his head. He was soon taxing all and sundry and generally making a nuisance of himself. Eventually, the Barons had had enough and forced John to sign the Magna Carta (Big Letter) at Runnymede in 1215. This famous document limited the power of the King and enabled the Barons to get some of the spoils for themselves. Later Kings were quite annoyed that John had signed the letter, so his name was never used again in polite society. If his name had been Henry, then presumably there would not have been a Henry VIII, which would have changed the course of history.

A word perhaps needs to be said about chivalry. Since high born women of the time were not encouraged to have sex before marriage, their suitors were forced to worship them from afar (even if they got close, they often discovered the infamous chastity belt, or “iron maiden” as it was sometimes called). Naturally, they comported with women of the lower orders, but spent most of the rest of the time mooning after the remote maidens. Some swains composed poems and simple ditties. If they were brutish illiterates (as was often the case), they would hire a wandering poet/troubadour to do it for them.  A real highlight for them would be when their lady threw them a hanky (unused, one would hope) to tie to their lances before they lumbered into battle. This was considered a good luck token, but it appears to have worked only half the time.

Knights and nobles were always looking for opportunities to shine. Thus, when Pope Urban appealed to the Christian rulers in 1096 to free the holy places in the Holy Land (Jerusalem and its environs), they jumped at the chance. Richard the Lion Hearted was foremost among them. Despite taking forever to get there, they finally rescued the holy places in 1099. Then, as now, killing your enemies in great numbers only made the holy places holier.

Alas, the Muhammadans had their own holy places in Jerusalem and seethed at their loss. They recaptured Jerusalem in 1187 under the mighty Saladin. Not to be outdone, the Christians set out on another crusade. When it didn’t work out, the children of Europe decided to take things into their own hands and 30,000 of the little tykes set out on the Children’s Crusade. It wasn’t anything like a Disney movie and the children who weren’t killed were sold into slavery.

But their noble sacrifice shamed their elders into trying again in 1228. They were successful, but were tossed out again in 1243. Had they persisted, the next crusade would have been the seventh and might well have finally succeeded, but they had lost count and suffered the consequences of faulty math. Not for the last time, history was the victim of politicians who couldn’t add.

Now that they had given up fighting the Muhammadans, the Europeans naturally took to fighting among themselves. While we might think that the six years of World War II was quite long enough, the English and French fought what has come to be known as the 100 Years’ War. While one might quible and point out that the wars actually lasted 107 years, we can certainly agree that there was a certain animosity between them.

(Some might say that some of this animus persists. When the Channel Tunnel was

being built in the 1980s, an English clergyman was quoted as wondering why anyone would want to go to France at all, much less quickly.)

Alas, the rest of Europe behaved little better than the English and French. Most of Germany and Italy were carved into little Duchies and Principalities, which were endlessly squabbling among themselves. One of the consequences of so many petty states, particularly in Italy, was that the market for paintings and other decorations greatly expanded, since even the pettiest prince wanted to grace his castle with pretty pictures, including one of himself. Artists who once didn’t have enough work to bother perfecting their talents suddenly were working overtime. One of them, Giotto, noticed one day that the people he was painting didn’t much look like the paintings themselves and was determined to do something about it.

While he was fiddling with noses and perspective, to the north a lusty young priest named Martin Luther had just about had it with the church’s main source of income – the selling of indulgences. And in the Celtic areas of France, Scotland, Wales and Ireland, the more sporting of the young men were inventing a new game to while away the cold and rainy days. In case you haven’t figured it out for yourselves, the Three Rs – Reformation, Renaissance, and Rugby – were looming over the horizon.

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

I’m Not From Here Myself 

By Patrick F. Cannon

My father was born in Ireland, and arrived at Ellis Island as a toddler in 1908. Somewhere, I have a copy of the ship’s manifest, and even a picture of the ship itself. I’m not unique in my generation in having a foreign-born parent. Just in the last couple of days, I’ve exchanged e-mails with a friend with a similar background. So, we know what it means when someone calls the United States “a nation of immigrants.”

Today, about 45 million of our fellow Americans have legal immigrant status, which is about 14 percent of the total population. Some became citizens; others have permanent resident or other status. The largely accepted number of illegal immigrants is 11.5 million, which has been fairly steady or even slightly declining over the last few years. And the influx of new legal immigrants has recently averaged just over one million per year; about 60,000 of those have been refugees.

Listening to some of our fine politicians, you would think the ratio of legal to illegal was just the opposite. Interestingly, Mexico is at the top of both the legal and illegal lists: 6.5 million of the illegal total, and 140,000 of the yearly legal list. China and India are next with about 70,000 each. They also figure on the illegal list, with 200,000 for India and 120,000 for China. Although I haven’t taken the time to check, I suspect many of these were admitted legally on student or travel visas, and simply didn’t go back when their visas expired.

It has obviously been much easier to enter the United States illegally from Mexico or Central America than it is from China. Unless you’re smuggled by sea in a shipping container, as has happened, you have to get an expensive airplane ticket and have a passport and visa if you’re coming from the Far East (or anywhere across the water for that matter).

If you live in an area with significant numbers of both legal and illegal aliens, Chicago for example, you are very likely to see and even interact with them almost daily. If you eat out, a very high proportion of the folks who cook your food and help serve it will have come from Mexico or Central America. They may have installed your new roof, and certainly have cut your grass and otherwise maintained your lavish gardens. If you’re alert, you’ve also seen them packed in vans on their way to do day labor throughout the city and suburbs.

Despite the odious pronouncements of President Trump, they seem to commit crimes at a rate less than the national average. But if they do, and are here illegally, the current law requires that they be deported. Actually, the current laws provide that anyone who is here illegally is subject to deportation. There are some legal niceties involved in the process, unless the person is more or less caught in the act of illegally crossing a border, or has done so fairly recently.

The Trump administration has pointed out that deportation hit record levels during the Obama administration, and this is quite true. As we now know, they have plans to accelerate the process. While the famous wall on our southern border may not rise immediately, a significant increase in border agents and police is in the works. While the priorities will actually be much the same (criminals, people caught at the borders, serial offenders), the numbers are likely to set new records. And all of this will be done, not through some extralegal whim of the mercurial President, but to enforce existing laws.

Who then should we blame if good people get caught in the net? The people who enforce the laws or the people who make them?  Do illegal aliens who have been here for a specified number of years, and have a clean record, deserve some kind of legal status? Does Congress really think that the existing laws make sense? Are they prepared to see 11.5 million people (or whatever the actual number is) rounded up like cattle and deported?

When legislatures fail to do their duty, bad things can happen. Look at Illinois. Washington is just failure on a bigger scale. Deplore President Trump to be sure. But what has your Congressman and Senator done for you or the country lately?

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

You’re in the Army Now 

By Patrick F. Cannon

I can’t recall his name now. After all, it’s been 56 years since my country called me to the colors under the auspices of the Selective Service Act of 1940. I’ll call him Joe Schmoe, which kind of fits. Anyway, Joe was my bunk mate during Army basic training at Ft. Benning, Georgia.

            Nowadays, with the all-volunteer Army, I suspect the living conditions for soldiers, even during basic training, are much better. In 1961, we were housed in World War II vintage barracks, which were never meant to be permanent. Simple, two-story frame structures with no insulation, they were heated by coal furnaces, which were tended, on a rotating basis, by the occupants. Since few of these fine young men had any relevant experience, the heating was unreliable at best. While March in Georgia (when I arrived) wasn’t quite as cold as Chicago, it was damn cold enough when revile sounded at 6:00 am the morning, particularly if the furnace had gone out overnight, which was most of the time.

            These particular barracks had been unoccupied since the Korean War, and we spent many of our off hours trying to scrub them clean. We never quite succeeded, to the horror of our platoon sergeant. Back to Joe. When some of us arrived at Ft. Benning by bus from Ft. Leonard Wood in Missouri, where we had spent two weeks of misery before the Army decided to send us south, we were directed to the barracks and told to throw our duffle bags on any available bunk. All of the first floor bunks had already been taken by earlier arrivals, so I trudged up stairs and threw my bag on the first available lower bunk.     By the time Joe arrived, all the lower bunks had been taken, so he favored me by choosing my upper. Now, if you equate “bunk beds” with the kind that families use to furnish kid’s rooms, you would be mistaken. These were in a more minimalist tradition, consisting of a three-inch thick mattress atop a single layer of saggy springs. Nor was there a charming little ladder to provide access to the upper. Since the mattress itself was only about three-feet wide, many a young soldier, accustomed to more generous accommodations at home, found himself tumbling to the floor during a fitful sleep. One got used to these thumps in night. I can’t recall that anyone got seriously injured as a result of these unexpected nocturnal flights.

            Trying to be a good neighbor, I welcomed Joe. “My names Pat Cannon,” I said, and put out my hand. Joe was a frail thing, maybe 5-8 and 140 pounds, with what looked like blonde hair (it was, like my own, mostly fuzz). He held out his limp hand. “I’m Joe. Where are you from?”

            “I’m from Chicago,” I said. “How about you?”

            “I’m from Chicago too…well Maywood.”

            “Maywood? I went to Maywood Park once…to the race track.”

            “Oh, yeah…I’ve never been there. Have you been to Skip’s Drive-in?”

            “No. I’ve just been to the track. Where’s Skips?”

            “It’s not too far from the track. You should go. On Fridays, guys bring their rods

            and customs and park in the lot. You can see a lot of cool cars.”

            “Well, maybe I’ll go there sometime, but I live kind of far away.”

            “You should.”

That was it, except that a couple of weeks later, we had an almost identical conversation, since poor Joe could summon up very little in the way of repartee. He wasn’t much of a soldier either. I certainly wasn’t a budding George Patton myself, but poor Joe was a ringer for Beetle Bailey. He just managed to scrape by, sort of like a D student. Nevertheless, I think he might have graduated, but fate intervened.

            We were probably about two thirds of the way through the eight-week ordeal when we finally got paid. As I recall, recruits earned about 70 bucks a month, enough to perk up morale. There was an immediate exodus to the enlisted men’s club down the hill, where a beer could be had for 25 cents. We even got a chance to visit the nearby metropolis of Columbus, Georgia, where beer was a bit more expensive and rumor had it there were loose women to be found.

            In addition to cheap beer, available cash always meant gambling in the army. Let me pause here for some demographics. In 1961, our world was at peace, but the draft was still in effect. Of the 200 or so recruits in Company B, 2^nd Engineer Battalion, 2^nd Infantry Division (charged with training us), about half were draftees and half enlistees. Draftees would serve two years; for enlistees, the term was three. Draftees tended to be older and better educated; I had finished two years of college and we actually had several college graduates.  Enlistees, who we fondly called “lifers”, were as young as 18. Many were from the South, and some were barely literate. While Joe was from the North, he more or less fit that profile.

            When some of us went into Columbus, Joe got lured into a poker game. The big winner was a draftee from Brooklyn. I can’t remember the exact amount, but let’s say poor Joe lost 50 bucks, or most of his pay. Brooklyn lived at the last bunks in our row. His winnings were in his wallet, locked for the night in his wall locker. The next morning, he discovered that someone had gotten into his locker and removed exactly $50 from his wallet, which contained a good deal more. Apparently, someone had pushed up the bottom of the locker far enough to reach the wallet, remove the money, and then replace the wallet. How this was managed with bunks full of sleeping warriors was a matter of wonder.

            Brooklyn recalled that Joe had seemed stunned at losing the exact amount missing, and went in search of our platoon sergeant, who was a decent guy and decorated veteran of the Korean War. He confronted Joe, who readily admitted taking the money, which, he said “was mine…I was just taking my own money back.”

            This explanation didn’t square with the Uniform Code of Military Justice, so Joe was ordered to pack his belongings. The Military Police (MPs) duly arrived and Joe was driven away, never to be seen again. Perhaps some day he made it back to Skip’s which, alas, is long gone.

            Shortly after, it was discovered that two of the recruits who had gone into town had not returned. The same platoon sergeant commented that they would probably end up going home, where the MPs would be waiting for them. We found out later he was right.

            In the event you think only lowly recruits run afoul of the Army, before basic training was over one of the mess sergeants was arrested for stealing meat, and the assistant platoon sergeant of Company C was busted for showing porn movies at a buck a head. I didn’t see the movies myself, but several reports deemed them barely worth the price of admission.

                                                            #####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

                       

 

People at War

By Patrick F. Cannon

Two books I read recently shed some light on how war affects a wide cross section of the people who live through it – The German War, by Nicholas Stargardt; and Paris at War, by David Drake.

I’ve read widely on the history of World War II, including what led up to it. While the primary focus of many of these books has been political and military, all necessarily pay some attention to the attitudes and experiences of those we might describe as average citizens. The subject books reverse that emphasis.

Stargardt looks at Germany as a whole, while Drake concerns himself mainly with Paris, although not Paris in a vacuum. Although this would change over time, Germany was of course initially the victor and France the defeated, with all that that implies.

With access to the letters and diaries of typical citizens, both books look at the totality of the home front experience, but I’ll focus on the fate of their Jewish citizens. 130,000 German Jews were killed, representing 55% of the pre-Nazi Jewish population. Since there was only a relative handful left in Germany at the end of the war in 1945, what happened to the rest?  The reason is related to the undoubted fact that the majority of Germans supported and indeed participated in the elimination of Jews and other “alien” groups.

From the beginning of his political career in the mid-1920s to his formation of a minority government in 1933, Hitler’s constant refrain was to blame the Jews for everything from Germany’s defeat in 1918, to its economic collapse during the Weimar Republic. He also equated the Jews with Bolshevism; indeed, the pairing became ubiquitous in his rhetoric and that of his henchmen. Ridding the Reich of the alien Jews would help to put real Germans back to work and return Germany to greatness. As a result, German (and Austrian) Jews, who saw the writing on the wall as more and more anti-Jewish measures were enacted, began to leave. Tragically, many who stayed could not convince themselves that the measures would go beyond discrimination to outright murder.

Unless they were directly involved with the extermination – the SS and Gestapo for example – most Germans didn’t directly witness the killing of their German Jewish neighbors. Many, in the army and related organizations, did witness the killing of Polish (2.9 million!) and other Jews. Amazingly, there was little censorship of letters sent by soldiers to their friends and families back home. They were good tourists, too, and actually inserted photos of Jews being killed with their letters. Some expressed regret, not that it was being done, but that is was necessary!

Hitler’s elimination of “undesirables” as a means of purifying the German/Aryan race actually began with the systematic euthanizing of the mentally ill and disabled. Initially, the Roman Catholic and other Christian hierarchies objected, but this faded away as the regime agreed to soften its stance against the established religions. Constant and consistent propaganda extolling the superiority of the German race and inferiority of the Jews and other so-called mongrel races became widely accepted. While individuals like Dietrich Bonhoeffer continued to protest, he and the more vociferous – and there were very few of them – became victims themselves.

While there was some underground resistance, ironically the only plot that came close to succeeding was the attempt by a group of Army officers in July, 1944 to assassinate Hitler. Ironically, it came only after some officers concluded that the war was lost, and they hoped that the elimination of Hitler would help them get better terms from the Americans and British. No such thoughts entered their mind while they were winning. They even harbored the vain hope that an armistice in the west would permit them to concentrate their efforts in holding off the Russians.

As the tide of war turned against the Germans after 1942, daily life for the average German began to deteriorate. In Paris, deterioration began with the German victory in June, 1940. The French, who had enjoyed an often messy democracy since the establishment of the Third Republic in 1870, began to resist the German occupation almost immediately, and the resistance continued to gain momentum until Paris was liberated on August 25, 1944.  Every attack on the German occupiers was met with brutal retaliation, yet the resisters persisted, eventually with the help of the Allies.

Of course, there were collaborators. 90,000 French Jews lost their lives, but this represented only 26% of the prewar population. (The Roman Catholic Hierarchy’s record was little better here than in Germany.) While a handful of German Jews were hidden by friends and survived the war, many more survived in France or managed to escape. Shamefully, those who were deported to the death camps were rounded up by the French police, on the orders of the puppet Vichy government. Many of the police and other collaborators who cast their lot with the Germans would be executed after the war.

And while France did not have a perfect record of resistance, at least they had one. After the war ended, Germans were forced to come face to face with what their government had done in their name and even with their support and approval. They would be forced in the years ahead to attempt to justify to their children and their children’s children what they had done or failed to do. But how do you explain away the deaths of six million of your neighbors?

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

 

 

Stop! That’s Unauthorized! 

By Patrick F. Cannon

The Chicago Tribune, that former bastion of conservative Republicanism, has recently taken yet another step in its crusade to never use a word that might accurately describe a person or action if a softer and less accurate one can be found. Thus, we no longer are plagued by “illegal” immigrants, but by “unauthorized” ones.

Before you make the assumption that I’m anti-immigrant, let me assure you that I’m fully in support of legislation to legalize the status of most of the 11 million or so folks who originally crossed our borders on the sly, or overstayed their visas. I’m particularly concerned that we do not punish young people who were brought here as infants or toddlers.

But I am also concerned that we describe things accurately. Believe me, the desperate person from Central America or Mexico who seeks a way across the border with the United States at a place not controlled by customs agents, knows full well that he or she is committing an illegal act, else they would proudly use a controlled crossing point. There are laws specifying who may legally enter the United States as an immigrant; just as there are laws that say you may not murder your neighbor or steal his goods. We do not (at least yet) say that John Doe is accused of the “unauthorized” killing of John Smith.

As anyone who pays attention to immigration matters knows, there are activists who never use the word “illegal” when talking about immigration, and presumably won’t use “unauthorized” either. To them, borders are a construct of the powerful, meant to subjugate the poor and protect the jobs of the native born bigots.

“A world without borders” is a noble sentiment, but recent events in the European Union and elsewhere, including the United States, have demonstrated that some stringent but rational controls may be necessary. But the actions of the Trump administration (announced after I started this piece) have gone beyond the necessary to the absurd. Apparently the one law they failed to recognize was that classic: the law of unintended consequences. Instead of specifying that visa approvals would be suspended effective at a reasonable date, it apparently didn’t occur to the President and his Svengali Bannon that people with valid visas and green cards might actually be enroute. Or maybe they just didn’t care?

So, my quibbles about whether to use “illegal” or “unauthorized” may be frivolous in the current climate. I find myself wondering if New York Times columnist David Brooks may have been pessimistic when he predicted that President Trump would be impeached within a year. Now, even the Republicans who decided they might be able to work with him are having second thoughts, and would certainly prefer Vice President Pence. I’m sure they’re wondering, as I am, what inevitable future egregious action by President Trump would qualify as impeachable. The suspense is killing me.

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon

 

Dogs, Part Three

By Patrick F.Cannon

This last in the series of articles about my adventures in the canine kingdom will be an ode to the glories of the Poodle. But first, I must make a correction. My daughter Beth – who has a fine and younger brain than mine – reminded me that Poodle Mimi indeed came before German Shepherd Sam. As the venerable New York Times might say: “We regret the error, although our undoubted eminence suggests that we must be forgiven.”

You may recall that poor Mimi was run over and killed by a neighbor. After the unruly Officer Sam donned his Chicago police badge, I learned my lesson and have had only Poodles since. The next was Emma, named after Emma Peel from the television series, The Avengers. Peel was played by the beautiful Diana Rigg, who partnered with the urbane John Steed, played by Patrick McNee, to foil England’s enemies in the 1960s BBC series. Rigg, who is still very much alive, is now Dame Diana and is as coolly elegant as ever.

We bought Emma from a North Shore breeder, who deigned to sell her to us on the understanding that we not show her, since she had a slight overbite. She was a few months old when we brought her back from Lake Forest (or was it Lake Bluff?) in the back of our station wagon. She cowered in the corner of the cargo area, which the children called the “slippery slip.”  When my first wife Mary and I later divorced, Emma stayed with me and lived until she was 18.

Let me pause now to extol the virtues of the noble Poodle. According to many sources, Poodles are the second smartest breed, behind only Border Collies. Now, those wonderful dogs are out in all weathers herding recalcitrant sheep, i.e., actually working. In contrast, the Poodle, bred originally as a water retriever, has – through its good looks and charm – moved from the icy waters of the hunting grounds to the hearth of its owner’s cozy homes. Just which breed is actually smarter, I ask?

Poodles have wool coats rather than fur, so do not shed, nor do they have dander to assault the nasal passages of family and friends. Like sheep, their wool continues to grow, so occasional shearing is required. Unless you can manage to do this yourself without making the poor dog look stupid, it can cost sixty bucks (or more if you live in a tony neighborhood) every four to six weeks to have a professional groomer do it.

In the goofy dog show world (if you haven’t seen the movie Best in Show, you should look it up), Poodles are required to have a hair cut that makes them look absurd. The strange people who run dog shows, aided and abetted by the American Kennel Club, have decreed that Poodles must have a ludicrous cut that they claim was how they were cut in days of yore to protect vulnerable parts of their bodies from cold water.  Can you actually imagine a duck or goose hunter going to all that trouble before heading to the lake or pond?

Now, it may be that King Louis XVI required the royal groomer to do so, but you know what happened to him. If you look carefully, you will see Poodles among the crowd storming the Bastille. And, by the way, in the days when vaudeville and circuses usually had dog acts, those dogs were almost always – you guessed it – Poodles.

Anyway, Emma was a miniature Poodle with few faults. After I married Jeanette, we lived in a condo for a time, so had to take her out for walks. All was fine, except in the rain, when Emma often refused to do her business until one or the other of us was soaked. When we moved to a house, we could just let her out in the back yard, so problem solved. She loved a good tug or war with an old sock and for no apparent reason would occasionally start racing around the house at breakneck speed. Sadly, when she got old she developed cataracts and eventually went blind. That and other ailments led us to eventually have her euthanized.

I can’t speak for Jeanette, but our next Poodle, a standard named Rumpole, was my favorite. He was named after Horace Rumpole, the rumpled hero of a British series called Rumpole of the Bailey. Played by the bulldoggish Leo McKern, he was a barrister married to the forbidding Hilda, whom he called “she who must be obeyed.” Rumpole, who we got as a puppy, was his elegant opposite. Emma had been black, but he was a color called Apricot. He weighed about 55 pounds when full grown, whereas Emma topped out at about 13.

I will mention only two of the many things he did that endeared him to me. I was sitting at the dining room table one day and he came over and simply laid his head in my lap and looked up at me with his big brown eyes. Later, he began to do his best to be a lap dog, but could only manage to get his front half in my lap. There he would stay for quite a while, even though it must have been awkward for him. He was never the healthiest of dogs, and had chronic problems with his back legs. He lived to be 15, good for a standard Poodle, and finally having to let him go was one of the hardest things Jeanette and I have ever had to do.

Although I confess I didn’t realize it then, our current miniature Poodle, Rosie, has gone a long way to taking his place. Their tenure overlapped a bit, because Rosie came to us when my first wife Mary died, leaving behind two dogs, Rosie and a male named Max. Max was older and a bit goofy and went to good friends of Mary’s who knew him well. We agreed to take Rosie. Rumpole was not too pleased with her arrival, but he died soon after.

Rosie, who has an amazingly soft silver coat, will soon be 12 and is quite active. A great athlete, she can catch a Frisbee with the best of them, and will run and fetch toys just as long as you’re willing to throw them. My daughter Beth (both my children have dogs) immortalized her prowess with verse, from which I will quote a few lines:

I play, I play, I run, I run

I run until the day is done

And when the big long day is done

And I have played with everyone

I will curl up in your lap

And take a dozy little nap

Still chasing toys inside my head

I will take me off to bed.

I realize that not everyone likes dogs or any animal for that matter, and that’s fine. For me, however, dogs above all animals have bonded with we imperfect beings, giving us the kind of unwavering love we probably don’t deserve on our merits. They are always happy to see us return, whether from an extended stay in Europe or a trip downstairs to get the mail. They never say “where in the hell have you been” but rather “thank God you’re back!”

#####

Copyright 2017, Patrick F. Cannon