Susie and I returned to Carolina Meadows yesterday evening at about 9 PM, which of course is 3 AM Paris time, so I am still rather exhausted. There are some things I want to say about the experience, about the hearings of the January 6 committee, some of which I managed to see, and also aboutn the different perspective on world events that one gets watching Aljazeera English, but I will just begin today with an account of the extraordinary experience we had yesterday morning taking the plane from Paris to JFK.
For the first time in the 18 years that we have been going
to Paris, we made the decision to stay at a hotel at the airport on Friday
evening so that there was no problem catching a cab to the airport the next
morning. We got up early yesterday morning, had breakfast at the hotel, and took the hotel van
to the airport, getting to Charles de Gaulle terminal 2A at just about 9 AM.
Our flight was scheduled to leave at 12:15 PM. No problem, right?
Alas, wrong. At Charles de Gaulle the service that provides
wheelchairs for passengers is contracted out to a firm not run by the airport. The American Airlines employees at the
check-in counter were very helpful, took us both to the front of the line, and
checked us in quite promptly. Because of my Parkinson’s, even though I had
taken my three wheel roller with me, I requested a wheelchair for myself as
well as for Susie. In each terminal there is a special area where wheelchair
passengers wait until someone comes to take them through immigration, security,
and to the gate.
The little area was jammed with people traveling, so far as
I could tell, to all corners of the
world. I waited politely, then began asking when we would be taken, was put off in the characteristic French manner, and finally began to yell and pound the
desk and demand action in English and French. At long last, I think probably
because I was making so much trouble, the person running the little space
produced two employees to take us to the plane.
Having arrived at the airport at 9 AM, we made it to the
gate at 12:15 PM, where, despite the fact that the gate had been closed some 15
minutes earlier, they were holding the plane for us! Our seats were in the very
last row of the plane totally packed with passengers so as everyone sat there
in their luxury business class quasi – beds or their upscale tourist class+
seats or their 10 across regular tourist class seats, we stumbled down the aisle
to the very last row and fell into our seats.
Not one of my best moments.
39 comments:
Quite a story. But the main thing is that you made it.
Pounding the table and yelling in two languages seems like a pretty good moment to me. One of my favorite Eugene Pallette moments is in The Lady Eve when he demands his breakfast by pounding the table and clashing the trays like cymbals.
You'll always have the Paris airport.
Interesting strategy.
I would have tipped whoever looked likely to solve the problem with a 50 dollar bill. If they hesistated, I'd try 100.
Passion rules.
Well, I just learned something -- namely, who Eugene Pallette was.
And w/ that, shutting off computer for the evening.
Yeah, I missed you Professor. Am happy you are back as well.
My experience is that east to west = less jet lag. Hope it's so for you.
LFC--Here's a description and stills of the scene with Eugene Pallette, which begins with his immortal singing of 'Tonight we'll merry merry be' (some of my friends, my wife, and I have sung this about once a month for the past 120 or so months; I came to the movie in the early 1980s from Stanley Cavell's account of it in his book on the so-called Hollywood re-marriage comedies): https://aurorasginjoint.com/2015/11/23/the-rotund-and-gravel-voiced-ol-reliable-eugene-pallette/
Welcome home, Prof. Wolff. Yes, you were missed, in part because you were not available to mediate some heated exchanges between me, and LFC, s. wallerstein, and Prof. Zimmerman on the subject of whether or not there are such things as objective moral precepts.
Below is a clip from the movie “The Lady Eve.,” with Eugene Pallette playing Henry Fonda’s father. It is not the clip that John Rapko referred to, but it highlights the talents of Mr. Pallette, Hanry Fonda, and, above all, Barbara Stanwyck, who plays a conwoman who cons Henry Fonda. It was one of Barbara Stanwyck’s outstanding roles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZhLiJowzNY
According to Justice Sotomayor, she and J. Thomas share a “common understanding about people and kindness.”
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/16/politics/sonia-sotomayor-supreme-court-clarence-thomas/
You would hardly know if from his written opinions.
John R. (and also Marc S.)
Thanks for the Eugene Pallette links. Will check them out.
Here’s a series of hilarious clips from the movie “The Lady Eve.”
This was when they could make movies about romance using great dialogue, and no nudity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ7X5JDKmSI&list=PLZbXA4lyCtqoJDKWAodTT-5A-woNK9l10
“when you could make movies about romance using great dialogue and no nudity”
Otherwise known as the Dark Ages.
I must admit I did miss you Professor Wolff. I checked every day to see if you were back. I find it amazing that given your experience at the airport that you were able to make an entry on your blog. If that were me, at seventy four years of age, I would be in recovery for the next three months before I could respond, " I am back!" Welcome home!
John R.
I read that post on Pallette -- interesting. Not to be "woke" or anything, but I was struck by the fact that the post's author referred to 'The Birth of a Nation' as a masterpiece without mentioning, even parenthetically, its notorious racism and pro-Ku Klux Klan sympathies. (But that's a side point.)
LFC,
Birth of a Nation came out over a 100 years ago. Maybe there's a statute of limitations on political correctness.
Dostoyevsky's novels are full of anti-semitic comments, but if I were to write an article on Dostoyevsky, I wouldn't even bother to mention that nor would I mention Dicken's antisemitism in the character of Fagan in Oliver Twist if I were to write about him either.
LFC, I'm not sure it's necessary to include denunciations when the mention is without additional commentary on either of those films. Also, according to IMDb, the subject of the article only had an uncredited bit role, so dwelling on the film itself would have been a pointless digression.
LFC, By the sheerest coincidence, this morning I've been re-reading Karen Hermassi's magnificent Polity and Theatre in Historical Perspective (1977), and just read the following on European realist drama in the late 19th-early 20th century (p. 157): "A theatre experience that had once historically constituted a collective memory would now reinforce, by dramatic convention, private forgetfulness. Once again, and this time decisively, the theatre finds its natural rival outside the dramatic arts: in 1910 D. W. Griffith releases his film "The Birth of a Nation" and permits the uninvolved spectator to experience a complete divorce from living actors. Only Brecht, in the early 1920s, seems to have perceived that the very existence of theatre depended entirely on reconstituting the audience by breaking down the fourth-wall convention (retained even by Shaw)" etc. One might think with s. wallerstein that one needn't recite familiar sins of our ancestors on every occasion their works are mentioned.--Back when I was wasting my own and others' time in teaching, I ran into this issue repeatedly in discussing Picasso, already starting in the late 1990s. Students became increasingly restive when I droned on for dozens of minutes about 'Les Demoiselles d'Avignon' or his 'Femmes d'Alger' series without honking even once about his misogyny. By around 2010 it became impossible for me to talk about Picasso in a graduate seminar, as the students would gasp in protest that I didn't start the lecture by shaking my fist in fury at the old horndog. I find these automatic and context-indifferent denunciations to be a particularly repellent kind of self-congratulatory moralizing.
I glance at The Guardian every day to see what I supposed to say and think this week and I notice that The Guardian which gives extensive coverage to what and who is politically correct at the moment also covers in depth new styles in clothes, in furniture, which kind of food is trendy, which tourist destinations are "in", etc.
It all seems part of a fast moving market which has gotten hip to the fact there's money to be made in wokeness and in-ness. So throw out your Phillip Roth novels and Woody Allen DVDs and buy whoever you're supposed to buy.
Ok, I'm also not a fan of automatic denunciations.
With the caveat that I have no pretensions to being any kind of cultural historian, I do think it worth noting that Birth of a Nation has, or such is my impression, a somewhat significant place in U.S. history. For one thing, Woodrow Wilson screened it in the White House. For another thing, it did much to reinforce and help propagate the Lost Cause (i.e. Confederate) view of Reconstruction etc. (That said, I've only seen clips of it.)
s.w.'s ref to Dickens e.g. is less than apt. Anti-semitism is not central to Dickens's work. Lost Cause-ism, or so I gather, is quite central to Birth of a Nation. But I'm not saying that post shd have denounced it.
s.w.
There have always been fashion trends, and politics is probably often or sometimes connected w them.
Sometimes, too, these things can benefit from being disentangled. I'll leave it there for now.
s. wallerstein, aaall,
I am going to come to LFC’s defense on this issue, especially given that today is Juneteenth day in the U.S.
The portrayal of the Ku Klux Klan in Birth of A Nation reinforced anti-Black prejudices in the South, where it was shown in theaters throughout the former Confederacy. That reinforcement resulted in the passage of Jim Crow laws which institutionalized discrimination laws throughout the South, and was also used to justify lynchings. In evaluating and discussing cinematic and literary works of art, I believe, along with LFC, to recognize and acknowledge both the artistic merits of a work, as well as its less than admirable characteristics which fortify harmful stereotypes which have had, and continue to have, harmful consequences for those stigmatized by the stereotype. So, I see noting wrong with praising Dostoyevsky and Dickens for their literary achievements in plot structure, characterizations of the persona dramatae, dialogue, word choices, etc., at the same time pointing out the less than admirable aspects of his works which contributed to the fortification and continuation of anti-Semitism in both Russia and Great Britain, attitudes which had devastating consequences for Russian Jews during WWII.
On a separate note, I wish to bring to the attention of this blog’s readers that the various PBS stations around the country will be broadcasting the documentary “Who Killed Vincent Chin,” about the murder of an Chinese American 40 years ago, because two laid off auto workers mistook him for being Japanese. The two assailants were given probation. The event had a dramatic effect on my life, because I was intimately involved in the legal efforts to have the sentence overturned, and having the assailants tried in federal court for violating Vincent Chin’s civil rights. Over the past weekend, there were several commemorative events held in Detroit, several of which I attended. They brought back horrible memories of what transpired and my profound disappointment at how the legal system failed. I urge you to watch the film, if you are able. The showing times may vary from station to station, but in the Detroit area it is being shown at 8 P.M.
Birth of a Nation was shown around the South on impromptu bed sheet screens and was a major recruiting tool for the Klan. Any actual treatment of the film needs to note its role in the resurgence of the Klan.
BTW, 75 years ago today Harry Truman vetoed Taft-Hartley. Sadly the Congress overrode his veto. 1947 was the inflection point that gets us to now.
I studied literature in the 60's and no one ever commented on the authors' political views or prejudices found in the texts. I liked that system better, but to each his or her own.
I'll continue not to moralize art, be it Wagner's music or Picasso's paintings or Pound's poetry. However, those who want to, good for them.
Last time I pounded the table and demanded service was when the Salvation Army put my refugees-from-an-apartment-fire family up in a Chicago (Hyde Park) hotel. Since we looked very bedraggled the restaurant manager tried to deny us service. The police who were summoned led me to a back room and explained that it was against city law to bang a table and shout in a restaurant. But they let me off with a warning.
Meantime, no doubt prompted by the fact that my six-year-old daughter thought I was being taken away to be executed, my wife stood up and made an impassioned speech to the people in the restaurant concerning our plight and our treatment by the manager.
When I got back to our table, I learned that far from being angry with us the other diners had spontaneously contributed quite a bit of money to help us out in our predicament.
Still, banging a table/counter and shouting isn’t something I’d recommend.
But I do especially feel for the awfulness of getting onto a crowded plane when one is agitated and no longer agile. My partner and I have encountered that very delayed wheelchair situation on several occasions. It makes the whole experience such a misery. I hope you’ve fully recovered from the ordeal.
Welcome back dear Professor,
I am picturing the airport scene right now. Yes, the romance that one could develop at an airport in the past is gone. Now it has given way to the monstrous mass processing of human bodies. Sometimes it can only be compared to a herd of cows being counted.
The situation at the airports has been a topic in the media here for days. The chaos is justified because very many service employees have lost their jobs during the Corona crisis and now do not want to come back. Poor pay, poor working hours, poor working conditions.
I hope you recover well from the stress of the trip
I missed you. Welcome back!
I admit that I've never seen Birth of a Nation, but I have seen Triumph of the Will.
I found Triumph of the Will generally fascinating, well done and at times beautiful.
Did it convert me into a raving Nazi? No.
Did I need a moral pep talk before the film to make me realize the horrors of Nazism? No.
Could the film convert an unbalanced teenage kid into a Nazi? It's possible, yes.
Would a moral pep talk before or after the film make that kid realize the horrors of Nazism? Very unlikely. Moral pep talks almost always turn off unbalanced teenagers likely to become Nazis or racists.
What can keep kids likely to become Nazis or racists from becoming so? I'd say good psychotherapy and proper medication more than moral pep talks or sermons about the evils of Nazism and racism.
s. wallerstein,
Your comment is off base. The issue was whether in evaluating the merits of a work of art, is it appropriate at the same time that a critic notes the work’s artistic achievements in creativity, execution, social value, etc., to note whether the work also incorporates certain aspects which fortify harmful stereotypes about individuals, which in so doing can provoke hostile acts towards such individuals. I, and LFC, maintain that this is an appropriate form of artistic analysis. It is not meant as a “moral pep” talk. It is intended to be instructive about the merits and demerits of a particular work of art. There is nothing wrong or moralistic about that, irrespective of whether it prevents some teen-ager from becoming a neo-Nazi.
I actually may have a position somewhere in between Marc S. and s.w. That is, I think there are plenty of times when there is no reason to make a comment on a work's unpalatable aspects.
It strikes me though that Birth of a Nation is probably an extreme case. Even so, that doesn't nec mean that *every* time the film is mentioned it has to be accompanied by an asterisk re the racism. But if one wants to put in the asterisk, I wd generally not object.
If I were a parent of, say, a 14 yr old about to watch Birth of a Nation and who didn't already know the historical context and implications, I would definitely explain it. Ditto for Triumph of the Will (which I've only seen a couple of stills of). That wd not be what s.w. calls a moral pep talk but rather nec. context for seeing the films, in my view.
LFC,
As I say above, I've never Birth of the Nation, so it may have some subtle subliminal mechanism for corrupting young minds that I'm not aware of.
However, as for Triumph of the Will, it is so obviously (well-made) Nazi propaganda that any normally intelligent 14 year old or 12 year old can see that in the first three minutes. Probably a 10 year old wouldn't be much interested in it.
s.w.
I think you are overestimating the ordinary American 12 yr old's knowledge of 20th cent European history, but whatever.
Anyway I have to leave it there for now.
P.s. This is not about preventing corruption of young minds. It's about giving young minds some of the tools they need to more fully appreciate and understand what they're reading or seeing. (The New Criticism so-called thought that context was superfluous; just look at the text. I tend to disagree w that.)
LFC,
You're probably right that I overestimate the ordinary 12 year's old knowledge of European history, although since you speak of being a parent above, I would bet that any 12 year old child of yours would have sufficient historical knowledge to get advanced placement in an Ivy League school.
Anyway, the average 12 year old wouldn't get past the first three minutes of Triumph of the Will because it's in black and white and is very very slow by today's standards: as I recall, the first few minutes focus on the ecstatic crowd as Hitler's plane circles above, nothing else.
I believe that we can agree (and Marc too) that the real danger today for young people are not slow-moving classics in black and white, but rather thousands of subtle messages received in social media about thousands of bad causes and products, all delivered in color, with "in" music and with a rhythm which suits the short attention span of young people today.
Agree on the last point, yes.
As I made clear, I'm not a parent. If I were, I have no idea frankly what my (hypothetical) children would be like. It's nice to think they would be star tennis players and super smart, but 1) who knows?, 2) I'll never find out, and 3) that's fine with me.
To s. wallerstein’s point about the attention spans of young adults today, and the effects of social media in influence them in unhealthy, anti-social behaviors, I am currently representing another attorney in a case which is currently pending in the Supreme Court on a petition for certiorari. The case involves a Nike advertisement promulgated on the internet and on cable called “The Last Game.” You can watch it if you Google “Nike, The Last Game, You Tube, Full Edition.” It is an animated film that depicts a rivalry between a once successful soccer team which is being beaten by a team referred to as the “clones.” The animation was created by an avowed neo-Nazi and is permeated with anti-Semitic, pro-Christian symbols, some which of are visible, many of which are subliminal, and which would take a trained eye to pick up watching the animation frame by frame. The lawsuit is supported by a psychologist whose expertise is in subliminal messaging and the effect subliminal messages in videos and advertisements have on the subconscious. We are claiming that the advertisement violates a Michigan statute related to consumer protection. Internet advertisements are not protected by the 1st Amendment. The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of the lawsuit, not on 1st Amendment grounds, but on statutory interpretation grounds. It is a very difficult case, but my client is very determined to see it through to the end.
The above Anonymous comment was by me.
The reference to a Michigan statute was the tell, Marc...You are the only esteemed Michigan attorney on this blog.
Cheers,
David Z
David,
Good to hear from you. And thank you for the compliment.
Did you view the Nike ad? Any thoughts? (No need to agree with my client's interpretation; a lot of the symbols are subliminal, although one is repeated several times during the video.)
Post a Comment