General

Anonymous Domini

Posted in General on September 2nd, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – 7 Comments

I have an Irish sister-in-law; there is one in every Jewish family. She attended a parochial school named for a St. Norbert, but all she apparently learned there was how to smoke. In an ecumenical attempt at conversation, I asked her about the school’s namesake. She had no idea. The nuns never told her.

That seemed a surprising sin of omission. I am the product of Chicago’s public schools; I never had a day of chemistry, but I did learn that my grade school was named for an alcoholic poet, and my high school for an unindicted city politician. Why were the students of St. Norbert spared the life of their saint? Perhaps Norbert had never existed. The early Christian missionaries often were better at marketing than theology. To convert pagans into parishioners, an eager evangelist might grant the local deity a complimentary sainthood. A number of gods made this leap of faith; Ireland’s St. Bridget is the altar ego of the goddess Bridget. What if the heathen Visigoths had a favorite troll named Norbert?

Of course, Norbert also could have been embarrassingly real. The medieval idea of a saint may be the modern definition of a psychopath. Spain particularly encouraged pyromaniacs to enter the clergy. If Norbert were an apostle of the Inquisition, that would be difficult to reconcile with the right-to-life movement. The saint’s anonymity intrigued me. I enjoy history for its gossip, and I expected that Norbert had some to offer. Since I was not prepared to decipher Latin or infiltrate the Jesuits, I confined my research to whatever I could find in my Britannica. It is an older edition, where the subjects are arranged alphabetically rather than by the University of Chicago’s notion of macropedia and micropedia. In Volume 16, mushroom to ozonolysis, Norbert awaited me.

I already had a vicarious knowledge of saints, the sum of college courses, European museums and Hollywood movies. The earliest saints are the most fascinating, if only because Rome went to such creative lengths to accommodate their martyr complexes. Being ripped apart by lions, flayed alive, or sauteed could make anyone interesting. If the Emperors had condemned the Christians only to dodge traffic on the Via Appia, no one would have aspired to so embarrassing a death. The sect might have been remembered as a circumcision-free Judaism.

With the triumph of Christianity, however, there was no one to persecute aspiring saints, so they had to do it to themselves. Medieval annals recount the epics of hermits who were able to subsist for fifty years on their own bile. The Church, though, had outgrown its preoccupation with religion and had discovered its true vocation: management. Even in the Middle Ages, someone was needed to count the silverware on the Round Table. As the sole source of literacy in western Europe, the Church produced the bureaucrats that made Alfred the Great and Char le magne.

One of these indispensable bureaucrats, with their pinstriped habits and button-down cowls, was Norbert. In the late 11th century, a younger son of German nobility had a choice of two vocations: the Church or to wait for his older brother to die. Norbert showed considerable patience. Since the eldest son was required to be a warrior, the first born often was the first dead. Norbert placed his faith in the Crusades and the constant feudal wars, but his brother selfishly survived them. Many German knights did not; however, Norbert lacked the charm or the inclination to marry a rich widow.

In 1115, at the age of 35, Norbert reconciled himself to entering the Church. As an aristocrat, he was spared an apprenticeship of parish work and anointed the medieval equivalent of a management consultant. He inspected monasteries in France and Germany and wrote critical reports on the monks’ lack of discipline. No one would have found a hairshirt in Norbert’s wardrobe, but that was not the point. He was a consultant, not a role model.

As an alternative to piety, Norbert preferred to ingratiate himself with the Pope. The Pope was praised as the true and supreme ruler of Christendom. Norbert also gave the same assurances to the Holy Roman Emperor, the Pope’s worst enemy. The Holy Roman Emperor, who actually was a German king with a pretentious title, had the ethnic tendency to invade other countries, and papal Italy was on his itinerary. His Holiness wished to keep his kingdom in this world as well as the next, so he would choreograph rebellions in Germany. This developed into a monotonous cycle of invasion, excommunication, civil war, and insincere treaties. Christendom could not accommodate both the Pope and the Emperor, but Norbert could. He applied extreme unction as a first impression rather than as a last rite.

Whether he was trusted or tolerated, the very civil servant was rewarded in 1126. Both Rome and the Emperor agreed that Norbert was an innocuous choice to be Archbishop of Magdeburg. Norbert died in 1134, but the Church did not bother to canonize him until 1582. Rome had not belatedly discovered his sanctity; it simply wanted to irritate Magdeburg for becoming Protestant. The Lutherans, though, could not have been as offended as Norbert would have been. As a prudent careerist, he never would have committed himself or his relics to a particular dogma. There were two sides to the Reformation, and Norbert would have been on both of them.

St. Norbert was remarkable. Unscrupulous yet boring, he deserves to be the patron saint of middle management. Today St. Norbert is best remembered for his anonymity; but if you seek his shrine, just go to any corporation and count the number of vice presidents.

p.s.  Let’s not forget the historic significance of this day:  http://finermanworks.com/your_rda_of_irony/2008/09/02/on-this-day-in-1898/

http://finermanworks.com/your_rda_of_irony/2009/09/02/the-regicide-regatta/

Das Korporation

Posted in General on September 1st, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

Coordinator Loyalty Addressable Marketing Communications 
Corporate (Sears, if you must know) 
The Coordinator Loyalty Addressable Marketing Communications reports to the Manager Loyalty Marketing Communications and in partnership with the Addressable Marketing Manager assigned to Loyalty. 

 

 

  

A Day in the Life of a Coordinator Loyalty Addressable Marketing Cordinator

Today, as I planned, was “Bring Your Child To Work Day.”  Of course, I never promised that the children could leave here.  And even if I had, so what!  This really is a wonderful test of the employee’s loyalty to the company.  It was not as if I asked every parent to strangle the child.  (  As for the ten who did, I am recommending the managerial program for the two fastest.) Of course, I fired every employee who objected to their child’s shipment to our plant in Indonesia.  It was not as if we were selling the child to some other corporation; Sears has a sense of loyalty, too. 

p.s.  Let’s not forget the historic significance of this day:   http://finermanworks.com/your_rda_of_irony/2009/09/01/2529/

 

   

 

 

 

Fanny Get Your Gun

Posted in General, On This Day on August 30th, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – 6 Comments

August 30, 1918:  Fanny Kaplan Becomes One of History’s Greatest Footnotes

Fanny Kaplan is not the kind of name with any historical portent.  In my old neighborhood, I might have known six of them, all friends of my grandmother.  None of these elderly yentas would be thought of as Fanny the Great.  So, who is the Fanny Kaplan?   This one killed Vladimir Lenin.   That sounds more erotic than it actually was.  Comrade Kaplan actually shot Lenin.

She was a Socialist Revolutionary, a political party more radical than the Bolsheviks.  It advocated land distribution to the peasants and terrorism.  The Socialist Revolutionaries (let’s be informal and call them the SR) had been in the forefront of resistance to the Tsar–when the Bolsheviks were debating dialectic materialism and playing chess.  Furthermore, the SR were just as defiant of Bolshevik tyranny.  The SR certainly were more popular than Lenin’s gang.  Russia had an election for a constituent assembly in November 25, 1917.  With their agrarian platform in a land where 90 percent of the people were peasants, the SR won more than half the seats in the assembly.  By contrast, the Bolsheviks came in a distant second.  When the Assembly met in January 1918, the Bolsheviks simply disbanded it.  The SR had the votes but the Bolsheviks had the guns.

Actually, the SR had guns, too.  They attempted an uprising in July 1918.  The Bolsheviks crushed it, but the SR still had recourse to political assassination.  On August 30, 1918 in Moscow, Lenin was shot twice by Fanny Kaplan.  One bullet did no worse than hitting his  shoulder, but the other lodged in the neck.  He did not die; by contrast, Kaplan’s execution was an immediate success.

However, the Russians were afraid to remove the bullet in Lenin’s neck.  At first, ignoring the bullet seemed an effective therapy.  Lenin seemed just as effective a tyrant as ever, leading the Reds to victory in a Civil War and initiating an agrarian policy of land distribution which he shamelessly stole from the SRs.  (From their ability, to his needs…)  Nor had Lenin lost his sense of fun; he sometimes ordered a Politiburo meeting to be conducted in English, German or French.  Speaking Russian just wasn’t enough of an intellectual challenge.

But then Lenin began suffering from headaches and insomnia.  He was physically deteriorating; the bullet in his neck clearly was threatening his life.  So Lenin finally agreed to an operation. No doctor in the Soviet Union had the skill or the nerve; a German specialist performed the surgery in April 1922.  The bullet was successfully extracted, and Lenin no longer had headaches and insomnia.  However, there may have been one side effect; he had a stroke in May.  He seemed to recover from it, but then a second stroke in December left him partially paralyzed.  In March 1923, a third stroke left him mute and bedridden.  He died in January 1924.

So, Fanny Kaplan killed Lenin, even if it took five years for him to realize it. 

Comparative Literature

Posted in General on August 29th, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – 5 Comments
      So what books have I been reading lately?  Roman history, American history, Australian history and…for a change of pace…Roman sociology.  From the histories I’ve learned that the young Augustus was a real creep, there was only one way that the British could have lost the Battle of New Orleans–but they found it, and the colonization of Australia was a horror but still better than staying in England. 
    That leaves us with Roman sociology…and today’s topic: updating history by degrading it.  As I opened “A Day in the Life of Ancient Rome”, the author Alberto Angela warned me that if I had any intelligence or self-respect I would be reading “Daily Life in Ancient Rome” instead.  The latter book, by Jerome Carcopino, is regarded as a classic.  I happen to have it, so I was able to compare the two texts. 
   Carcopino was a professor; Angela is a television host.  That might explain the difference in their styles, and their expectations of the reader’s attention span.  Carcopino’s book, written in 1940, is 342 pages and divided into nine chapters.  Angela’s book, fresh from the publisher in 2009, is 380 pages and divided into 55 chapters.  Now, with Angela’s extra 38 pages, what does today’s reader learn?  Apparently, Carcopino was unaware that the Romans had bodily functions or sexual interests; but Angela is eager to fill in the details.
   In discussing ancient Rome, it is hard for Angela to avoid some reference to history; but that doesn’t mean he has to be accurate.  I was particularly impressed when Angela referred to a section of the Roman Forum where the Emperor Marcus Aurelius delivered his famous funeral oration for Julius Caesar.  The oration would have been especially notable since Julius Caesar had died two centuries earlier; but being a Stoic philosopher Aurelius might have been oblivious to punctuality.  The notoriously un-Stoic Marc Antony had also delivered a funeral oration for Caesar, and that actually coincided with Caesar’s funeral.  Is it possible that an Italian would confuse Marcus Aurelius (121-180) with Marc Antony (83–30 B.C.)?  To put it in a Hollywood context, that would be like mistaking Alec Guinness for Richard Burton.
(And yes, you can compare Marcus Aurelius to Obi-Wan Kenobe.  Both were warrior philosophers.  The major difference was that Aurelius left the empire to his idiot son Commodus; at least Obi-Wan was not the father of Jar Jar Binks.)
   By this time, you may have discerned that I prefer Carcopino to Angela.    As a historian, definitely; but as a person, NO.  A year after the publication of his classic, Carcopino was named France’s Minister of Education and Youth.  It would have been quite an honor for the Corsican-born Professor except that particular government is not remembered for any honor.  Carcopino was a Minister in the Vichy government.  Well, Fascist is derived from a Latin word.  In his two years as the Minister of Education and Youth, he initiated one particularly unique policy.
Time Magazine:  September 15, 1941
> Vichy’s Secretary of State for Education Jérôme Carcopino announced the abolition of free high-school education. This measure, in effect ending high-schooling for the French poor, he defended on the ground that the masses of poor children had made classes unwieldy, that the rich had got free schooling at the State’s expense. By way of compensation to the poor, he said that the number of State scholarships would be increased. He also implied that hereafter history-class attention would be concentrated on periods before the freedom-spreading French Revolution.
   So the erudite Professor Carcopino would have enforced stupidity.  The fatuous Angela merely wants to share it.
(After the War, Carcopino talked his way out of any punishment and enjoyed some semblance of respectability until his death in 1970.)

Hi, I’m Eugene And I Have This Special Offer….

Posted in General on August 27th, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – 2 Comments

There are some real advantages to subscribing to The New York Times

I subscribe to exclusive benefits
Dear Home Delivery Subscriber,As a subscriber, you have access to more than just the delivery of the newspaper. Your subscription includes FREE benefits :

  1. The exclusive right to use the words post-modernist, louche, bildungsroman and Proustian in a single sentence.
  2. Free brunch at any home in the Hamptons.  Just show up with a copy of the Sunday Styles and demand the meal.
  3. Refer to Pulitzer-winning dramatists by their first name. (In the case of Mr. O’Neill, Gene may be pushing it.)
  4. Receive a complimentary tote bag or sweatshirt, emblazoned with our proud crest:  Of course, I’m insufferable.  I read The New York Times.

p.s.  You barbarians, let’s not forget the historic significance of this day:  http://finermanworks.com/your_rda_of_irony/2009/08/27/when-in-rome-2/

Mehlman’s Complaint

Posted in General on August 26th, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

Former Republican chairman says he’s gay

WASHINGTON — Former Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman says in a magazine interview that he is gay.

Mehlman, who was campaign manager for President George W. Bush in 2004 and then RNC chairman after Bush’s re-election, told The Atlantic in an interview published online Wednesday that he came to the conclusion he is gay recently.

That really is an over-reaction to Jewish women.  I realize that Mehlman has limited himself to Republican Jewish women, but that still is no reason to despair or defect.  Let’s see.  There is Dr. Laura Schlessinger….and Joan Rivers.  Ayn Rand, too, although at this stage she may be a bit musty.  You know, Ben Stein has a sister…well, you can hope that she was adopted from an orphanage next to a SAS stewardess school.  And if Britney Spears is serious about the Kabala, that makes her semi-Semitic….

All right, homosexuality seems a logical choice.  Welcome to the Log Cabin Republicans and let’s hope you find a circumcised log.

p.s.  This was a busy day in history.  Take your choice:

http://finermanworks.com/your_rda_of_irony/2008/08/26/questionable-birth-announcements/

http://finermanworks.com/your_rda_of_irony/2009/08/26/von-clueless-on-war/

Sean the Terrific, Ivan the Terrible and Marie the Osmond

Posted in General on August 25th, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – 3 Comments

Let’s deal with the really important news today:

Happy Birthday Sean Connery!

He is 80–and still looks better than any man in a Judd Apatoff movie. (Yes, that isn’t saying much–and it is probably Anti-Semitic.)

Our class assignment: Name your favorite Sean Connery movies.

My favorite film that is actually good: “The Man Who Would Be King”
My favorite film that is rather embarrassing camp: “The Wind and The Lion”
My favorite James Bond movie: “From Russia With Love”

Now, it is your turn….

And we now resume our usual irrelevance:

 

Chilean miners told to keep slim to squeeze out

AP
Relatives of 33 trapped miners wait for news outside the collapsed mine

Dr. Jaime Manalich said rescuers are applying a holistic plan to support the miners’ well-being during the months it may take to carve out the tunnel, including exercise and other activities to keep them from gaining weight.

Representatives of the Ruthless Gringo & Insatiable Mandarin Mine Consortium assured the public that they never intended to feed the miners.  “If they can’t buy food from our company store, they are not getting it anywhere.”  However, representatives from Jenny Craig have purchased product placement rights; the first miner to emerge from the cave-in will be rewarded by corporate spokesmannequin Marie Osmond with a dietetic brownie.

p.s.  Let’s not forget the historic significance of this day:  http://finermanworks.com/your_rda_of_irony/2009/08/25/caviar-preemptor-2/

Nostradamus Nostalgia

Posted in General on August 24th, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

I won’t claim prophetic powers but a satirist should recognize a farce.  So I knew Rod Blagojevich was a joke before he became a national punchline.  Here is what I wrote two years ago, really.

While Flossing My Teeth With My Unibrow

The New York Times has a preconception of me. Forsakened in the Midwestern wilderness, I am presumed to be unibrowed, toothless and married to a first cousin. My Masters’ degree–being only from Northwestern–must be in manual labor. Yes, I do vote Democratic–as the Times would wish–but it is only because my unibrowed, toothless alderman promised me a garbage can lid, which I would use as a plate and an umbrella.

So imagine the shock to my drooling neanderthal sensibilities to read the Times article on the dynamic, presidential, charismatic Rod Blagojevich. (Apparently, Senator Obama does not have a monopoly on those adjectives.) That glowing description of Illinois’ governor is all the surprising because I don’t know anyone who likes him. Blagojevich is sleazy, corrupt, incompetent and abrasive. The governor has practically institutionalized bribery. His Republican predecessor went to prison for corruption–and he was more subtle. Blagojevich even has a bad haircut; a page boy does not suit his fifty-year old head. The man is a Democrat but I would gladly vote against him.

Unfortunately, the Republican party of Illinois cannot decide whether it is dead or just surreal. Its last senatorial candidate was Alan Keyes, who lives in Maryland. (Yes, but he was a documented migrant worker.) The party’s senior statesman is the Presbyterian Ru Paul; who knew that kilts came in hot pink! Against the execrable Blagojevich, the G.O.P. slated a lady who looked like she owned 18 cats and never seemed quite sober. The National G.O.P. has simply written off Illinois, at least until the Second Coming and Lincoln’s resurrection (although Lincoln now would be a Democrat.) In other words, we are stuck with Blagojevich–at least until he decides to run for President.

So what does the New York Times see in him that evidently escaped the notice of everyone in Illinois? He is not “IVY” and he did not name his children for his favorite characters from Proust. Perhaps incompetence, corruption and outlandish hair are post-modernist irony. I have long suspected the Times despises the “people:” Government of the vulgar, by the vulgar and for the vulgar. Now it is no longer a suspicion.

p.s.  Catherine de Medici wouldn’t want you to forget the historic significance of this day, and you wouldn’t want to disappoint her….
http://finermanworks.com/your_rda_of_irony/2009/08/24/the-best-laid-plans-of-mice-and-queen-mothers/

Your RDA of Doggerel

Posted in General on August 23rd, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

I came across this entertaining verse on English history, written in the 19th century, distinguishing the first four King Georges.

George the First was always reckoned
Vile, but viler George the Second;
And what mortal ever heard
Any good of George the Third?
When from earth the Fourth descended
God be praised, the Georges ended.

–Walter Savage Landor

It is good doggerel but poor history.  Let’s see if I can do better.

I’ll answer with candor
The errs of Walt Landor…
George First was the worst, unspeakably vile.
So reckon the Second inversely mild.
The Third, be assured, a well-meaning churl.
His diligent efforts lost the New World.
The Fourth, I discourse, was shamelessly bad:
A gluttonous wastrel, bigamist cad.
(The year of his death, 1864,
Kept Landor from rhyming for two Georges more)

The Fifth was a stiff, a true head of staid,
But fought cousin Wilhelm’s attempt to invade.
The Sixth stood affixed and showed majesty
In “their finest hour” of Brit’ history.

p.s.  Let’s not forget the historic significance of this day:  http://finermanworks.com/your_rda_of_irony/2009/08/23/history-rumors-and-hollywood/

Money Talks but needs elocution lessons

Posted in General on August 21st, 2010 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

Elon Lindenstrauss, Ngo Bao Chua, Stanislav Smirnov and Cedric Villani are awarded the Fields Medal for their work in mathematics.

 Fields Medals are awarded every four years to mathematicians no older than 40, and two to four mathematicians can receive them each time they are presented. Canadian mathematician John Charles Fields created the medals, which were first awarded in 1936. Along with a gold medallion inscribed with the winner’s name, the awards bring a cash prize of about $13,300.

The prize winning topic was “Mathematics doesn’t pay.”  In his research, Israeli Elon Lindenstrauss showed how he could earn more working part-time at H&R Block.  Vietnamese Professor Ngo also proved that the cash was barely equivalent to what he makes at the Hewlett Packard Call Center; Ngo further noted that “the math wasn’t as much fun as deliberately misinforming Americans”.  Frenchman Villiani postulated that only accurate mathematics does not pay; in his research as a headwaiter at a three-star Michellin restaurant, he demonstrated how you can make a three look like a nine on a check. 

As both a Russian and a mathematician, Smirnov proved that money is a foreign concept.  Smirnov also offered the most interesting response when asked how he would spend his prize money.  “I will give the money to the first person who threatens to kill me.”   Being civic-minded, he hoped that it would be a Russian policeman rather than some other criminal.

p.s.  Let’s not forget the historic significance of this day:

 

If Only Lincoln and Douglas Debated Today

On this day in 1858, Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas held the first of seven debates in their campaign for the U.S. Senate. Each debate lasted three hours and addressed only one question. Somehow the two men carried on without an interrogating panel of reporters or pundits. It evidently was a more primitive time. Here is how a modern debate would have been….

Reporter: Mr. Lincoln, you are quoted as saying that “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” What is the basis of your harsh criticism of the American construction industry?

Lincoln: You misunderstand me. It is a quotation from the Bible which I used as metaphor reflecting the divisive issue of slavery.

Douglas: I refuse to believe that the Bible is critical of the American construction industry. May God forgive you, Mr. Lincoln!

Pundit: Mr. Douglas, you were known to have courted Mary Todd before she married Mr. Lincoln. Do you believe that she is too promiscuous to be a senator’s wife?

Douglas: Let me assure the public that I will never be the first to exhibit daguerreotypes of the naked Mrs. Lincoln for political purposes. And I invite Mr. Lincoln to make the same pledge.

Lincoln: What?

Commentator: Mr. Lincoln, during your one term in Congress, you opposed the Mexican War. Do you hate our soldiers or do you just prefer Mexicans?

Lincoln: I oppose unnecessary wars.

Douglas: While I would not question the patriotism of my craven, timorous opponent, I have always been a full-throated supporter of victory–and I am adamantly opposed to defeat.

Psychologist: Mr. Douglas, you are a proponent of popular sovereignty. Yet, being an embarrassingly short man with a pompous personality, you certainly are not as popular as the affable Mr. Lincoln. What in your miserable childhood led you into politics?

Douglas: My dedication to public service and the opportunity for revenge.

Lincoln: Do you really have naked daguerreotypes of my wife?