FinermanWorks

The French are connoisseurs of scandal. How would Americans react to topless photos of Laura Bush? Mais les Francaises give an appreciative smile to the display of their First Lady and note that it is a French tradition. The Louvre has a gallery’s worth of bare-chested French queens. There is even a porcelain bust of Marie Antoinette’s bust; the guillotine was merely her second venture into the topless.

Nevertheless, the executives of Lancome Cosmetics could have wished a more discreet time to introduce their new perfume “Magnifique.” According to the hyperventilating advertisement:

“It’s the fragrance that celebrates her vibrant feminity, her joie de vivre. Infused with the spicy impertinence of saffron, the warmth of roses and smoky embrace of nagarmota wood. Audacious. Passionate. Utterly Magnifique.”

On second thought, Lancome should have named the perfume “L’Embezzelle.” That is the scent emanating actress Anne Hathaway, Lancome’s symbol of its new product, and the girlfriend of convicted embezzler Raffaello Follieri.

Follieri claimed to be the chief financial officer of the Vatican, coaxing millions from the easily impressed. Perhaps he was offering time-shares for the Sistine Chapel. The self-proclaimed financier collected millions as well as the affection of the Hollywood starlet. She moved into his $37,000 a month New York apartment. Unfortunately for his investors, he was not robbing St. Peter to pay Paul. Follieri has admitted to 14 counts of fraud, conspiracy and money-laundering. He faces a prison sentence of 4 to 5 years; it is unlikely that Ms. Hathaway will volunteer to share his cell.

The actress has suffered the indignity of this bad publicity, but she denies any knowledge of Follieri’s chicanery. In law, this is referred to as the “stupid slut defense”. Ms. Hathaway is reported to be cooperating with the FBI–does she have a choice–and has turned over all of the jewelry that Mr. Follieri gave her. And, yes, she has also broken up with him.

Nonetheless, I feel that Lancome might have created a more appropriate ad for Ms. Hathaway:

“It celebrates your infinite gullibility and your irrepressible vacuity. The tropic allure of an off-shore bank, the oaken splendor of a juryroom, and the tantalizing bouquet of a plea bargain. It is all your senses but common. Shamelessly yours! L’Embezzelle!”

It is unlikely that many of the English archers or their Scottish pin cushions at Flodden would have identified their battle as part of a war that begin in Italy. Yet, five years earlier–in 1508, Pope Julius II attempted to organize an alliance against Venice. France, Spain, the Holy Roman Empire and the Papal States were arrayed against the Venetian Republic. Venice discovered the disadvantage of being small and rich. Of course, all those riches did allow the Republic to field armies of mercenaries; so at least Venice was not completely defenseless. Nonetheless, the coalition was overwhelming–and Venice was losing ground–especially to France.

Now, the French wanted to keep all that they had won. They were not good at sharing, and considering that they were guests in Italy, the Pope was especially offended. So Julius decided in 1510 to switch sides and ally the Papal States with Venice. It took Spain and the Holy Roman Empire about a year to figure out which side that they were on, but they eventually joined the war against France. Of course, England never had any doubts–it was just Anti-French and young Henry VIII wanted to play soldier. So if England was on one side, then Scotland had to be on the other. And that led to Flodden…

The Italian alliances, however, lacked that kind of clarity. More of a soldier than a theologian, Pope Julius was able to maintain the Anti-French alliance despite the conflicting interests of the theoretical allies. (The Hapsburgs proved just as bad guests as the French). Unfortunately, in 1513 Julius was 69–and he acted his age. His successor Leo X was no soldier or diplomat (but he would have made a good host for an art series on PBS); he did not like the Hapsburgs but was too lethargic and maladroit to curb their expansion. A frustrated and endangered Venice had no alternative but irony; in 1513 it switched sides and allied with France.

(So, here is a summary of the alliances: first, everyone against Venice; then, everyone against France; finally, France and Venice against everyone else.)

Surprisingly, that last combination actually worked. The Hapsburgs were driven back–at least for a few years–and Northern Italy was left in the hands of the French and the Venetians. The Pope did not care; as it turned out, he was Pro-French, too. Besides, his Holiness apparently was preoccupied in organizing an alliance of Northern Europe against the Church; if so, that worked too.

James IV of Scotland created a job vacancy for James V. The battle of Flodden was a real boon to Scottish probate lawyers and undertakers. Of course, James IV had not planned on wiping out half of the Scottish nobility, along with 12,000 less socially prominent men. His last emotion would have been genuine surprise. He had invaded England, with 30,000 men, under the impression that the English were defenseless. His brother-in-law Henry VIII had taken England’s best men-at-arms to invade France. All England had left was its home guard led by the elderly Earl of Surrey.

So the carefree James took a leisurely approach to his invasion, rambling around the Northern shires, besieging a castle here and there. The Earl of Surrey was 70, but he proved very spry, amassing and organizing an army to meet the Scots. True, Surrey’s forces were the B-team of English long bowmen, which meant they were only the second best archers in the world.

When confronted by this English force at Flodden, James arrayed his army on the high ground to resist any cavalry attack. This would have been an excellent defense if he had been fighting the French. However, the English never squandered their knights on pointless frontal assaults. Their horsemen were used for flanking manuevers, cutting off retreats–tactics that actually were intelligent. So the Scottish troops stood their high ground and got to play “catch the arrow.”

Aside from their aerial vulnerability, the Scots’ defensive position was precarious. On the positive side, hey could only be attacked in one direction; however, they also could only retreat in one direction. Unfortunately, it was the same direction–where the English army was. So the Scots charged, and they did not do well. Now was the time for the English cavalry to outflank and cut off retreat. The battle became a trap and the trap became a slaughter. The Scots lost at least 12,000 men; the English at most 1,500.

For his victory, the Earl of Surrey was granted the title of Duke of Norfolk. In fact, he had been the Duke of Norfolk for a few minutes in 1485. His father had died at Bosworth Field–on the wrong side. The Earl did not have any time to exercise his inherited title. He had been on the wrong side, too; the captured Earl was brought before the victorious Henry VII–and given the chance to talk his way out of execution. The Earl said he loyally served whoever wore the English crown; since Henry now was king, Surrey would serve him too. Henry liked that answer; he dispossessed Surrey of his dukedom but let him live and prove his loyalty.

In 1513, his probation period ended with the victory at Flodden. Thomas Howard once again became the Duke of Norfolk, a title that the Howards still hold.

As for the Stuarts, they kept getting killed by the Tudors–James V and Mary–but still managed to outlast them.

I just saw a sweeping spectacle of 19th century thieves, buffoons and sociopaths. No, I am not referring to the Republican Convention but to the French masterpiece “Les Enfants du Paradise.” The title, “The Children of Paradise”, refers to actors. They certainly are not to be confused with angels: they are a gallery of libidinous rogues who are shamelessly at ease with both aristocrats and criminals (and those castes may be synonymous too). But while the actors are on the stage, they give their audiences a sense of the ideal.

To summarize the plot: four men are in love with the same woman. To the woman’s credit, she never loves more than two at a time. And she does have a remarkably diverse appeal: the aesthetic mime, the garrulous actor, the sociopathic criminal and the overbearing aristocrat. Imagine if one woman was having simultaneous affairs with Johnny Depp, Jack Black, Dick Cheney and Mitt Romney. (In the French version, the Cheney type is more likable than the Romney alternative.) Yes, from that description, the film seems absurd; while you are watching it, however, you will be charmed, moved and fascinated. And you will remember it.

The history of the film is also remarkable. Produced in two parts, 90 minutes each, “Les Enfants du Paradise” took three years to make, and those years were 1943 to 1945. So the film began production during the German Occupation, under the auspices of the Vichy Regime; and it finished after the Liberation. The War and its politics were mirrored in the film. Some members of the cast were collaborators while members of the production were part of the Resistance. The female lead, Arletty, was of an accommodating nature. As she said after the War, “My heart is French, but my ass is international.” In contrast, the set designer literally had to stay behind the scenes; otherwise, Alexandre Trauner could have been relocated to an unspecified location in Poland. Joseph Kozma, the composer of the film’s score, also found it healthier to work at varying locations in the South of France.

Despite the Vichy supervision, the film’s script does have liberal traits. Although the story is set in the 1830s, the sociopathic criminal seems to have a prophetic familiarity with the yet unborn Nietzsche. Now, what kultur at the time loved to quote Nietzsche–although completely out of context? You’d think that the Vichy censors would have noticed and removed the fingernails from the scriptwriter. However, this was 1943 and 1944. The Vichy officials certainly had heard the rumors from the Eastern Front, and the French had learned what happens when you lose your main army in Russia. Allied Air Forces controlled the skies of France, and the massive American army in Britain was not merely to keep the Irish at bay. Perhaps the Vichy censors decided that a little leniency was a prudent policy; if you are going to collaborate, why not collaborate with both sides?

So, “Les Enfants du Paradise” is not merely a masterpiece of French cinema but of French cynicism.

p.s. Please don’t tell Ron Howard about this film. He’ll want to remake it with Jim Carrey.

September 5th

Today is the birthday of the most popular composer of his time: Jacob Beer. Of course, you do not recognize the name. Well, he may have been the first Jew in show business to change his name. He is better known as Giacomo Meyerbeer…and most of you still have not heard of him.

But in his day (1791-1864) he was indisputably the most popular composer. He put the grand in opera. Meyerbeer had a string of hits–“Robert le Diable”, “Les Huguenots”, “Le Prophete”–that would have made him rich…except for the fact that he was born rich into a banking family. (Envious composers accused him of bribing the music critics.) His friend Heinrich Heine quipped that Meyerbeer’s mother was the second Jewish mother in history to see her son proclaimed a God.

Rich, talented, and adored, he did have what turned out to be one disastrous flaw: he happened to be a generous and kindly fellow. He was always willing to help younger artists, both with his connections and with direct financial support. In 1840, one struggling composer, his debts far more impressive than his compositions, appealed to Meyerbeer. The young man had composed an opera entitled “Rienzi.” The work was highly imitative of Meyerbeer but showed genuine talent. Meyerbeer provided money to support the penurious composer and arranged for his opera to be produced.

“Rienzi” was the composer’s first success, and he never forgot Meyerbeer’s help–and he never forgave it. In fact, Richard Wagner demonstrated the nature of his gratitude by writing in 1850 the essay “Judaism in the Arts.” The self-anointed high priest of Holy German Kultur denounced Jews for their foreign, polluting influence on the arts. Of course, the most popular Jewish artist of the time was the greatest danger. Meyerbeer had incriminated himself by the fact that his operas had French librettos. In hindsight, Jacob should have called himself Thor instead of Giacomo.

Meyerbeer shrugged off the attack. He was still popular and was used to a certain degree of Anti-Semitism. Wagner was unusually shrill by the standards of the time, but this was 19th century Germany. How bad could things become?

(His friend Heine had a prescient suspicion. Sensing the direction of the nascent nationalism of Germany, the poet wrote, “Christianity has not converted the Germans. It merely constrains them. But the talisman of the Cross is weakening and it will break. Then we will see that the old Gods were not dead but sleeping. The day will come when Thor rubs the sleep from his eyes, reaches for his hammer and, with one blow, brings down a thousand years of civilization….What will happen in Germany will make the French Revolution seem like an idyllic day in the country.”)

Wagner’s growing reputation would eclipse Meyerbeer’s. The parasite and bigot is acknowledged as a genius, while Meyerbeer is relegated to the quaint. But Meyerbeer probably would not begrudge the judgment of history. After all, as both patron and victim, Meyerbeer was the first to recognize Wagner.

On This Day in 1939

Upon returning from the Munich Conference and its betrayal of Czechoslavakia, Neville Chamberlain proclaimed “Peace in our times!” He failed to mentioned that the times would last a year. Now, with the German invasion of Poland, he was forced to announce the British government’s response. Here is the first draft of his speech:

“Germany has failed to respond with an explanation of its actions in Poland. So it is my sad duty to announce that we are now at war with Wurtemberg. If Germany fails to respond within another three months, we may declare war on Baden. Within one year, we could be at war with the entire South of Germany. Yes, the full weight of the British Empire on Bavaria; and we may not stop there. So if Herr Hitler wishes to avoid such unpleasantness, he should send me just a brief note of explanation. I’ll even pay the postage.”

The members of his cabinet recommended something a little sterner, although Lord Halifax preferred a declaration of war against France and Poland.

Nostradamus Finerman

Yesterday’s satire is today’s news. A few days ago, I portrayed Sarah Palin as a survivalist loonie. Well, she was obliging enough to prove me right. Beginning in the 1990s, she has been associated with the Alaska Independence Party, a political party advocating Alaska’s secession from the United States.

Joe Vogler, the founder of AIP, regarded the American government as a communist conspiracy. In 1991 he said, “The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government…and I won’t be buried under their damn flag.” By comparison, Rev. Wright’s fulminations were a Hallmark Card.

There is some question whether or not Sarah Palin belonged to the AIP during the Nineties. The party secretary said she was; Palin denies it. (I am sure that any incriminating paperwork will somehow disappear.) There is no question that her husband was a registered member of AIP from 1995 to 2002; it is on his voters’ registration–and that paperwork wasn’t lost quickly enough. Nor is there any question that Mrs. Palin attended AIP conventions in 1994 and 2000; in 2008, as governor, she addressed the convention.

Right now, the McCain campaign is denying that Mrs. Palin belonged to a secessionist group–and she had no idea that her husband espoused treason. And if it turns out that she had a faulty memory, I can imagine the next excuse. “It was the Nineties and she was just trying to escape the clutches of Bill Clinton.”

This was the way that Afghanistan and Iraq were supposed to end: the outnumbered but morally superior (and better armed) western army decisively vanquishes the fanatic Moslem horde. That was the rousing finale of the Mahdi War in the Sudan as well as the 47 or so film versions of “The Four Feathers.”

On this day in 1898, on the outskirts of Khartoum, a British and Egyptian force of 26,000 faced a Sudanese army of 50,000. Both armies were organized by caste and race; the enemies had snobbery in common. The British soldiers had artillery, machine guns and the most modern rifles; their Egyptian allies had old rifles but carried the latest in British baggage. On the Sudanese side, the Arabs had horses and rifles while the sub-Saharan Africans (yes, I am trying to find a euphemism for Black) had swords and their feet.

Ironically, the invading British were reluctant imperialists. Nothing in the Sudan was of interest or value; if the Islamic fanatics running the desolate region had behaved themselves, the British would have been happy to ignore them. But when have you heard of a subtle, discreet fanatic? The Sudanese thought that they were being led by an Islamic messiah–the Madhi–and they intended to spread their cult to Egypt. Now, there, the British had a cherished interest: the Suez Canal. To protect that Canal, Britain had usurped Egypt–relegating the reigning Khedive to be their pampered puppet while running the country.

Unfortunately, by taking over Egypt, Britain had also acquired the chronic problem of Sudan. It was not merely an annoying neighbor but a rebellious province of Egypt. In fact, the Sudanese were winning. One Egyptian army had been massacred in 1881; a second Egyptian army–with British advisors–was massacred in 1883; and a third Egyptian army–under the very British general (and celebrity) Charles Gordon was trapped in Khartoum in 1885. Knowing the Sudanese habit of using British officers’ heads as decorations, the English newspapers demanded the military relief of Khartoum. S-l-o-w-l-y acceding to popular demand, Britain finally sent  an expedition to the Sudan: it arrived to find the late General Gordon–if not his head–and his equally decomposing Egyptian army.

Not slowly, the British left Sudan and stayed out for 15 years. By 1898, however, the British found that they could no longer ignore the Mahdists. They were fomenting unrest in neighboring territories, and now the French were threatening to do something about it. It was bad enough that Sudan is a French name; it would be insufferable for it to be a French territory. If only to keep the French out, the British finally resolved to retake the Sudan. Of course, they offered all sorts of noble excuses–end slavery, suppress fanaticism and avenge General Gordon–all of which were true, if not really important.

In any case, Omdurman was a glorious British victory. The British and Egyptians suffered less than 500 casualties while killing or wounding more than 20,000 Mahdists. The rebellion was effectively crushed, and British would control the Sudan for another 50 years.

A young British cavalry officer expressed the sense of elation at Omdurman: “Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.” This unusually articulate lieutenant was also moonlighting as a journalist. Check your 110 year-old copies of the Daily Telegraph for his byline: Winston Churchill.

Demonstrating his concern for victims of Hurricane Gustav, President Bush announced guest memberships at Texas country clubs for anyone whose golf course has been flooded.

Arriving in Louisiana with 500 “John McCain for President” umbrellas, the Arizona Senator and his running mate Sarah “Rambelle” Palin expressed their conservative compassion for the victims. Ms. Palin demonstrated 30 different ways the umbrellas can be used to kill. Governor Bobby Jindal is expected to live. Ms. Palin almost apologized for the mistake, saying that the Indian-American “shouldn’t look that way, all terroristy.” Senator McCain did apologize, wishing Jindal “a full recovery or a better reincarnation.”

While McCain compared the plight of the hurricane victims to being in a North Vietnamese prison, Palin offered swimming lessons. “Every real American should be able to swim through ice floes while clutching a 50 caliber machine gun in your teeth.” Governor Rambelle also noted that the worst hurricanes always have “foreign names like Gustav and Katrina. And why don’t they ever strike those liberal places like New York or Beverly Hills?”

Rambelle may have included an ethic reference to her description of liberal places, but campaign spokesmen now insist that she said “jejune” or “Juneau”.

Responding to criticism that his running mate was a survivalist psychopath, Senator McCain said “Those are exactly the qualities America may need. You don’t really think that I can fix these Bush disasters: the economy, the wars, the climate–it is going to be chaos and barbarism. Anyone see “Mad Max” or “Waterworld”? I don’t expect to survive it; so the next President has to be a savage. Arnold Swarzenegger was just acting, but Sarah is the real thing. She will save the non-edible members of mankind. So what if she thinks that Christ’s first name is Thor?”

Hurricane Gustav’s Silver Lining

The Republicans were looking for a way to avoid having Commandude Bush at their convention. No one actually threatened him. Sarah Palin’s offer to kill and skin Barney actually was her idea of a gift. But there were subtle efforts to discourage his presence. They never made clear whether the convention would be in St. Paul or Sao Paolo; and by a slight misunderstanding, the convention schedule sent to the White House was based on the Julian Calendar.

With the threat of Hurricane Gustav, however, the Republican Convention will understand if the President now is too busy to attend. And, if the Hurricane had not been so convenient, the Republican National Committee would have wanted the President to remain in Washington to monitor reports of a Persian Army massing to attack Greece.

The Second Syllable of Addiction

Joseph Biden was speaking, but the news scrolling on the bottom of the television screen had the real story. David Duchovy is going into rehab to be treated for sex addiction! This news item was so important that CNN spelled every word correctly. (A few days earlier, the CNN scroll reported that Chris Katten “seperated” from his wife.)

I have to wonder what is a sex addiction? I recently saw Mrs. Duchovy (alias Tea Leoni) in a film, and she did not seem the worse for his addiction. She wasn’t bow-legged. So what is Duchovy doing? Does he take public transportation just to bump into people? Is he auditioning for concerts with his baton? Is he looking for nude photos of his wife on the internet?

Having seen Duchovy’s attempts at acting, I am surprised that he is capable of any animation.

The Republican “Dream Ticket” of Maverick and Annie Oakley ended today when Alaska Governor Sarah Palin resigned. Palin had not realized that she might be expected to move to Washington D.C. “I don’t trust them cities with all their communist contraptions” explained the governor who had ordered the removal of stoplights and sewers from Juneau.

Palin even expressed her personal dislike of the White House. “It is not the kind of place where I can just open a window and shoot something.”

She also was offended that the Republican platform would not incorporate her Anti-Abortion policy into the party philosophy. “Unwanted children are an excellent source of meat” she insisted, offering the reporters a collection of her favorite survivalist recipes.

With Palin’s resignation and the need for another token woman on the Republican ticket, Mitt Romney has offered to change his sex.