Your RDA of Irony

Monday Miscellany

Posted in General on June 23rd, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

Topic I: The Depths of My Depravity

This weekend I attempted to corrupt an innocent mind by telling her that John Wesley had founded the Methodist School of Acting. I even offered her a famous example of Methodist acting:

“I couldah been a contendah–which would notah been possible if we was subject to predestinarian determinism. So my one-way ticket to palookaville was a mattah of Free Will.”

Topic II: What is Chinese for Aquitaine?

I recently discovered that China has a recycling policy. No, I am not referring to the use of human waste for fertilizer or packing material. (And keep in mind, the “compost’ on your Walmart purchases may not all be from China; Walmart rarely gives its employees washroom breaks.) My revelation occurred while watching the Chinese costume epic “Curse of the Golden Flower.”

Set in Medieval China (of course, that could be only 70 years ago), the film depicts a web of palace intrigues. The Empress and the Emperor are plotting against each other; their three sons are exploited as pawns but those young princes have machinations of their own. In the first 30 minutes, I saw one poisoning, one of those marvelously choreographed martial arts duels, and two seductions (one verging on incest). For all this hectic activity, something about the film seemed remarkably familiar. Suddenly, I recognized what it was: a Chinese version of “The Lion in Winter.”

As Mr. and Mrs. Tang, Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine have lost their sense of humor but gained a much better wardrobe. Tenth century China was richer and more sophisticated than twelfth century Europe. The Tangs’ casual opulence surpassed the best that the Plantagenets had to offer. But the Tang dynasty also seems more disfunctional than the Plantagenets. At the end of “The Lion in Winter”, Eleanor is going back to prison, the princes are in rebellion, but everyone is alive and in a comparatively good mood. As “The Curse of the Golden Flower” ends, the Emperor is still cheerful, but he has beaten to death one son, forced another to suicide, and driven the Empress mad. Spare the rod…

And I am looking forward to more Chinese recycling. I anticipate an epic about a headstrong if footbound heroine during the Taiping Rebellion: “Gong with the Yin”.

Our Yenta in Art in Heaven

Posted in General on June 21st, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

Notre Dame, NBC agree to 5-year deal through 2015

In what may be the hiring coup of the millennium, NBC will have the political insights, the theological gossip and the Jewish mothering of the Virgin Mary. The ancient lady will be NBC’s equivalent to Barbara Walters.

The introductory reception featured fish and loaves. “Jeshie used my recipe,” exclaimed His Mother who insisted that everyone called Her Miriam. “Virgin sounds much too formal. After all, I’m not Oprah.”

People noted her excellent command of English. She was asked if she had picked up the language from watching reruns of Fulton J. Sheen. “No, dahling. I was personally taught by Mr. Shakespeare. But first I made him apologize for that nasty “Merchant of Venice.”

Addressing rumors, NBC denied that Miriam would not have a talk show on CNBC.  “It just wouldn’t work,” explained a spokesman. “No one would want to lie to Her, so no one would come on the show.”

The stock market rallied on the news of the deal. Analysts noted that the Second Coming now definitely would not occur before 2015. “Jesus isn’t going to throw his mother out of work.”

Bonaparting Words

Posted in General on June 18th, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

Today is the 193rd anniversary of Waterloo. As you can imagine, I have spent the day comforting Catherine Deneuve, Carol Bouquet, Juliette Binoche and Eva Green. (All right, try to imagine it.)

I just turned in a magazine article on “The Rise of Napoleon.” The editor asked for 1200 words; the least that I could write was 1600. For a small man, Napoleon defies brevity.

Napoleon had a thick Corsican accent. A Corsican accent could be described as bad Italian and worse French. In fact, Napoleon did not learn French until he was ten. When the Emperor of France met the Tsar of Russia in 1807, they spoke to each other in French; but it was noted that the Tsar had the better accent.

And on the other channels….

Posted in General on June 16th, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

Desperate for attention, Fox News has announced the “tragic death of John Gibson.” The network reports that Mr. Gibson was killed, shielding the pregnant body of Ann Coulter, in a terrorist attack by Keith Olbermann. When reporters disputed the pregnancy of Ms. Coulter, the Fox media liaison exclaimed, “So Olbermann did kill the child.” When John Gibson was seen working in the Fox mailroom, the media liaison responded, “It truly is a miracle. His overbite must have absorbed the explosion.”

CNN has denied the death of Wolf Blitzer. “That is just the way he is.”

And CBS is offering a guest appearance on “How I Met Your Mother” to anyone who can make Katie Couric “disappear.”

Fodder for Father’s Day

Posted in General on June 15th, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – 3 Comments

To celebrate Father’s Day, let’s consider some of the worst fathers in history.

Surprisingly, very few Roman emperors would qualify. Perhaps that is one of the benefits of sterility. Marcus Aurelius was one of the few potent potentates, and he was too good a father. He left the Empire to his completely incompetent son. (And now we know George H.W. Bush’s role model.) The Emperor Constantine demonstrated his Christian virtues by executing his oldest son; the prince was rumored to be having an affair with his stepmother. The lady died rather abruptly, too. Somehow this episode did not inspire the saying “Chastity begins at home.”

Herod the Great really did not massacre innocent children, but he could be ruthless with annoying ones. He executed three of his sons. One was a treacherous weasel (his paternity was never in doubt). The other two were merely obnoxious and overbearing; imagine if Meyer Lansky had somehow sired Ben Stiller and William Kristol. You could have guessed the outcome, and can we really blame Herod? Besides, Herod had an additional four sons, so he could afford the braticide.

Among the privileges of being a Tsar was killing your son. Ivan the Terrible won an argument with the Tsarevitch by applying a staff to the young man’s skull. Ivan immediately regretted his impetuosity and ordered the execution of anyone who might have caused him to be in a bad mood. Peter the Great’s reforms did not include a liberal approach to childrearing. Finding his son supported the Court’s conservatives, Peter had the Prince tortured to death.

Of course, who is to say that Ivan and Peter were being prudent? Spare the rod…lose the throne. When Alexander I seized the Russian throne from his father Paul I, Dad was “accidentally” strangled.

I suppose we should consider Henry II of England as our role model for both father and ruler. When your sons plot against you, just do enough to thwart and defeat them; but try to refrain from killing them.

Termagant of Endearment

Posted in General, On This Day on June 13th, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – 1 Comment

There was a fifty/fifty chance that one of our states might have been “Henriettaland”. Fortunately, the wife of Charles I had a more palatable middle name: Marie. That probably was the most tolerable thing about her.

On this day in 1625, she became the wife of Charles I. What an unfortunate time for an English king to be a heterosexual. It did not help that Charles was a weak-willed dolt. The French Princess Henrietta was a domineering, belligerent moron. Her father, Henri IV was a wise, adroit, charming, tolerant ruler but who died when his daughter was an infant. Henrietta took after her mother, a blundering battle-axe (yes, Henri cheated on her) whose inept regency of France triggered rebellion and coups. In fact, the Queen Mother was eventually exiled by her annoyed son Louis XIII (on the always wise advice of then Bishop Richelieu).

However, England had no Richelieus. (James I had picked his ministers for their looks.) Charles I simply…very simply…deferred to his wife. Henrietta’s goading and provocations triggered the civil war that would kill her husband. In fairness, Cromwell should have beheaded her, too–but she was watching the Civil War from a spectator’s box in France.

Upon Restoration of the monarchy, she returned to England where her belligerent nature quickly exasperated her wise, adroit, charming, tolerant son Charles II (who obviously took after grandpere). She was encouraged to retire to France.

Nonetheless, as an observant Catholic, Henrietta Marie did have some admirers–among them her fellow parishioner Lord Calvert. In 1632 Calvert decided to sponsor a Catholic colony in North America, and it seemed a clever idea to name the haven for both the Queen of England…and the presumed Queen of Heaven.

The Chicago Tribulation

Posted in General on June 11th, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – 1 Comment

If you enjoy reading coroner’s reports or watching road kill decay, that I would highly recommend The Chicago Tribune‘s new comic strip, “The Adventures of Sam Zell.” (Any resemblance between this strip and a real person would be appalling.) In a brilliant innovation, the strip is the entire newspaper. It is the story of a ruthless wheel-dealer who acquires the bankrupt Tribune on terms indistinguishable from a license to steal. The strip’s hero basically uses the employees’ pension fund to buy the newspaper. The business euphemism for this is “leverage”; you could say that the Vandals certainly leveraged Rome. Of course, he promises to reimburse the pension fund by cutting the newspapers’ costs–such as the employees’ jobs.

He also intends to raise revenue. The newspaper is to reduce all that ink-wasting, eye-straining journalism and replace it with advertising: his stated goal is a newspaper that is half ads.

Furthermore, the reporters are told to think of ways to bring in money. Zell’s employees cannot afford ethics, so perhaps they should “leverage” a slant to their stories. The newspaper also apparently wants to increase its circulation by lowering its standards. The statuatory rape case of singer R. Kelly is receiving pornographically detailed coverage. A recent Tribune story described his alleged fetish; let’s just say that Kelly’s next single could be “My Groin is a Fountain.” The old Tribune would not have printed the word “bladder”, let alone illustrates its deviant uses.

So, each day now, I open the Tribune to see Zell’s latest havoc. Will he save ink by eliminating double consonants. Ilinois, basebal, batle, gramar–I still can decipher the words. Go ahead, Zell: spelling is such an affectation. I also am waiting to see product placement in the comic pages. You know that the Tribune’s Op-Ed page will endorse John McCain; for a little extra money, so will Dick Tracy. And wouldn’t you like to know Dagwood and Blondie’s favorite beer? But I am especially anticipating more “popular features” such as nude illustrations of all the First Ladies. If you have ever been “curious” about Lucy Rutherford and Mamie Eisenhower, Sam Zell thinks that you have the right to know!

So read the Chicago Tribune and see it go to Zell in a handbasket.

The Art of War and Public Relations

Posted in General on June 10th, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

Napoleon needed something to do in 1798. The 28-year-old general had conquered Italy and forced Austria to capitulate–but that was a year ago. He sensed that his glory was already fading. The French government–a collection of kleptocrats known as the Directory–did have a project for him. He had been named “General of the Army of England.” Invading England certainly would be exciting; the British Navy would guarantee that. A French platoon was unlikely to make it to shore; and if it had, the English population would not be particularly cordial. No the invasion of England was a certain catastrophe, and definitely not Napoleon’s idea of glory.

A second proposal at least seemed less hopeless: invading Ireland. Allowing for the improbable prospects of a myopic British navy and a competent French one, a French army landing in Ireland would find itself very popular among the oppressed and impoverished victims of English rule. The Irish would have offered all they had to the French: potatoes and volunteer militia armed only with farm implements. Nonetheless, Napoleon might have succeeded in driving the English out of Ireland–and then what? The British navy would have kept him penned up in Ireland. He might have been the de facto ruler of Ireland and its grateful people; but Napoleon did not want the gratitude of a poor people. Generals of the Directory worked on commission, and liberating Ireland just wouldn’t pay.

There was a third idea, however, that promised Napoleon enough wealth and glory to sate his megalomania: invade Egypt. There was a military rationale for this plan. Egypt was the transit between the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean; the trade and communication between Europe and the Orient passed along the Suez trail. (Yes, there was talk of building a canal.) A French army in Egypt would have a stranglehold on Britain’s link to India. Of course, there was also an economic incentive for invading Egypt; all that trade was quite lucrative. Finally, there seemed a political advantage as well. No one else seemed to rule Egypt. The country was a nominal province of the Ottoman Empire, but the weak Sultanate was unable to enforce its rule there. Egypt was in the hands of squabbling, medieval warlords–the Mamalukes. What could be more tempting than a rich and defenseless country?

He would invade Egypt with an army of 34,000 men. Never lacking confidence, Napoleon expected a glorious military victory but he also envisioned his campaign as a cultural triumph. He would rediscover Egypt and reintroduce a great civilization long forgotten. So, in addition to his military preparations,(which actually were inadequate; he overlooked the need for water canteens in a desert) he assembled several hundred scientists, historians and artists to accompany his expedition. While he conquered, they explored, discovered and illustrated–inspiring a fascination with ancient Egypt that continues to this day. Our very knowledge of hieroglyphics began with Napoleon, when some French soldiers dug up a very interesting stone at Rosetta, Egypt.

Such a massive undertaking could not have escaped the attention of the British. However, they assumed that the General of the Army of England was a literal title. The British navy was patrolling the English Channel and the western Mediterranean while the French fleet was heading toward Egypt. On the way, the French stopped at Malta to seize the island. By doing so, the French had finally revealed their whereabouts, and the British guessed Napoleon’s real intentions. The British navy sailed immediately to Alexandria and arrived before the French. In view of the French absence, however, the British now wondered where the French might be headed. Was Malta a feint and Napoleon was heading past Gibraltar to sail to England? So, the British fleet raced northwest while the French fleet lolled southeast to Alexandria.

However, the British had not reached Gibraltar, let alone Penzance, when they learned that the French had actually arrived at Alexandria. Turning around–again, His Majesty’s Ships now raced east. In the intervening month, the French army had disembarked in Alexandria, defeated the Mamalukes in a battle picturesquely near the Pyramids and now was in Cairo. The French fleet was at anchor at the mouth of the Nile, in Abukir Bay. Late in the afternoon of August 1, the British fleet attacked. The French were in a good defensive position, the ships aligned close to the shore and with the added protection of darkness. Who would attempt to navigate narrow gaps between the French ships, skirting the Egyptian shore in the dark? Did I mention that the British commander was Horatio Nelson? He could have assured you that it is easy to sail at night when you have burning French ships to light your way. Most of the French fleet was either sunk or captured, and the French army now was stranded in Egypt.

The Ottoman Empire did not grieve over the Mamalukes, but it did not consider the French control of Egypt as an improvement. Assured of British support, the Sultan declared war on France. Napoleon was not one to wait for an attack. He marched into Syria, expecting the conquest of that province would compel the Turks to cede Egypt to France. Although he had just 15,000 men, his campaign began with its customary success. The Turkish forces were equipped to fight a 16th century war. Napoleon even began to entertain the notion of taking Constantinople. However, his triumphal march did not get past the fortifications of Acre–in what is now northern Israel. The garrison’s Turkish gunners had the benefit of European training and the aided assistance of the British navy. Napoleon found himself outgunned and ill-prepared for a siege; worse, bubonic plague broke out in the French camp. Although unaccustomed to retreat, he had no choice.

Napoleon now realized that the Egyptian campaign would inevitably fail; however, no one else in France seemed aware of it. Bonaparte really should be considered one of the pioneers of public relations. He dictated communiques–press releases–telling the public exactly what he wanted it to believe. Napoleon was never shy about self-aggrandizement; every victory was magnified, any defeat was minimized if not omitted. (Despite its ability to do so, the British navy never bothered to impose a complete blockade on Egypt, so individual French ships could manage to go back and forth carrying Napoleon’s communiques.) The French public was convinced that the Egyptian campaign was a complete triumph. Ironically, however dubious or pyrrhic those victories, that was the only good news that the French public heard at the time.

With Napoleon in Egypt, Austria felt emboldened to resume the war. Aided by a Russian army, Austrian forces had recaptured most of Italy and now threatened France itself. Feeling endangered, the French wanted their best general back home to defend them. Since the public demanded it, Napoleon was willing to save France–and flee his hopeless situation in Egypt. Of course, he did not tell his abandoned army or even his second-in-command of his French itinerary. That was a surprise. Just as surprising was the fact that the French army held out for another two years, contending with Turks, Bedouins and disease. By 1801, the acting French commander was half-mad but he still managed to get generous terms of surrender. What was left of the army–its 17,000 ragged, sickly survivors–was repatriated to France. (The British did confiscate many of the ancient artifacts that the French had found; that is why the Rosetta Stone is at the British Museum.)

The survivors of the Egyptian campaign found that France had considerably changed in their absence. The corrupt, unpopular Republic had been replaced by a less corrupt, much more popular dictatorship–and guess who the dictator was. He had proclaimed the invasion of Egypt to be a glorious campaign–and who were they to disagree?

Sex and the Suburbs

Posted in General on June 6th, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

I know that many of you have wondered, “Eugene, if you were a serious writer, shouldn’t you be in New York (for the fame) or California (for the money)?” Of course, with the premiere of “Swingtown”, you now know that I remain in Chicago for the olympian adultery. Yes, Lake Michigan is just our idea of a hot tub.

The fact that all the houses in my suburb look alike only facilitates the orgy. Just walk into any house; at worse, you will actually be home. As I explained to a somewhat gullible Mr. Weinfarb (after finding me hiding in the laundry hamp), he was in the wrong house. Besides, after 4000 years of inbreeding, his wife could have mistaken me for him.

If you need further proof of Chicago’s shameless eroticism, the Cubs play in the nude. Those “uniforms” are only computer graphics to pacify the prudes on the FCC. And now you know the real reason that the Cubs won’t slide to base.

Unfortunately, all of our unabashed hedonism is being televised on CBS. Let’s face it: HBO would have more graphic sensuality in a production of “Anne of Green Gables.” This is a series about adultery, but it is the only time that you’ll ever see actress Molly Parker with her clothes on.

In any case, now you understand the allure of Chicago. As the sign says at O’Hare Airport, “Mayor Daley welcomes you to sex and pizza.”

Manipulating the Media: 1870

Posted in General on June 5th, 2008 by Eugene Finerman – Be the first to comment

By 1870 France and Prussia were eager to fight. Prussia wanted to exploit a common enemy to weld the German states into one Reich. France intended to humiliate the expansionist upstart. Any excuse would have sufficed for a war. Was Hegel or Voltaire better in bed? Who you calling Allemagne? Is Leopold von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen a suitable name for a Spanish King?

In fact, it was Leopold who inadvertently started the war. By popular demand, Isabella II had fled Spain in 1868, and the Spanish were looking for a new monarch. Leopold, from an underachieving and Catholic branch of the Hohenzollern dynasty, could have used the steady work. France, however, vehemently objected to the idea of a Prussian on the Spanish throne, fearing the threat of goose-stepping Sancho Panzas yodeling Wagner from the Pyrenees. (Actually, the French Bourbons had ruled Spain for more than 150 years without making the Spanish sarcastic or adulterous.)

However, being an underachiever, Leopold withdrew his candidacy. (His more energetic brother eventually got a job as King of Rumania.) But the French wouldn’t take “Ja” for an answer. They wanted the personal guarantee of the King of Prussia that no member of his family would assume the throne of Spain. The King was spending his summer at the resort of Ems; so the French ambassador intruded on the King’s vacation and accosted the old junker with France’s complaints and qualms. The King certainly was affronted and he was not prepared–without Bismarck–to improvise foreign policy. He refused to make any commitment to France.

The King then telegraphed Bismarck a summary of this dismaying encounter; and the diabolical chancellor realized that he now had the perfect excuse for war. The French ambassador had insulted the King of Prussia, and the King of Prussia had insulted the ambassador of France. To exacerbate national outrage, Bismarck edited the telegram to make the affronts even more offensive and then released the doctored dispatch to the newspapers.

France declared war and finally had the chance to teach Prussia a lesson: how to humiliate France and be a vindictive victor.