Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
International Teletimes Volume 03 Number 05
International Teletimes Vol. 3 No. 5
====================================
***** ****** ***** ****** ******* *****
* * * * * * * * *
***** ****** * * ****** * *****
* * * * * * * *
***** * ***** * * * *****
& L E I S U R E
************************************************************
* September 1994 ISSN 1198-3604 *
************************************************************
========
CONTENTS
========
Features
--------
THE TAO OF HIKING
"Starting about mid-morning, I began the hike as if I were
running a race-pacing and pushing myself over hills, up
switch-backs, past ridge tops that baked in the sun and
slopes that languished in shady canopy. I had been working
out consistently before the trip, so I viewed the hike as
a sort of test."
- Jay Hipps, Petaluma, California, USA
CUSTOM AND EXERCISE
"I remember being dragged off on cross country runs in
freezing (literally) weather wearing only shorts and a
T-shirt (with the games master dressed in a track suit,
gloves, woolly hat, pullover, etc.). In fact when I think
about it, most of my childhood experiences with Physical
Education were overwhelmingly negative."
- Dr. Euan Taylor, Vancouver, Canada
THE RUNNER NEXT DOOR
"However, contrary to popular belief, most runners are, by
nature, unhealthy. They shun doctors, run themselves into
the ground and wonder why they are not setting pr's. And
because obsessiveness is also a characteristic of the
runner (almost a given in marathon and in ultra-distance
runners), they may shun food altogether as well, not
wishing to carry anything extra around those 25 laps on
the track."
- Sheila Eldred, Oxford, UK
AN INVITATION TO FENCING
"Fencing is about an interchange of ideas - ideas intended
to deceive or surprise. Fencing is about thinking and
transferring thoughts into action at the maximum rate and
with the maximum precision."
- Theo Norvell, Toronto, Canada
Departments
-----------
DEBATE ROOM
"Although TV shows are starting to sport gay characters in
their regular line-ups, these characters rarely lead
realistic lives on screen. Of all the flirting, touching,
kissing and steamy love scenes we are constantly bombarded
with, how many occur between gay characters?"
- Euan Taylor, Paul Gribble and Jon Gould
MUSIC NOTES: FEATURE
"Even a quick glance at this year's selections reveals a
very real difference from previous Lollapaloozii. This
cast is closer to the original intent of the all-day
mega-concert."
- Russell Weinberger, Davis, California, USA
MUSIC NOTES: REVIEWS
This month, Ken reviews Van Morrison, Boz Scaggs, Alison
Moyet, The Brian Setzer Orchestra, Sir Douglas Quintet,
Stanley Jordan, McCoy Tyner Big Band, and Cyrus Chestnut.
- Ken Eisner, Vancouver, Canada
DEJA VU
"50 years later some of us seem to be pro-longing that
day, not wanting it to end. How else to explain my arrival
from the States to accompany one of the many 'D-Day
Remembered' tours with about 20 of my alma mater's alumni?"
- Andrew B. Shaindlin, Providence, Rhode Island , USA
=============
EDITOR'S NOTE
=============
Hello all! As you may have noticed, Teletimes has not been
published for several months. We were planning to release a
new edition in a format called "Replica" but have had to
postpone it indefinately because of technical problems. This
caused a huge slow-down in production, but you'll be happy
to know that we're getting back on track and have some great
things planned for the next few months.
Staff Positions Available
-------------------------
Teletimes has gone through incredible growth since it began
in October 1992. Since Teletimes won the Best of the Net
award in June, interest in the magazine has never been
higher. Along with this new popularity and growth has come a
lot of extra work. Unfortunately we do not have enough
people to handle the extra workload, so I'd like to announce
the following list of available positions. Please note that
people will be hired on a volunteer basis initially.
Section Editors
---------------
People who are quite comfortable with the Internet and
possibly have publishing experience and/or interest are
needed as section editors. Section editors will be in charge
of a defined section of Teletimes. Their tasks will involve
finding and corresponding with potential writers, making
sure that there is sufficient material in each section,
rejecting articles which do not meet standards, and
generally working directly with writers and correspondents
for their area of the magazine. Sections which need editors
are the Features section (monthly theme) and one or two
editors to help out with running certain columns in the
Departments section.
Illustrators
------------
We need a couple of creative people to help out with
illustrating articles and helping out with cover design. To
get more information about what is involved, please e-mail
our Art Director, Anand Mani (me@armani.com).
Internet Guru
-------------
We need a person who is extremely knowledgeably about the
Internet to help with technical questions/problems related
to the magazine. This person might also help out with online
marketing and distribution.
Writers
-------
We need lots of writers, especially from outside of North
America, to write for us. Monthly topics are provided as
guidelines, but there are also some specialty columns which
people may enjoy writing for. Female writers are extremely
welcome as we'd like to try and even out the male-female
ratio on our staff.
If you are interested in any of these positions, or think
there is some other way you could help out with Teletimes,
please e-mail us your resume.
- Ian Wojtowicz, Vancouver, Canada
editor@teletimes.com
=======
MAILBOX
=======
Reactions to our Award
----------------------
Congratulations!!!! You're doing a damn fine job!!
Greg Vogel
San Diego, USA
Congratulations! I've always appreciated your work, and am
looking forward to lots of interesting articles to come.
Awaji Yoshimasa
Kisarazu, Japan
Great magazine. I like the pictures, and I look forward to
your Photon issue!
Jeffrey E. Richardson
Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
Response to "Academic Freedom"
------------------------------
After reading the Debate Room column on "Academic Freedom"
in the April issue, I have to make a few comments.
While I mostly agree with Paul Gribble, my opinion comes
with a few caveats related to Dr. Taylor's comments.
While I do feel that a University must support freedom of
speech, especially freedom to espouse unpopular positions,
this does not mean to me that they have the right to say
just anything in the classrooms and lecture halls. As an
undergraduate, the most painful classroom moments came when
the instructor was nattering on about some topic with little
relevance to the course description in the catalog. As a
student I was paying my own good money for that class time,
and I didn't want it wasted.
My personal favorite example was in an introductory course
in Artificial Intelligence. I took this course during the
period when the Strategic Defence Initiative was a hot
issue. Our instructor thought that SDI was a horrible/evil
idea and took up many a classroom hour explaining why in
horrendous detail. Now, while it can be argued that there is
some relation as computers would have to be used in any
system such as SDI, this is more an issue for a Computers
and Social Responsibility class (which did exist at that
University). Very little AI was learned that semester. A
year or so later I ran into an ex student of the same
instructor from the early 70's who told me that back then
this instructor was doing the same thing with the Vietnam
War, including trying to organize the students in a sit-in.
I partially agree with his opinions, but I wasn't paying for
them. I was paying for an introductory survey of AI,
hopefully relatively balanced. I wouldn't even have minded
so much if his presentation of the issues of SDI had been
more balanced. Checking the journals at the time, the
software engineering community was close to evenly divided
as to the practicality of the SDI system.
In short, the academic community has another responsibility,
to their students, to teach the subject matter that the
students are paying for. Too many students I have met have
had similar complaints and the situation is getting worse as
tuitions increase.
Thanks for the soapbox
John Dougan
Vancouver, Canada
Great Graphics
--------------
You have done a lovely job, and I am thoroughly impressed.
Did you draw your own graphics? How? They are as good as any
by professionals I know. I am looking to step into
electronic publishing now, and you are clearly the standard
setter! Good for you! Count me in on your mailing list!!
Antoinette Burnham
Washington D.C., USA
Anand Mani Responds:
Thank you. I produce all of the icongraphics in Fractal
Painter using a Wacom tablet. I am an illustrator and
iconographer by profession; most of my work being produced
for companies. My work can also be found in Adbusters
Quarterly. Electronic publishing is an exciting new field
and I wish you the best of luck.
E-Zine Recommendations?
-----------------------
I've been looking for good e-zines but been disappointed.
I'm not much interested in reading about music -- and the
mid-eighties style 'zines moved over to the Net seem to lean
toward the weakness they had in the original form. The
formats of low-budget publishing and of e-zine appeal to me
greatly but as with TV the reality is bleak (a real dirth of
quality content)...yet I certainly don't have the talent to
remedy the situation myself.
I picked up 3 recent issues of your publication while "World
Wide Webbing" around. The quality is superior. I think you
are doing good work. Are there fellow e-publications of
similar merit you can recommend?
Daniel Amin
St. Louis, MO, USA
Ian Wojtowicz Responds:
Well, I probably don't spend enough time reading other
electronic publications, but I can recommend InterText as a
good fiction magazine. For some better recommendations, try
e-mailing John Labovitz (johnl@ora.com). He compiles an
extensive list of e-zines and could probably recommend a few
for you.
Response to The Wine Enthusiast
-------------------------------
Greetings. I was browsing around the Web and came across
your zine, and even scanned the article in the April '94
issue by Tom Davis, on Beers. A nice general introduction to
the topic, but he incorrectly cited Yuengling Brewery as
being in Boston. It is in fact in Pottsville, Pennsylvania,
and lists itself as America's oldest brewery (since 1826).
It is still run by the same family.
They make a pretty nice Black & Tan, and their Lord
Chesterfield Ale isn't bad either. They also do a Porter,
but I'm not one for that style, so I can't comment on their
version.
Rita Melnick
Baltimore, USA
========
FEATURES
========
The Tao of Hiking
-----------------
"Travelling is a fool's paradise... At home I dream that at
Naples, at Rome, I can be intoxicated with beauty and lose
my sadness. I pack my trunk, embrace my friends, embark on
the sea, and at last wake up in Naples, and there beside me
is the stern fact, the sad self, unrelenting, identical,
that I fled from."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson, from *Self Reliance*
It's safe to say that Emerson didn't think too much of those
who undertook recreational travel. His attitude seemed to be,
"a fool at home is a fool abroad," and so be it. Trying to
lose oneself in any experience is playing a fool's game --
when it's over, you'll still have yourself to contend with.
It reminds me of a quote from the film character Buckaroo
Banzai: "No matter where you go, there you are."
Perhaps Emerson would look more kindly on backpacking.
Backpacking takes us into the wilds not only geographically
but spiritually as well. The distractions of our everyday
lives are taken away, the annoyances of school, career, and
competitive advancement replaced with a simple set of
activities: cooking, walking, eating, and making camp. In
such a setting it's nearly impossible to avoid recognizing
who you are and coming to terms with yourself. Nature
provides an unusually uncompromising mirror. I suppose this
could also be experienced in a solitary cell at your local
state prison, but backpacking is a much more pleasant way of
accomplishing the same thing.
Unless you've done it, it's hard to understand the
experience. To begin with, a backpacking trip is the
ultimate in self reliance: it's you and nature. Everything
necessary for your survival you must carry with you. The
food you eat and the water you drink are up to your devices
-- either pack it in or purify it. Your shelter and the
level of comfort it gives you are up to you as well.
My wife and I recently returned from a three-day trip in Big
Sur, California, which was also my first backpacking trip.
My mindset changed dramatically over the course of the days
we were gone. On the way in -- a relatively strenuous seven-
mile hike up and into the coastal mountains -- I focused my
attention completely on reaching camp, our day's ultimate
goal. Starting about mid-morning, I began the hike as if I
were running a race-pacing and pushing myself over hills, up
switchbacks, past ridge tops that baked in the sun and
slopes that languished in shady canopy. I had been working
out consistently before the trip, so I viewed the hike as a
sort of test. I stopped the times my wife needed to rest,
made insinuations as we waited that she would probably be
making better time if she had been working out too, and
trudged on.
We eventually reached camp only to face a variation on
Emerson's travel query: once you get away from it all, what
do you do when you're there? Being away from it all means
that you can't hide yourself in television or other
diversions. Having no grand task to set about doing, I was
left with just myself and the woods. This is where the
miracle happened -- my senses began to clear from the
dynamics of life as I usually live it -- filled with
deadlines, driving, the din of the media, and the hum of my
hard drive. Instead there was the sound of a river running
its course, insects serenading the evening breeze, and the
smell of coastal wildflowers in bloom. All the hard edges to
life that I had accepted as givens faded away as the natural
dynamics of life on earth moved to the forefront. The sun
fell to reveal more stars than can be viewed in a city
month, and I slept. The following days were a joy. Instead
of focusing on the destination, I began to enjoy wherever I
was on the way. Finally reaching the destination was great,
too, and allowed for selection of a new goal -- but the path
on the way was more than just an obstacle standing between
me and where I wished to be.
Unanticipated problems confronted us and were dealt with in
the best way possible at the time. My sense of adventure
returned along with my curiosity. I'm sure that there are
other recreational activities that give the same results.
Backpacking isn't the only way toward self-knowledge, but it
does provide a useful metaphor. How often do we focus on
achieving a goal, forsaking all enjoyment until we reach it?
Or refuse to move in a new direction because we can't
anticipate all the obstacles we might encounter? These are
all lessons taught by the trail. I wonder what I'll learn on
my next trip.
- Jay Hipps, Petaluma, CA, USA
jhipps@crl.com
Custom and Exercise
-------------------
I was thinking about the theme for this month's issue while
I was jogging the other day. My mind conjured up images of
my schooldays. I remember being dragged off on cross country
runs in freezing (literally) weather wearing only shorts and
a T-shirt (with the games master dressed in a track suit,
gloves, woolly hat, pullover, etc. I'm sure plenty of you
know the scene). In fact when I think about it, most of my
childhood experiences with Physical Education were
overwhelmingly negative. Whenever I could avoid Phys. Ed.
(or P.E. as we called it in England), I did.
Once I finished school, I (eventually) took to fairly
regularly running and swimming, the former at University
where about 7 years after my last compulsory cross country,
I went jogging down the river at the end of a long evening
studying. The latter took place rather later (slightly more
than fifteen years after my last school swimming lesson). In
fact when I think about Phys. Ed. I am uncomfortably aware
of some very negative stereotypes. So I before I launched
into a wildly prejudiced opinion column on the subject I
decided to find out something more about it.
I wondered how a such a department at a university compares
to my experience of other University Departments. What kind
of people work there? What sort of training takes you into a
career in Physical Education, etc. My expectations were very
uncertain, mostly featuring old men in tracksuits and lots
of shouting. So I spoke to Professor Robert Schutz of the
School of Human Kinetics at U.B.C. (University of British
Columbia) here in Vancouver to get an inside perspective on
a range of questions. It turns out my own preconceptions are
not unusual, in fact that type of reaction is one of the
reasons the name was changed from School of Physical
Education and Recreation the more appealing "Human Kinetics"
which lacks some of those negative (or at least
stereotypical) associations. Mention Phys. Ed. and
practically everyone thinks of volleyball, rugby or
whatever, and someone screaming "come on, RUN!" The physical
rather than the cerebral.<P>
It is, says Schutz, "a prejudice we fight all the time." The
School is in fact quite separate from Athletics which is a
separate entity. The Faculty includes people who have no
interest at all in sports as such. Its work covers a wide
range of activities, and he makes a point of correcting me
when I talk of "training," he prefers to talk of
"education," and points out that they have faculty members
funded by the Medical Research Council, The Social Sciences
and Engineering Research Council, NSERC, and others, just
like any other faculty. He sums up by recounting a
conversation with a Wisconsin bus driver towards the end of
his three year doctoral study in mathematical psychology and
computer science (he started out as a mathematics and sports
teacher).
"What do you do?" the driver asked.
"Well, I'm finishing my Ph.D."
"What in?"
"Physical Education."
"Wow, how many push ups can you do?"
Given my own experiences I wondered how much the quality of
the Phys. Ed. experience was valued both within and without
the subject. The "party line" is that positive experiences
at a younger age encourage participation later and even when
participation is not voluntary it seems it may have some
connection with activity at later stages of life. Schutz
believes that one of the things which contributes to a
helpful environment is a healthy level of competition, but
"healthy" is defined rather differently from what my
preconceptions might have told me. In fact there has been a
good deal published about the effects of competition, the
National Coaching Association has even published guidelines
outlining the desirable levels of competition for different
age groups. The overall feeling seems to be that at certain
ages at least, declaring a winner should be avoided, and
Schutz himself prefers to emphasize the participation in
competition rather than who wins and who loses. In fact he
had raised one of the problems I had been loosely thinking
about myself. The disincentive an unhealthy competitive
environment can provide when only the winners get any
positive feedback and everyone else is a loser -- leaving
the experience with very negative impressions. I vividly
recall a very strong "winner" ethic -- explicitly stated or
otherwise. There were empty phrases that went with it "its
not winning that matters," but school and society around one
made it quite clear by their behaviour that winning was all
that really mattered.
I retain the uneasy feeling that however noble ones
conscious sentiments about the subject (and by no means
everyone would agree that obsessive competitiveness is
altogether a bad thing), changes of policy do not
necessarily find expression in changed attitudes at a deeper
level. Attitudes and beliefs are expressed by far more than
simply what we tell each other verbally or even consciously.
But then I "did my time" (as I think of it) on the other
side of the Atlantic and I wondered if there was some
difference in the Canadian perception of sports as opposed
to other nations. As it turns out, Schutz himself along with
a colleague (Frank Small) at the University of Washington
did research in that area. Generally, he thinks that
psychologically the values associated with sports remain
very similar across Canada, the US and Europe. However, he
noted that whilst many US institutions absolutely require
their students to take part in one or two semesters of Phys.
Ed. courses, he is aware of no Canadian Universities that
have such a requirement, a fact which may reflect some
underlying differences in the philosophy of the two
countries. In fact it seems that (in general) parents,
teachers and students all value Physical Education pretty
much equally with (if not higher than) other subjects, up
until having to compete for university places, then it
drops somewhat in the list of priorities (you don't need
Phys. Ed. to get into college, but you do need a lot of
other things).
Well, if there were no big national differences I wondered
if there were province to province differences. After all
the possibilities in British Columbia (with an accessible
coastline, mountains all over the place, and fairly stable
weather) are very different from Manitoba (-40C on a bad day
and chronically cold all winter, no realistically accessible
coastline, and inescapably flat), you might think that aside
from the inevitable differences in what sports people do,
there might also be differences in attitude to it.
Apparently not however, the only variation that Schutz could
suggest was that in BC people may tend to be more active
(because there is more variety of available activities), but
at the same time that fitness monitoring programmes are less
active here. I wonder if it is simply that the assessment
programmes a re most used where people have the least choice
of what they can do, where people have more choice they are
out doing something rather than worrying about how much
exercise they ought to be taking. In any case there is
little doubt that public exercise is financially significant
both because of the commerce related to sporting activities
and because of the probable health costs of unhealthy life
styles including leading a very inactive life and not
maintaining a "healthy" level of fitness.
I was certainly surprised by the reality of a Phys. Ed.
Faculty compared to my one dimensional preconceptions. Above
all, I was pleased to find that the things which had left me
(and I think most of my schoolfriends) with such negative
impressions have in fact been recognized by professionals in
the Phys. Ed. area. Whether that has translated or ever will
translate into a changed mindset in society at large is
something we shall just have to wait and see.
- Dr. Euan Taylor, Vancouver, Canada
ertaylor@unixg.ubc.ca
The Runner Next Door
--------------------
If the terms "negative splits," "fartleks," "polyurethane
midsoles," "butt-kicks," and "LSD runs" fail to conjure up
any corresponding images in your mind, at least you'll admit
that this jargon sounds rather intriguing. It's runners'
talk, and they can spew this stuff for hours on end. To
become proficient yourself, read on and learn all about the
inner workings of that skinny guy in the purple tights you
almost ran over with the snow plow the other day.
6:15 a.m.
Alarm. A dedicated runner's day often starts with an easy
run in the morning in preparation for a hard workout later
in the day. Following this typical 5-miler, the healthy
runner will consume vast quantities of cereal, explaining
that she is replenishing her glycogen supplies. However,
contrary to popular belief, most runners are, by nature,
unhealthy. They shun doctors, run themselves into the ground
and wonder why they are not setting pr's. And because
obsessiveness is also a characteristic of the runner (almost
a given in marathon and in ultra-distance runners), they may
shun food altogether as well, not wishing to carry anything
extra around those 25 laps on the track.
12:00 Noon
Runners will either use their lunch break to (surprise) go
for a run, although the netheads -- those of you reading
this article, for example -- may also use this time to catch
up with their virtual running partners.
5:00 p.m.
Off to the track for an interval session. Here the runner
may come into contact with the jogger. In order not to
offend runners, it is crucial to understand the difference
between running and jogging and to use these terms
appropriately. When in doubt, always use the word "runner;"
a jogger won't know the difference anyway. Basically, a
"runner" runs to improve; a "jogger" jogs to lose weight, to
be healthy, or to cross-train. With some practice, you'll
immediately be able to tell the difference -- that man
wearing the headphones, Ked sneakers, and fuchsia sweat
ensemble is a jogger. But that woman who zoomed by so fast
you couldn't tell if she was wearing anything, she is a
runner. Once at the track, the runner will probably think
about stretching, and may even succumb to bending over a bit
before going for a warmup "jog." (The term 'jog' can be used
here as in this case it is preliminary to the "run" -- real
runners do jog occasionally.) The track session could
include any number of intervals, ladders, or repeats, but
most likely it will leave the runner tired and famished,
ready to finally head home. If he doesn't fall asleep over
his fifth plate of pasta, the runner may engage in some non-
running-related activities before bed.
Of course, this is only an ordinary day in an typical
runner's life. Often, though, races disrupt this normal
flow, for as much as a week previous to the actual day of
the race (depending on the race's distance and importance).
During pre-race periods, it's important to be careful what
you say to a runner. Don't say the wrong thing (or the right
thing at the wrong time), anything at all at certain times,
or nothing at other times. This, too, will take some
practice. Don't feel insulted if a runner ignores you during
this period; in fact, you may want to ignore anything she
says until after the race. But be careful about post-race
comments as well, and follow the same pre-race guidelines
about what to say.
A final comment: despite anything you've just read to the
contrary, runners are actually some of the most intriguing
people on this planet. Don't be intimidated by them -- they
won't bite, and they'll tell you more than you ever wanted
to know about their current overuse injury if you just ask.
- Sheila Eldred, Oxford, UK
sheila.eldred@keble.oxford.ac.uk
An Invitation to Fencing
------------------------
The image of fencing is sometimes confused with the clashing
of swords seen in the movies, from the classic exploits of
Errol Flynn to the latest incarnation of The Three
Musketeers. When fencers see sword fighting on the silver
screen they are almost always disappointed by the lack of
thought that is displayed in the fights. For fencing is
about an interchange of ideas -- ideas intended to deceive
or surprise. Fencing is about thinking and transferring
thoughts into action at the maximum rate and with the
maximum precision.
Of course movie sword fighting is not intended to be
fencing, but as many people have seen more sword play on the
movie screen than in a fencing competition, perhaps a few
words about how these two activities differ is one way to
convey some of the spirit of the modern sport. For example
in the movies the sword-fighters often just launch
themselves into the action and then start banging away. But
a big part of fencing is in choosing the best moment for
attack and this involves a certain amount of legwork in
order to lure the opponent into a false step or a false
sense of security. A second example is that when an attack
is begun to the head--for example--it finishes on the head,
or more often is blocked by a parry. This may be realistic
with a period sword, but with the light weapons used in
modern fencing, an important aspect of the game is to
conceal the intended target of a thrust by threatening
another, or to change the intended target on the fly in
response to the opponents defensive actions. One thing that
the movies and fencing do share, though, is passion. Whether
fighting for one's life or for a medal, fencing requires a
complete focusing of one's mental energy on the task of
striking the opponent.
Fencing can be done with any one of three different types of
weapons (fencers do not tend to use the word "sword"), each
with slightly different rules: Foil, Sabre, and Epee. All
three share a great deal in terms of technique, but each has
its own distinctive character and athletes of a high calibre
generally concentrate their training and competition in one
of the three weapons.
Foil
Ironically, the roots of fencing go back to the introduction
of gunpowder into Europe and the invention of the gun. This
innovation made armour ineffective and that meant an end to
the heavy two handed swords that were needed in order to
make an impression on a man in armour. Swords became lighter
and were used less for warfare and more for self-defense and
for duelling. In order to train for duelling in a non lethal
way, swords were tipped with a dull point and certain
conventions of scoring were introduced with the intention of
instilling the habits that would prove most useful in a
duel. The rules of Foil can be understood in these terms. In
a duel with weapons such as the shortsword popular with the
French nobility of the 17th century, it is important to hit
with a thrust and to hit a vital part of the body. In Foil
points can only be scored when the tip of the weapon lands
on the torso of the opponent; the arms and legs are deemed
not vital enough, and the head was not a suitable target in
practice, until the development of the fencing mask.
Furthermore, as it is small satisfaction to seriously wound
ones opponent in a duel only a split second before one is
seriously wounded oneself, Foil fencing does not award
points solely based on who hit first. Instead the rules
encourage defensive play by dictating that an attack must be
defended against before a valid response--or riposte--can be
given. Thus the right to attack ("right of way") goes back
and forth like the ball in tennis. In the case of hits
arriving at about the same time, the point is scored by the
fencer who had "right of way."
Much of the essence of foil comes from the fast exchange of
the right of way and the consequent alternation of attack
and defense. The fencers will generally move along the strip
"pushing" and "pulling" each other with threats and retreats
either looking for the best moment to attack, or attempting
to fool the opponent into believing the advantage is his
when it isn't. It usually doesn't take long before one of
the fencers takes the plunge and attacks -- typically
pushing off the back foot into a lunge. If the defender
cannot (or chooses not) to step away, he or she will try to
"parry" the attack and if successful will "riposte." Now the
tables are turned and the original attacker must defend and
may be able to make a riposte back ("counter-riposte").
This is the basic pattern but it comes in a splendid
variety. The attack may be made directly or might involve
some preparatory attacking of the defender's blade. The
defense can be made with a number of different parries. The
defender may even decide not to parry, but rather attempt to
force the attacker to miss by either stepping back or even
stepping forward. The attacker may deceive (avoid contact
with) the parry and continue the attack either to the same
area of the torso or another. The method of deceiving the
parry depends on which type of parry is used and thus
requires extremely fast reaction or careful reading of what
the defender is most likely to do. If the first parry is
deceived, the defender may have time to form a second parry
-- especially if the first parry was a mere ruse and the
second was part of the original plan. Once the parry is made
everything turns a round the defender is now attacking with
a riposte and the attacker must defend against it. The
riposter may attempt to hit with simple thrust, or may
deceive the original attackers parry. You may think this
could go on for quite a while, but usually either a hit is
made, or someone defends by re t reating and the game of
looking for just the right moment to attack starts again.
Sabre
The Sabre is descended from the cavalry sabre. The version
used in competition though is a far cry from it's heavy
antecedent. It is light and quick. Points may be scored
either with a thrust as in Foil or with the side of the
blade, the latter is called a "cut." The target is the
entire body above the waist including the head and arms. The
conventions concerning the right to hit are the same as in
Foil.
Because the parries must defend against cuts from many
angles, they require fairly large movements, this makes them
more easily deceived with some fast fingerwork than in Foil
and shifts the advantage towards the attack. Thus there is
little waiting a round in sabre, one or the other fencer
will soon attack -- and often both attack at the same time.
Thus one aspect of its cavalry heritage Sabre has not lost
is the charge. But that is not to say that Sabre is merely a
race to see who can attack first. Tricking your opponent
into attacking at the wrong time can lead to a fairly easy
parry and riposte. And the fact that the arm is target makes
the attacker susceptible to being hit on the wrist as he or
she prepares for the attack. The exchange of attacks parries
and ripostes seen in Foil is also seen in Sabre, but the
emphasis is perhaps even more on attacking at the right time
with the right distance.
Epee
The Epee is a direct descendant of the short sword used by
courtiers for duelling. As honour was generally satisfied by
drawing first blood, in Epee points are scored by hitting
first, anywhere on the body. The conventions of right of way
do not apply. As with the Foil, the Epee is strictly a
thrusting weapon, hits with the edge are not counted. The
absence of conventions that put an emphasis on parrying
means that the best defense in Epée is often a good
offense. If your opponent attacks the body, it may be
possible to attack them back on the arm, the difference of
distance translates to a difference in time and the "counter
attack" to the arm is likely to get the point. Even an
attack to the arm can be defended against by a thrust that
defends with the guard of the weapon and counter attacks
with the tip. Of course the option to parry is still there.
It is ironic, but the absence of conventions to promote
defending makes attacking a risky proposition. Thus Epee,
more than foil and much more than sabre, can be a waiting
game. But it is an active waiting. The feet are constantly
being used to push or pull the opponent. The hand is busy
making false attacks to test the defenses and to disguise
the real attack when it comes. The eyes are busy learning
the reactions of the opponent to each action. And the
fingers are feeling the reaction of the opponent whenever
the blades meet.
When the attack does come, if it is not a short attack to an
ill-defended part of the arm, it is often done in such a way
as to neutralize any possible defense. For example the
"envelopment" is a spiralling thrust made with the point
towards the target so as to pick up the opponents blade on
the way in. This pushes the opponent's point safely out of
the way and makes the angle of his or her blade
unfavourable for a successful parry.
Doesn't it Hurt?
The typical hit in fencing noticable, but doesn't hurt. The
occasional hit will sting for a bit and may leave a small
red mark for a day or two.
Fencing is one of the safest sports there is. An Ontario
Government study found that of all sports surveyed it was
second only to lawn bowling in it's safety record. In recent
years the introduction of better equipment has made it even
safer. Most injuries are of the nature of twisted ankles or
pulled ligaments. It is possible for a broken blade to
penetrate the protective clothing, but this is extremely
rare.
Learning to Fence
Fencing is an enjoyable sport or pastime for people of all
ages. It is my observation and that of other fencers and
coaches that almost anyone can learn to fence well -- that
is at a level where one begins to touch on the beauty of the
sport. The only prerequisite is enough dedication to stick
with it for a while.
The learning curve for fencing is generally quite long. In
few other sports do you have to learn to walk all over again
and learn to make finger movements as fine as are used in
writing while holding a half kilogram mass in your hand.
When I learned to fence we were taught the basic footwork
and handwork for three months before being allowed to engage
in any sort of bouting. Nowadays most teachers will get to
bouting a lot sooner (perhaps even on the first day), but it
still takes about three months before ones basic ability is
at a level where the bouting starts to resemble fencing. Of
course a good teacher will manage to make that initial
learning time rewarding and enjoyable.
Although there are three different weapons, there is a core
of skills and ideas common to all three. Thus it doesn't
matter which weapon you are taught first. So if you are
hell-bent to become a sabreur, but the local club teaches
Epee first, don't worry, almost everything you are taught
will be useful for all three weapons.
Once the basic technical skills are sufficiently mastered
comes the most intangible part of learning: learning to
apply those skills appropriately against an opponent doing
their utmost to confound you. This is a never-ending process
of self-improvement. There are always better fencers and a
reaction can always be made just a millisecond sooner.
Beyond technique there is tactics: picking the moment,
picking the attack, combining footwork and handwork
appropriately, deciding what attacks are likely and what to
do first in each case; and beyond tactics there is strategy:
deciding if it is better to attack or defend, deciding if it
is better to dominate the footwork or respond to the
opponent's footwork, deciding whether to repeat a previously
successful tactic (because it was successful), avoid it
(because it will be expected), or elaborate on it (for
example begin the same way, but finish differently).
Fencing is usually taught in fencing clubs either private
or associated with larger bodies such as universities or the
local Y. Most clubs will have classes for beginners at least
once a year. To find out about clubs near you the easiest
thing is either to check local universities or to contact
the national fencing organization. The addresses of three of
these are listed at the end of this article and also the
address of the international governing body.
The highest level of teacher is a "master" or "maitre" who
will have had extensive experience and passed exams set by
the national organization.
Competitive & Recreational Fencing
Some fencers are satisfied to fence with the other members
of their club and engage in friendly competition with their
comrades. Others seek new challenges and test their progress
by competing on a local, national, or international level.
Fencing has been an Olympic sport since the first modern
games in 1896.
Both men and women complete in all three weapons -- although
at the international level women's sabre is not yet
recognized. Competitions are also often broken into age
groups so that younger fencers do not have to complete
against much more experienced competitors. There are no
weight divisions as size confers little advantage except in
Epee where long arms can be useful.
Fencing bouts in competitions are observed by referees who
keep track of the score, start and stop bouts, award
penalties when rules are broken, and--in Foil and Sabre--
decide which fencer had the right to hit when there are hits
close in time. The referee is assisted by an electrical
system that senses hits made on target. In Foil and Sabre
the competitors wear electrically conductive clothing and in
Foil and Epee each weapon is tipped with a small spring
loaded button.
Recreational fencers will find fencing an excellent source
of fitness. Whereas running, swimming, and cycling are
calmingly repetitive and aerobics has a certain pack appeal,
fencing allows an infinite variety of creative expression
while providing a combination of aerobic and anaerobic
conditioning.
Competitive fencers find that they need to be in top shape
in order to remain in peak form throughout the many bouts it
takes to get to the pedal podium. They also need to keep
honing their technical, tactical, and strategic skills
through regular practice and one-on-one training sessions
with their coach.
The Spirit of Fencing
For me the beauty of fencing lies in the difficulty of some
of its concepts and in the interplay of ideas between two
opponents.
Take for example, distance and timing. Distance does not
mean just the simple distance between the fencers as can
be measured with a metre stick, it includes the way that
each fencer is moving. For an elementary example, one of the
best ways to obtain a favourable opportunity for attack is
to reverse direction from going backward to going forward,
your opponent is still coming forward and the distance
suddenly closens and now is the moment for attack (timing).
But this is not so easy as it sounds, for your opponent is
already coming forward and may be in a better position to
attack than you who are in the midst of changing direction,
so any anticipation of your plan by the opponent is likely
to be disastrous. And timing does not mean just picking the
moment for an attack. It includes the rhythm that actions
are performed -- for example, two steps and a lunge might be
done in the rhythm slow-fast-slow (thus affecting distance)
-- and it must be tailored to exploit the weaknesses or to
make weaknesses of the strengths of the opponent.
The interplay of ideas in fencing is very fast. In a few
seconds there can be several parry-riposte sequences. Each
action made is a challenge to the opponent to come up with
a counter action. An attack is a challenge to find and
execute an effective parry. A parry is a challenge manage
its deception or to land the hit before the parry is
complete. The responses must be made at reflex action speed,
yet the best response and the best way to execute the best
response vary from opponent to opponent and from situation
to situation. This makes fencing very challenging, always
different and hence extremely rewarding.
For More Information
Online - There is an internet newsgroup (rec.sport.fencing)
devoted to fencing discussion. A WWW home page is also
available at "http://www.ii.uib.no/~arild/fencing.html".
Offline - There are numerous books on fencing although they
can be hard to find. [A list of good fencing books is
maintained as part of the Fencing FAQ, by Morgan Burke.
E-mail him at morgan@sitka.triumf.ca for more information.
- Ian]
National and International Organizations
Federation Internationale d'Escrime
32, Rue La Boetie
75008 Paris, France
Amateur Fencing Association (Britain)
1 Barons Gate
33-35 Rothschild Road
London W4 5HT
Tel: 081 742-3032
Canadian Fencing Federation
1600 Prom. James Naismith Drive
Gloucester, ON K1B 5N4
TEL: (613) 748-5633
FAX: (613) 748-5742
22
- Theo Norvell, Toronto, Canada
===========
DEPARTMENTS
===========
Debate Room
-----------
* The Portrayal of Gays on TV *
Over the past few years gay and lesbian characters have
started appearing on popular TV shows and in the movies. For
example, the highly rated Roseanne show now sports a lesbian
couple, the Northern Exposure nighttime serial added a gay
male couple to its regular cast of characters, and on the
popular prime-time generation-X serial Melrose Place, a gay
man has been a regular resident since the show's premiere
years ago. Although TV shows are starting to sport gay
characters in their regular lineups, these characters rarely
lead realistic lives on screen.Of all the flirting,
touching, kissing and steamy love scenes we are constantly
bombarded with, how many occur between gay characters? None.
Northern Exposure was even afraid to show two men kissing
after reciting their wedding vows to each other -- instead
they were shown giving each other a hug.
In this month's debate column, Teletimes contributors Jon
Gould and Paul Gribble will address the question, how much
gay content is enough, and how much is too much? Jon will
argue that it's acceptable for a TV network to adjust its
programming for the taste of its viewers. Paul will take an
opposing view and argue that although the existence of gay
people in the popular media is an enormously important step
forward, the way in which gay people are portrayed on screen
reduces them to mere token gay characters, which ultimately
amounts to two steps backwards.
- Dr. Euan Taylor, Vancouver, Canada
ertaylor@unixg.ubc.ca
* Two Steps Backwards *
The portrayal of gay people on popular television shows and
the manner in which these shows address gay themes has
changed enormously in recent years. Twenty years ago gay
characters didn't exist on television, and the only "gay
themes" addressed were when characters like "Archie Bunker"
made "fairy" and "fag" wisecracks. Today popular prime time
television shows are beginning to sport regularly appearing,
"openly" gay characters. However, despite this important
improvement, an exploitive and insulting double standard
exists that supports the censorship of realistic depictions
of the lives of gay characters on television.
In order to fully understand the impact of this kind of
depiction of gay people, it is necessary to form an
appropriate context by examining the ways in which gay
people have been portrayed on television in the past.
The Myth of Non-Existence
Up until the 1970's gay people didn't exist on television at
all. Homosexuality was simply not something to be discussed,
either in private or in public. Homosexuality was something
to be hidden, something to deny. This myth of non-existence
was reflected in television programs; gay characters and
storylines dealing with any sort of gay issues or themes
simply didn't exist. It is important to consider how deeply
this kind of denial affects people who consider themselves
to be gay.
Wherever you fall upon the gay region of the Kinsey
continuum, from completely gay to slightly gay, living in a
society that implicitly denies the existence and value or
your feelings is emotionally devastating. If you're gay, or
if you ever thought you might be gay, you've more than
likely experienced the feelings I'm trying to express. If
you're not gay, indulge me for a moment in a revealing
thought experiment, and consider living in a world that
denies the existence of heterosexual people.
Imagine that everyone around you is romantically attracted
to people of the same sex. Imagine that everyone on
television, in the movies, in magazine ads, on billboards,
and in books, have same-sex partners. At the end of the day
your father comes home to his husband and they smooch while
you watch TV. Your brother goes out on dates with other
boys, your sister is married to another woman, and even
though you're secretly attracted to someone in your class
who happens to be of the opposite sex, you're expected to
bring a same-sex partner to your high school prom. The
predominant message you get from people around you is that
you don't belong. Nowhere do you see heterosexual people
portrayed in a positive way -- in fact, you don't see them
portrayed at all. The only exposure you get to
heterosexuality is when it's the brunt of someone's joke,
when it's referred to as a sickness, an aberration,
something to be hidden from view until people can be cured
of it. Denying your existence in this way judges you without
even granting you the consideration of which everyone around
you is automatically entitled. You feel very alone. You know
that other heterosexual people do exist in the world, but
you never see them. They live their lives within an unspoken
subculture, separated from the rest of society. At an early
age you accept the uncomfortable fact that you have a choice
to make as to how to live your life -- to submit to
society's pressures and participate in the denial of your
own feelings by living life as a perpetual lie, or to
separate yourself from "normal" society so that you can live
a life you can finally call your own.
Exploitive Comedy
If you begin to understand how this perpetual denial eats
away at one's individuality and self-esteem, then you can
appreciate how devastating it was when television finally
started to acknowledge the existence of gay people in the
form of exploitive comedy. Campy and effeminate characters
like "Monroe" on Too Close For Comfort perpetuated insulting
stereotypes about what it means to be gay. On Three's
Company, main character "Jack Tripper" pretended to be gay
so that his landlord would let him share an apartment with
two female roommates. His charade was a reliable source of
humour, but it reinforced the message that homosexual people
aren't real, but are caricatures; homosexual feelings aren't
real or valid but are surreptitiously funny. While there are
notable exceptions, television programs today still exploit
gay people for cheap laughs by portraying gay people as
campy, effeminate caricatures (for example, "Jules" on
Anything But Love). By depicting gay people in this way,
homosexuality isn't afforded any dignity or respect but is
considered a hilarious act to be laughed at and made fun of.
During this time in history it was much more difficult than
it is now for gay people to "come out" and acknowledge their
homo-sexuality, so the only gay people most heterosexual
people were exposed to were those portrayed in the popular
media.
Let's briefly return to our thought experiment and think
about what effect this might have on you and your self-
esteem if the tables were turned and heterosexual people
were regularly represented in the popular media by insulting
stereotypical caricatures. Being heterosexual in a sea of
homosexual people, you feel like you don't exist. You search
your environment for other heterosexual people with whom to
identify. The message that is conveyed to your friends, to
your family, to people that haven't ever met you, and
perhaps most damaging, to you, yourself, is that people who
are heterosexual are jokes, their heterosexual feelings
are funny, and their existence in general is a hilarious
circus act to be mocked and exploited for cheap laughs.
You've gone from feeling like people won't acknowledge your
existence to feeling like people are pointing at you and
your emotions and laughing, at the expense of your dignity
and self esteem.
AIDS & "Issue" Episodes
In the early 1980's the onset of the AIDS epidemic had a
profound impact upon the way gay people were portrayed in
the news and popular media. The unknown disease was first
identified widely in gay men, and was hence called "GRID"
(Gay Related Immune Deficiency) and sometimes "Gay Cancer."
The general public was bombarded with news stories about the
fatal threat; gay people everywhere were in danger of dying
of this new unknown disease. It took a considerable amount
of time before the Center for Disease Control in the U.S.A.
publicly stated that the disease could be transmitted
sexually -- by homosexual or heterosexual contact, and in
doing so opened (some) people's eyes to the fact that the
disease doesn't discriminate based upon sexual orientation.
By the time the disease was renamed "AIDS" (Acquired Immune
Deficiency Syndrome), gay people, gay organizations, and
homosexual issues in general had experienced a sudden
profound increase in widespread media exposure, thanks
mostly to unjustified paranoia and general misinformation.
Suddenly the words "gay" and "homosexual," and indeed gay
people themselves, were appearing where they had never
before seen the light of day -- on the front pages of
newspapers, on national news programs, and of course on
popular televisions shows.
Weekly series shows like St. Elsewhere and Hill Street
Blues, as well as daytime soap operas began to address the
"AIDS issue" by centering one and sometimes two episodes
around a character dying of AIDS -- usually a gay man. The
horrible predicament these characters and their friends and
families found themselves in was consistently milked for all
the melodrama the screenwriters could squeeze out of the
situation. The controversy surrounding the disease coupled
with the boldness of including a gay character on screen
made airing an "AIDS episode" good sense in terms of
ratings.
While these kinds of shows usually accurately depict the
hateful intolerances that these people experience daily
because of the fear and prejudice surrounding AIDS, they
consistently miss the otherwise rare opportunity to explore
the many personal and social issues surrounding
homosexuality. The implicit message is that homosexuality,
and all that it means to live as a gay person in a
heterosexual society, is not worthy of our consideration.
The gay characters are only revealed as being gay because
they have AIDS. Their homosexuality is not aff o rded any
validity or dignity on its own. All of the emotions and
experiences involved in growing up and living as a gay
person -- homosexual life -- are ignored and instead our
attention is focused time after time on homosexual death.
Returning to our thought experiment, you find yourself
bombarded by the message that "heterosexual = AIDS = death."
Craving any form of exposure of heterosexual people and
their lives in the mass media, you're suddenly bombarded
with melodramatic accounts of the slow and painful deaths of
heterosexual people everywhere. Fundamentalist preachers
sermonize to you and millions of others that AIDS is God's
wrath for the evils of heterosexuality. You witness
heterosexual people (irregardless of their "HIV status"),
and people with AIDS (irregardless of their sexual
orientation) being treated with hateful indignity.
Heterosexual people are suspected as contagious harbingers
of evil disease, and people with AIDS are suspected as
sexually irresponsible queers. Whatever remnants of self-
esteem you may have held on to up until now are undoubtedly
seriously threatened.
Today's Double-Standard
The past five years or so have witnessed a lot of
improvements in the way gay people are portrayed on
television. A few popular prime time shows now include gay
characters in their regular ongoing storylines. A lesbian
couple is regularly featured on the Roseanne show; a recent
episode of Northern Exposure featured the wedding of two
regularly appearing gay men; a young gay man has been on the
regular cast of Melrose Place from the very beginning.
However, although it appears that a real effort is being
made to portray gay characters on television in a more
positive and realistic light, a ridiculous double standard
exists that robs these characters of the same dignity and
respect automatically afforded to heterosexual characters.
On the season finale of <I>Melrose Place</I>, for example, a
scene in which "Matt," the young gay character, kisses
another man was shamefully censored -- the scene was edited
so badly, the video and sound slowing down, speeding up, and
jumping around, that the sacrifice in image quality probably
didn't justify the exclusion of the kiss -- or did it? The
embarrassing fact is that it probably did. The new police
drama N.Y.P.D. Blue has recently broken new ground in prime
time television by including heterosexual love scenes
depicting partial nudity. While it is considered acceptable
to show half-naked heterosexual characters kissing, fondling,
and making love to each other, a simple kiss between two
fully clothed consenting adult gay men is out of the
question.
This show in addition to many others over the past decade
has also broken new ground in terms of depicting violence on
prime time television. What kind of message is sent to
people -- especially to children -- when murder, rape,
assault, and other gory violence is regularly depicted on
television, yet beautiful, romantic love between two adults
(who happen to be of the same sex) is considered wrong?
The message that this double standard sends to people is
that although it is acceptable to acknowledge the existence
of gay people, their lives should be hidden away. This
reduces these characters to token gay characters whose
existence, while intended to reveal the "progressive"
sensibilities of the TV networks that produce the programs,
ultimately send an implicit message to television viewers,
both gay and straight, that although gay people exist, their
interests, their loves, their fears and joys, indeed their
entire lives should be hidden from view.
Let's delve into our thought experiment one more time, (and
if you're getting tired of it, just imagine living it every
day of your life!). After many years of disappointment in
watching heterosexual people depicted as jokes and "issues,"
you finally observe heterosexual characters being depicted
simply as everyday people who happen to be heterosexual. You
eagerly tune in every week expecting to finally watch the
comedy and drama of these characters' lives explored with
the same frankness and openness afforded to the lives of
homosexual characters.
Before you know it, however, it's the end of the season, and
although the other (homosexual) characters have each
experienced crises, loves, injustices, and soul-searching
angst in all its melodramatic glory, the only thing you know
about the heterosexual characters is that they are
heterosexual. Although the homosexuality of the gay
characters constantly played an integral role in the
storylines surrounding them, (who they fell in love with,
who fell in love with them, who dumped them, who they
surreptitiously slept with, what jealous lover threatened to
kill them, their changing relationship with their parents
and friends), the heterosexuality of the heterosexual
characters did not play any part whatsoever in their on
screen lives.
You wonder what people are afraid of. You wonder what it is
about your heterosexual feelings and experiences that makes
people so vehemently opposed to acknowledging them in the
same open, honest environment in which gay issues are so
regularly explored. You reflect on the unfortunate fact that
the answer is wrapped up in the complex social history of
public attitudes toward heterosexuality over the past few
hundred years. Then you realize that the answer is not so
complex after all. The answer is simple. The reason behind
the history of the portrayal of heterosexual people on
television is identical to the reason behind today's
outrageous double standard: simple, unacceptable prejudice
-- narrowÑminded discrimination because of the gender of the
person you love. You wonder what possesses people to embrace
this unjustifiable bigotry and reject so much sincere,
honest, romantic (heterosexual) love in a world that seems
to be so devoid of harmony.
It has been said that television is a reflection of our
society. It is clear then from both the (often recurring)
history of the treatment of gay people on television and the
present insulting double standard that until gay characters
are depicted with the same levels of candor and honesty
automatically granted to heterosexual characters, gay,
lesbian and bisexual people in the real world will have to
continue the painful daily struggle, both privately and
publicly, for equal dignity, equal respect, and most
importantly, equal treatment.
- Paul Gribble, Montreal, Canada
gribble@motion.psych.mcgill.ca
Sources
"Queer Resources Directory" (QRD) - accessible by electronic
mail, BBS, FTP, WAIS, gopher, and WWW (lynx and Mosaic). For
details e-mail qrdstaff@vector.casti.com or ftp/gopher to
vector.casti.com (149.52.1.130) and look in "/pub/QRD."
* You Get What You Pay For *
Is homophobia wrong? Yes. Do I think network censors should
be less conservative in depicting gay life on television?
Perhaps. But should they be expected to? No.
Paul and I don't agree with the result desired -- we both
seek a society in which heterosexuals and homosexuals alike
are accepted and tolerated. The difference is how we get
there Paul believes that the media has an affirmative
obligation to expose more viewers to gay lifestyle. I don't.
Television is a mirror of life; it depicts the values and
appeals to the tastes of its viewers. If we want to see more
gay characters on television, we shouldn't expect the
television producers to take the initiative. We need to
change social attitudes, from which television will follow.
To be sure, there is a bit of a chicken and egg question
here. Television can play a part in changing social
attitudes, but its responsibility should be limited to news
coverage. If gay and lesbian issues are newsworthy, they
should be covered. But there is a big difference between the
media's reacting to news-worthy events and its affirmative
decision to depict gay lifestyle in entertainment
programming. The difference is viewers. Television survives
only to the extent that it attracts viewers. If viewers want
to see gay characters, television should have more of them.
Conversely, if viewers want Christian broadcasting, a
television executive would be foolish to ignore their
wishes. This is exactly why we see organised protests over
television programming. Parent groups who want to reduce sex
and violence, educators who argue against sophomoric
programming, housewives who petition for a soap opera -- all
are trying to tell television executives what they want, and
the producers ought to pay attention. Run croquet three
times a day and you are likely to lose your station.
In the end, the question is whether viewers want, or are
willing
to tolerate, gay lifestyles on television. My sense
is that we're beginning to see inroads, but viewers aren't
ready for the kiss that Northern Exposure avoided.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe CBS was off. But you have to convince
them that their read of society was wrong. Write letters.
Protest their sponsors. Start a cable station dedicated to
gay and lesbian programming. But don't expect them to buck
general sentiment. Changing viewers' preferences is not the
responsibility of the broadcasters.
- Jon Gould, Chicago, USA
Music Notes: Feature
--------------------
* A Whole Lollapalooza Goin' On! *
[The rock ' n ' roll bandwagon is on its way, and Russell
Weinberger, our man in Davis, California, takes a look at
this year's line-up. - Ken]
************************************************************
The fullblaze of summer now hints at its imminent arrival.
And with the heat and dust of yet another dry California
season comes the long-awaited arrival of Lollapalooza 1994.
The new line-up may disappoint alternative-junkies looking
for another fix of Pearl Jam before the world realizes they
are, in fact, a pop band. Even a quick glance at this year's
selections reveals a very real difference from previous
Lollapaloozii. This cast is closer to the original intent of
the all-day mega-concert. In its first conception, Jane's
Addiction frontman Perry Farrell wanted to offer a real
barrage of new and different types of music. The first three
concerts, though a true change of stadium pace, were really
festivals of college rockers, with a dash of rap and R&B for
flavor. This year, the organizers have something different
planned:
MAINSTAGE
Smashing Pumpkins
Beastie Boys
George Clinton & P-Funk Allstars
The Breeders
A Tribe Called Quest
Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds
L7
Green Day
SECOND STAGE
(Check dates to find out who's taking the second stage in
your town)
Jul 1 - Aug 3 The Flaming Lips
Jul 1 - Aug 3 Verve
Ju 1 - July 8 The Souls of Mischief
Jul 1 - July 15 Rollerskate Skinny
Jul 1 - July 15 The Frogs
Jul 9 - Aug 3 Luscious Jackson
Jul 16 - Aug 3 Palace Songs
Jul 16 - July 24 Guided by Voices
Jul 25 - Aug 3 Girls Against Boys
Aug 4 - Sept 4 Stereolab
Aug 4 - Aug 11 Blast Off Country-Style
Aug 4 - Aug 18 Charlie Hunter Trio
Aug 4 - Aug 11 Fu-Schnickens
Aug 4 - Aug 11 Lambchop
Aug 12 - Sept 4 Shudder to Think
Aug 12 - Sept 4 The Boo Radleys
Aug 12 - Aug 18 King Kong
Aug 19 - Sept 4 The Pharcyde
Aug 19 - Sept 4 Shonen Knife
For everyone wondering what to expect for their 30+ dollars,
here's a brief overview:
First, there's Green Day. This Berkeley, California-based
band recently made it big with the release of Dookie, moving
to the top of alternative and college charts all over the
U.S. The band, however, is far from new. I remember seeing
them for five bucks at the Gillman St Project in Berkeley
when they had a hard edge and an attitude that wouldn't
quit. Even then, when they were still figuring out how to
play their instruments, they were a band with unmatched
energy and a stage presence that brought crowds back week
after week. Their new album, quite a bit tamer than their
former works, is reminiscent of classic English power pop
the likes of which hasn't been seen since the Buzzcocks. (It
would probably be quite a bit more fun to see them in the
closed, sweaty confines of a smokey club.)
Next comes L7, the all female hardcore band which has
recently appeared in John Waters' latest movie, Serial Mom
(under the nom du flique, Camel Lips) Definitely not for the
timid, L7 takes up the slack where 45 Grave and The Slits
left off. Their music is some of the strongest stuff around,
complete with big nasty guitars, heavy bass lines, and
spitfire drumbeats sure to send any general-admission crowd
into a frenzy. Add to this the emergence of the Riot Grrrl
movement, and it's easy to understand why L7 was chosen to
fill the slot Babes In Toyland left behind last year.
Then, Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds will take fill main stage
with the sounds of doom and gloom that has made them
legendary in underground circles. Cave, backed by Blixa
Bargeld on guitar (of Einsturzende Neubauten fame) and the
rest of the Bad Seeds combines gothic mystique with the
lyrical story-telling styles of Leonard Cohen and Tom Waits
to produce a sound that is nonetheless unique. Featured in
several Wim Wenders movies, including Wings of Desire,
Cave's resonant baritone voice is both chilling and
enthralling. This combined with a variety of instruments
from violin to piano make his music some of the most diverse
and varied around. More impressive is his range of subject
matter which spans from tales of bar brawls to lost loves to
diatribes on the sad state of the modern world. The Seeds'
latest release, Let Love In, is a definitive "theme album"
replete with a cynical sense of humor.
The tone changes yet again with A Tribe Called Quest, a
smart act which combines intricate rap with jazzy rhythms
and melodious harmonies. With the overwhelming success of
their first album and their recently released second already
on its way up the charts, the Tribe is proving itself a band
whose unstoppable innovation has changed and influenced hip-
hop as well.
Following them is The Breeders. Fronted by ex-Pixi Kim Deal,
the Breeders' blend of psychedelia and punk have made them
an MTV smash as well as a college radio favorite. The power
and strength of this band make it difficult to accurately
describe. However, if all you have heard is their hit
single, "Cannonball," get ready for quite a bit more. Their
repertoire includes several more traditional punk songs
along with a cover of The Beatles' "Happiness is a Warm Gun"
which is innovative enough to add another dimension to John
Lennon's classic anthem to heroin.
There really isn't enough to be said for the next act. The
founder of Parliament, Funkadelic and their various off
shoots, George Clinton is the godfather of post- James Brown
funk and, without a doubt, one of the most influential
musicians of our time. Let's just say this: without this
Clinton, there would be no Red Hot Chili Peppers, no Faith
No More, and even Prince would be struggling for a musical
identity.
The Beastie Boys started as a NYC hardcore act with little
or no talent which tried rap out as a joke and has since
become one of the biggest and most important hip-hop acts
around. From their first album, the humorous Licensed to
Ill, the Boys have come a long way in helping to redefine
and reshape hip-hop. They are unique in that they have been
able to continue to produce music that is wholly their own
and still draw fans of every discriminating taste. They
were, most importantly, one of the first hip-hop bands to
actually play their instruments both on their album and on
stage, replacing a drum machine with a live drummer, and
using guitars instead of samples. Their next release, due
May 31, promises to deliver more of the same with further
innovations.
Headlining Lollapalooza is The Smashing Pumpkins, a Chicago-
based psychedelic band whose haunting melodies and harmonies
make them one of the most successful bands of their sort.
Like Jane's Addiction, Smashing Pumpkins attract fans from
heavy metal, alternative rock, and just about every other
circle of music listeners. Their second, critically
acclaimed release topped college charts and made them one of
the premier bands of the '90s. Unfortunately, judging from
interviews on MTV and in Rolling Stone, it looks as though
this may be one of the last times they play live. At least
they're likely to go out with a bang.
There you have it. Lollapalooza 1994 looks as if it may be
the best yet, topping even the tremendous lineup of the
first Lollapalooza in 1990. Definitely worth the money and
who knows, they might even have the body-piercing booth
again, and you can go home with a little permanent memento.
- Russell Weinberger, Davis, California, USA
c/o tt-entertainment@teletimes.com
Music Notes: Reviews
--------------------
All reviews based on a five star rating system
Van Morrison - A Night in San Francisco ****
(Polydor/Polygram)
With his last few releases approaching snooze-control, it's
only natural to see a Van Morrison live record as a plain
holding-pattern move. In fact, one glance at the song-list
sets off alarm bells: isn't this the third time around for
"Vanlose Stairway"? But the proof is in the listening, and
it turns out this two-disc, 22-cut album--recorded on two
Bay Area nights last year--is for people who miss the old
rambunctious, eclectic Van-the-Man. There's little
meditative about his rowdy, Celtic-flavoured reworkings of
early fare like "Moondance" or "Tupelo Honey", and even his
mellower recent stuff, like "In the Garden" and "So Quiet in
Here" is interrupted by surprising snippets of tunes from
James Brown, Sly Stone, and Rogers and Hart (as in "My Funny
Valentine"). Expected guests like Georgie Fame, John Lee
Hooker, saxist Candy Dulfer, and guitarist Ronnie Johnson
(Morrison's current musical director) turn up the fun
quotient, and he has bluesers Junior Wells and Jimmy
Witherspoon shouting some of the songs which first inspired
the Belfast Cowboy in his pre-Them days. He also shows the
sense to have other singers tackle some of his over-exposed
ditties, like Hooker's growling "Gloria" or Brian Kennedy's
subtle take on the sentimental "Have I Told You Lately That
I Love You?". But even without the cameos, the record
offers something Morrison hasn't delivered in years: real
excitement.
Boz Scaggs - Some Change ***1/2
(Virgin/EMI)
In the 1970s, Boz Scaggs was an Al Green for people scared
of black music, and little happened in his sporadic
subsequent output to dispel that notion. The thing is, you
imitate something long enough, sometimes you turn into the
real thing. Actually, Boz was always a guitarist and singer
of excellent taste, going back to his Texas days with the
Steve Miller Blues Band. Surprisingly, some of that early
enthusiasm infuses Some Change, a record more engaging than
it has any right to be. His ersatz soul-man vocals are still
up front, but the Jim Nabors goofiness--which always
threatened to put another "O" in his first name--has fallen
away in favour of a more genuinely ruminative style. Scaggs
played most of the instruments, along with co-producer and
drummer Ricky Fataar (although guest key-boardists like
Booker T. Jones and Smitty Smith pop up), giving the album
an intimate, late-night feel. After a clumsy, pop-eager
opening tune, it settles down to older-but-wiser
observations of wayward love. And even if there's little
revelatory in the lyrics, tunes like "Time", "Illusion" and
the gently propulsive title cut have a seductive sweep that
makes everything feel as profound as a second scotch with a
long-lost friend.
Alison Moyet - Essex *
(Columbia/Sony)
It's hard to believe that the big-voiced Moyet, as part of
the pre-Eurythmics Yaz (or Yazoo, in some places), was once
a tower of soul in the vanilla-synth world of "New Wave"
music. Now that everybody's rediscovered dance music, not to
mention Aretha Franklin (the original edition, anyway), this
once-innovative diva is just another singer, churning out
would-be hits in the faceless English pop machine. Sure, she
wrote most of these forgettable numbers, but she sounds numb
and detached in the Pet Shop Boys-like production provided
by Ian Broudie and Pete Glenister. The only time she wakes
up, ironically, is for one acoustic-guitar-based cut written
by Jules Shear. But even "Whispering Your Name" is shot in
the house remix ending the disc. What's next, hitting the
disco-revival circuit with Gloria Gaynor?
The Brian Setzer Orchestra **
(Hollywood/WEA)
It's funny what happens to some rockers as they get older:
as the edge goes, they slowly become whatever they were
rebelling against. Of course, Setzer's retro-billy Stray
Cats were always in pose mode, and his guitar often betrayed
more intelligence than the song selection let on. Now he's
gone the Colin James route and embraced music made before he
was born. Although many of the tunes were written by Setzer,
they're intended to recall the late-'40s milieu in which
big-band, blues, and hillbilly sounds collided for the first
time. But primordial chemistry like that can't be recreated,
and anyway, his voice isn't up to the task. His off-key
Holiday Inn croon sounds silly on pseudo-raunchy items like
"Ball and Chain" and "Sittin' on It All the Time", and the
sub-Jack Jones impression is driven home by ill-advised
covers of "Route 66" and (I kid you not) "A Nightingale Sang
in Barkley Square". His guitar-playing, though used sparely,
is always tops, and you have to wonder when Setzer'll stop
kidding around and put out a smart instrumental record.
Sir Douglas Quintet - Day Dreaming at Midnight ****
(Elektra/WEA)
Sir Doug is back, and it's a testament to changing tastes
that his retooled '60s sound fits in perfectly with today's
jangly alternative music. What's startling is how little
it's retooled. The Beatle hair may be gone, but the Austin,
Texas-via-Sooke, B.C. songwriter is still purveying his
infectious blend of Tex-Mex rhythms, bluesy singing, cheesy
garage-band effects, and wall-o'-guitar twang (maybe too
much guitar on some tracks). It helps that veteran
Quinteters, like Farfisa-man Augie Meyers and guitarist
Louie Ortega, are back, and they're joined by Creedence
Clearwater rhythm-men Doug Clifford and Stu Cook. Son Shawn
Sahm is also in the fold, on guitars and vocals, and he co-
wrote the set's catchiest tune, "Too Little Too Late", with
his gruff-voiced dad. "Intoxication" and "Dylan Come Lately"
are other standouts, with lyrics about the music Sahm still
loves to death.
Stanley Jordan - Bolero **
(Arista/BMG)
Like the world really needs a 23-minute fusion version of
Ravel's sensual masterpiece. It is worth hearing once for
the African rhythms and odd instruments (shakuhachi flute
and jazzy flugelhorn) wafting through the mix. But the whole
thing is anchored--as in sunk--by one of those maddening
click tracks which made the "Hooked On..." records so
annoying in the early '80s. An antique air hangs over the
rest, as well, with '70s tunes like "Betcha By Golly Now"
and Herbie Hancock's "Chameleon" showing up. The effect is
intentional, but Jordan doesn't really add anything new to
the oldies, except that which any modern studio can
provide. Mainly, it's painful to see how the young
guitarist, with that unique, fingerboard-tapping style, has
failed to live up to his early promise. What good does it do
to swamp a revolutionary technique in a sea of dated
synthesizers? This mindless crossover approach even makes
the 4-minute solo closer sound more like an apologetic
afterthought than a hint of sweet things to come.
McCoy Tyner Big Band - Journey ***1/2
(Verve/Polygram)
In which John Coltrane's favourite pianist and enduring jazz
warrior gets back to his compositional roots in a well-
recorded set of tunes in the vein of his classic turn-of-
the-'70s output for Blue Note and Milestone. With pals Billy
Harper, Joe Ford, and Steve Turr in the horn section, and
with Avery Sharpe and Aaron Scott on bass and drums, the
large group delivers punchy new versions of Tyner's
"Peresina" and "Blues on the Corner" and lively Latin
grooves on three cuts written by bandmembers (Turr's
romantic "Juanita" is the stand-out). Still, the most
effective piece mutes the ensemble for a lovely Dianne
Reeves reading of Sammy Cahn's "You Taught My Heart to
Sing", with lyrics by Tyner and a fine trumpet McCoy Tyner
solo from Jerry Gonzales. This is the blend he tried years
ago with Phyllis Hyman, and its success points to putting
away the orchestra in favour of a quiet duo record of
standards and more rediscovered originals.
Cyrus Chestnut - Revelation ****
(Atlantic/WEA)
This young New Orleans pianist, known for supporting
trumpeter Donald Harrison and singer Betty Carter, is more
playful than Marcus Roberts, but he shares the latter's
encyclopedic grasp of jazz piano idioms--albeit towards the
modern end. With subtle help from bassist Christopher Thomas
and drummer Clarence Penn (although a few cuts are solo),
Chestnut recalls Thelonious Monk on the title cut, Herbie
Nichols on the sprightly "Blues for Nita", and Horace Silver
on the groovin' "Cornbread Puddin'". He also assays
Massenet's brief "Elegie" and approaches the traditional
gospel of "Sweet Hour of Prayer. If the record has a flaw,
it's that Chestnut favours the same few keys, and sometimes
drives his homage-laden pieces a few minutes longer than
necessary. Maybe after backing others for so long, he can
barely contain himself; still, I'd rather see his prodigious
talent meted out in tastier bites.
- Ken Eisner, Vancouver, Canada
tt-entertainment@teletimes.com
The Quill
---------
..
!le!surE
:.
4 H.H.C. (18**) & T.L. & S.R. (19**)
?do u>m!chael.schre!ber@wu-w!en.ac.at<uncode !T :rfc-fr2e-s2one2t!na
.apokrypy!x-conden-sensat!on-asc2!-chaR
::
?do u want 2 re-member a fax-s!m!l!x of t!mE .there was a 1854 le2terbound
th!nker of joy ends ?do u scan your box da!ly & = !t st!2l h2th!P ::.
,a set = a s!m!lar once only sp2edy w!2l! maC .never ever the same fun aga!n even
!n a new paC ?th!s joy-decay dr!ves par!ah & pr!esT 2 !ts scorE .test go''en4s
pest - !t = a d2or 2 far out morE :::
?hel! saud! cal.-w!ne derushd!-squads R x-ray-!mploy-inC .sm2!le sa!d 3x - tr!ce
blank ste2l sm!le forever rhyme ,tri2ger ha2py tr!2ger guard!an w!thout @@@@ &
reason ?v!rtue sh!n!ing du2l parade - al419## !ce = w!nkinC :::.
,ski2ming the health-cream, dump!ng the flesh & b1 .holy s!x !n the brown,
speakers on 500+ bandS ?= !t that u R 2 g2od 2 b true w!th suprema-C .:::.
- Dr. Michael F. Schreiber, Vienna, Austria
Deja Vu
-------
* The Longest Day - Part 1 *
[In this month's Deja Vu column, we bring you Andrew
Shaindlin's journal of his recent trip to Europe on the
occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of D-Day. More articles
following the theme of "History" can be found in the January
1994 issue.- Ian]
Cornelius Ryan called June 6, 1944 "the longest day." In
1994 the same phrase is used by an overtired passenger on my
transatlantic flight. Complaining of his fatigue after a
sleepless six hours in economy class, he turns to his
companion and says "I've had the longest day...." Upon
arrival, we shuffle through the cattle pens toward
immigration. Ryan used the phrase in literal and in
figurative ways. British glider pilots approached the Orne
River and its strategically important bridges just after
midnight on the 6th of June. 24 hours later the flow of
Allied men and materiel into Normandy was just gearing up,
and for everyone involved it had been a long day indeed.
Fifty years later some of us seem to be prolonging that day,
not wanting it to end. How else to explain my arrival from
the States to accompany one of the many "D-Day Remembered"
tours with about 20 of my alma mater's alumni? Many,
especially those who were there, will say that the 50th
anniversary celebrations are a solemn occasion, more
properly considered a commemoration. Maybe our trip should
be called "D-Day Remembered." But what are we remembering?
Not only the sacrifice of young Allied lives, striking "the
ultimate blow for freedom," but also the hopeless self-
sacrifice, in the worst sense of those words, of young
German lives, for no reason at all. Which is more stirring?
Which more tragic?
London's air in April has that same grimy, coarse, polluted
quality that I remember from some time I once spent here
during November. The best way to summarize it is to say that
should one stop to blow his nose, the handkerchief comes up
black. It's the accumulated airborne soot of a thousand
diesel lorries careening in endless circles around a
thousand cobbled sidestreet roundabouts. The green spaces in
this city provide a kind of respite from the urban oxygen of
Westminster.
Sitting in Regent's Park, watching the inhabitants of the
city, I'm suddenly aware of a subrace of British men, a race
of mutant giants striding on their way to meetings at the
Home Office, the Parliamentary Counsel Office, the Old
Admiralty, the Reform Club. They are a type of extreme
vertical ectomorph best characterized in popular culture by
the comedian John Cleese. You know them. They're too damn
big. Their feet are huge, awkward barges, impelled by the
conserved momentum of legs five feet long. Pell mell down
Pall Mall, they wear striped bespoke Bond Street suits and
their heads, invariably topped with uncombed thinning hair,
bob and teeter chaotically above crane-like necks. And no
matter what amount they seem to have spent on the tailoring
of their suits, their shirt collars are always uneven and
their ties knotted too loosely. Their average height is six-
foot six. They're harmless, yet vaguely unnerving. They're
English, they're too big, and they're coming from all
directions.
Then there are the French women. If you look carefully you
can spot them. They aren't obvious in their appearance the
way we Americans are. Americans look...well, they look
American. The French women have what the French call "un
look." Their three primary characteristics are the mystery
of their age (is she 25, or 40?), the shortness of their
skirts, and the fact that they wear hats and manage not to
look silly. Rather, they look...well, they look French.
The tour group is three hours late arriving from the US.
I've come over independently a couple of days in advance.
Good god! What if our troops had been delayed three hours
back in '44? We'd all be wearing lederhosen and swilling
Bavarian lager....
The group in question consists of alumni from two Ivy League
schools, accompanied by a professor from each school. Each
faculty member will lecture to the entire group four times.
The itinerary calls for a couple of days in London, then by
motorcoach to Bath, Devon, Dorset, and then a Channel-
crossing by ferry. Finally, in a kind of Overlord for
weaklings, we'll re-enact the breakout for ourselves on into
Paris, fifty-overladen American tourists, trying to get a
feeling for that longest day. I'm not one of 'them.' I'm a
staff member at one of the two schools, along for the ride
to act as "host" for my school's alumni. In the end, the
group arrives, listens (fighting back jet-lagged sleepiness)
to an introductory lecture on the "Difficulties of the
Second Front" then has a welcoming cocktail party before
turning in for a 16-hour sleep.
It is seventy degrees, dry, and quintessentially English on
the grounds of Blenheim Palace in Woodstock, a few miles
from Oxford. Today's highlight is a kind of private
"audience" with Charles George William Colin Spencer-
Churchill, brother of the 11th Duke of Marlborough and
cousin of Sir Winston Churchill. Lord Charles, as he is
known, is personable enough. After we've seen both the
public and private apartments, Lord Charles regales us with
suitably witty and essentially sincere recollections of his
cousin Winston.
We make our way to Bladon nearby, to look at Churchill's
grave. I'm more interested in seeing the resting place of
Consuelo Vanderbilt, first wife of the 9th Duke of
Marlborough, and Lord Charles' grandmother. The private and
public spaces of the Palace have on display at least four
portraits of this striking beauty. Three of the four are
likenesses by John Singer Sargent, each notable for a
different reason and Sargent's authorship means that
Consuelo's beauty may well have been idealized and
exaggerated by the artist.
The first instance is a charcoal sketch about 9 x 14 inches.
Dated 1907, the sketch plainly shows Sargent's excitement at
the exploration and discovery of a new, beautiful subject.
The second is a formal commission, an enormous stereotypical
Sargent family portrait in oil. Clearly, again the painter
has lovingly rendered what was for him the true subject of
the work. The background is all but non-existent, a murky
slathering of brownish black, seemingly applied with a six-
inch house-painting brush. And in an attempt to cover up for
the obvious lack of attention to detail in the subject of
the Duke, Sargent has compensated by casting the Duke's head
in a luminist glow as if his head had been targeted by a
single shaft of sunlight. The ruse very nearly works. But
not quite.
The final and most evocative treatment of the transplanted
American socialite is dated 1914, and is another simple 9x14
inch sketch. Done in soft charcoal, there is no intermediate
shading. The only smudging is to grind the powder into the
blackest black, for Consuelo's penetrating eyes, latin brow,
and stylish hairdo. The portrait is casual, consistent with
the others, but above all it is intimate. Whether Sargent
really connected so strongly with his female subjects, I do
not know. He was in such control of the medium that I wonder
whether he just made the connection seem that real and that
strong.
As we cluster about Churchill's simple tomb, Lord Charles
appears again, in the corner of the churchyard. It's as if
he had wheeled about upon leaving us at Blenheim, taken a
single giant step, and reappeared in front of us here in
Bladon, two towns away. He reads affectionately a poem
written about Churchill after his death, and we're quiet for
a short spell. Then he thanks us and disappears again.
Lord Charles Spencer-Churchill gives the impression of a
straight-arrow English aristocrat--not quite an upper-class
twit who potentially harbors some harmless eccentricity,
like believing that any illness can be cured, if only the
sufferer would drink enough water.
Churchill, of course, is genuinely upper-crusty. On the
other hand, Viscount Montgomery of Alamein is not, despite
his title, which sounds impossibly lofty to the American
ear. Montgomery is the only child of that larger-than-life
British military hero, General Bernard Montgomery, known
universally as Monty. Monty gained well-deserved fame for
outfoxing the desert fox himself, Field Marshall Erwin
Rommel in the North African campaign. Monty's son, who
inherited the honorary title which commemorates the
destruction of Rommel's Afrika Korps at El Alamein, readily
admits to his very middle class background. But what Lord
Charles lacks in the way of stereotypical twittish
mannerisms, the current Viscount Montgomery actually affects
and compensates for.
Over an elegant private luncheon at the vaunted Cafe Royal
in London, Montgomery addresses our group. He's actually
pushing for us to buy "his" upcoming biography of his
father. It is not really his book, any more than it is a
biography. The cover announces that it was written by
Alistair So-and-So "with" Viscount Montgomery, and it covers
just the years 1944-1945.
Montgomery is, in any case, a definite Type A personality,
and as he relates anecdotes about his father his lower jaw
recedes, and his upper lip recoils to reveal a large front
teeth. And instead of laughing, he snorts and hiccoughs his
way through his talk. Nonetheless he is mostly genuine,
quite entertaining, and not overly-long with his remarks.
Maybe I'll buy the book...no, probably not.
A word on quipping and punditry. Shaw and Wilde are well-
known as having set the standard against which all witty
ripostes must be judged. But let me put in a good word for
Sir Winston Churchill. It seems everyone in London has a
"favourite" Churchillism. Some representative samples:
Lady Nancy Astor: Winston, you're drunk!
Churchill: Madam, I may be drunk, but you are ugly, and
tomorrow, I shall be sober.
or...
Lady Astor again: Winston, if you were my husband I would
put arsenic in your coffee!
Churchill: Madam, if I were your husband, I'd drink it.
or...
Noted playwright: I enclose with this letter two tickets to
the opening of my new play. You are invited to attend with
a friend (if you can find one).
Churchill: I regret I cannot attend the first night of your
play, but will come on the second night (if it's still
running.)
Not deep; but one can't help feeling that Sir Winston's
sense of timing, delivery, and facial expression were finely
honed.
6:30 pm
We enter the Houses of Parliament. We are the guests of Sir
Fergus Montgomery, Member of of Parliament from the Labour
Party. Sir Fergus regales us with bawdy puns, fond
recollections of his first visit to the states in 1959, and
his general unhappiness with the personal and ad hominem
nature of the bitter exchanges so common in the modern
Parliament. Of course, he may just be bitter from 15 years
in the Opposition....
Stonehenge looms over a gentle rise by the side of a
highway, like a Stone Age rest stop. Much to my dismay I
have the same feeling here today that I had during my first
visit, six years ago. I can't clear from my mind the ending
from Hollywood's version of Tess of the D'Urbervilles. But I
resolve to put Hardy and Nastassia Kinski from my mind, at
least until Dorchester when I can contemplate the Mayor of
Casterbridge. I do take solace in the complete lack of
development in this area. If Stonehenge was in the US, I'm
quite sure that visitors would be able to take advantage of
a meal at the nearby BurgerHenge.
Bath in the Valley provides an opportunity for lunch with
our local guide, Esther. She and I sit in Demuth's, an
excellent vegetarian restaurant behind Bath Abbey. For two
hours we exchange personal theories, covering everything
from the neolithic roots of anti-feminism to the merits of
graduate level education in various countries. I thoroughly
enjoy our conversation, but it leaves me with only an hour
or so to poke around the side streets of old Bath.
Napoleon is reputed to have said: "A reasoning army would
run away." The same could be said of tour groups. The sunny
weather and irrepressibly optimistic atmosphere of Bath on a
weekend make one think about not climbing back aboard the
motor coach. I proposed to my wife here in Bath six years
ago, so my reminiscences of that first visit here are even
more pleasant (and distorted, probably) than they might be
otherwise. But like obedient soldiers, we do climb back on
board the bus, an air-conditioned behemoth rumbling
impatiently in front of the Abbey. And continuing on, we
arrive at length in the coastal resort town of Torquay.
Life at the Imperial Hotel in Torquay is eminently bearable.
The clannish omnipresence of rich people lends the necessary
blaseness, while the Edwardian decoration and gilded resort
surroundings give one something tangible to enjoy.
For reasons that are to remain unclear, we drive today to
the village of Dartmouth and then to Slapton Beach. Besides
the remnants of Operation Tiger, an ill-fated Allied
training operation of early 1944, there is not much here of
special interest. In Dartmouth, home of the Royal Naval
Academy, I discover a wooded footpath which leads, after a
precipitous, switching-back climb, to some farmer's hilltop
pasture. Half a dozen cows eye me warily then return to
their stoic munching.
As I survey the little village, nestled in a crook of the
river Dart below me, I imagine that it looks today much as
it did fifty years ago when over a hundred thousand
American servicemen invaded Dorset and Devon, in preface to
their subsequent invasion of Normandy. The entire region
was evacuated of its residents and made into a military
staging ground. The means by which the Allies confused and
misled the Germans about the time and place of the D-Day
landings are well-documented. But even taking into
consideration the elaborate precautions the Allies took to
that end, it seems absurd that the build-up to the Channel
crossing went essentially without response from the Germans,
billeted comfortably about fifty miles away.
As I stand on the hilltop watching the Dartmouth ferry
trolling patiently across the river, I realize that
Operation Overlord was not only historically unprecedented,
it can never be repeated. Marvin Minsky said that we are in
"the thousand years between no technology and all
technology." As we approach the age of almost total
information (albeit only partial knowledge) technology
provides even the most ignorant commander with clear
physical evidence of his enemy's presence and inclination.
No future Hitler (or Eisenhower) will rely successfully on
the fog of war to cloak his intentions.
I'm a week into my European trip. The top headlines of the
week roll across my hotel television screen. Some are
memorable, some not. Decide for yourself: Mandela is
President elect of South Africa; Brazil plans a State
funeral and declares three days of national mourning for
race car driver Ayrton Senna; President Clinton is sued for
sexual harrassment; Prince Charles' Jack Russell terrier,
Pooh, has gone missing; and His ex, the Princess of Wales,
has been photographed topless and the pictures can be yours
for a half-million dollars.
A day's drive includes a brief stop in Dorchester--I do
indeed find the house of Hardy's Mayor of Casterbridge--and
culminates in Portsmouth. This is the embarkation point for
our re-enactment of the famous event, which one of our
professors reminds us is "1066 in reverse."
We take in Southwick House, with its map room. It was here
that fetching WRENs (Women's Royal Naval Reservists) stood
confidently on step ladders, posting the various military
units' positions on the map as the invasion and breakout
progressed. A suitably British anecdote relates that a
female Member of Parliament, stereotypically naive or
innocent, was alarmed by the shortness of the WRENs' skirts.
The Minister for Defence explained how the serge material
was in minimum supply and that large quantities were needed
for the Royal Navy's uniforms.
"Am I to understand," she is reputed to have replied, "that
the WRENs' skirts are to be held up until the entire Royal
Navy has been serviced?" It makes for a good English chortle
and a wink over a pint of bitter....
After a visit to the unremarkable D-Day museum we hear
another lecture, this one on William the Conqueror and the
Battle of Hastings, in anticipation of our visit to the
Bayeux tapestry in two days. I can't help thinking of the
humorous book 1066, And All That. The summation of the book
is the ultimate spoof of the Anglo-Saxon version of history,
along the lines of "So William won the battle and history
came to an end."
5:15 am
Wake-up call. The hotel operator is smug. "Your early
morning wake-up call..." Our crossing to Cherbourg is
bearable. Club class seating resembles business class
airline service, but with three times the leg room. Some
fresh air and a pair of "sea bands" preserve my breakfast in
its rightful resting place. The crossing takes five-and-a-
half hours and is not uncomfortable, despite a minor run-in
with a French TV crew who are lighting up their Gitanes in
the "No Smoking" section.
The English learn how to smoke discreetly. Holding the
cigarette down as if trying to deny the fact that they are,
indeed, puffing away, they avoid looking at the cigarette
and affect an air of denial about the whole dirty business.
The French, on the other hand, smoke at you. They brandish
the cigarette in a defiant challenge and occasionally watch
the cigarette while it smolders. They have the look of a
soldier who examines his rifle after cleaning it, convinced
of (and satisfied by) its potential to harm someone someone
else.
Hobbes might have been describing the prospects for a
soldier in the D-Day invasion force when he wrote that life
is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." Well, maybe
not solitary, but for a G.I. born in, say, 1922, the war
followed all too quickly on the heels of a decade of false
hopes (the '20s) and a decade of extreme economic hardship
(the '30s). And to be in the first wave at Omaha Beach on
June 6, 1944 was to learn a first-person lesson in nastiness
and brutishness.
Carrying fully-loaded packs which often weighed more than 70
pounds, these soldiers were shooed from the landing craft
too far from shore--the crews of the craft feared getting
any closer to the German gunfire. Most of them sank to the
bottom and drowned; the ones who didn't were either run over
by the craft or were sitting ducks for the Nazi gunners on
shore.
As we disembark in Cherbourg we anticipate seeing the site
of this carnage, but first we visit St. Mere Eglise where
John Steele of the 101st Airborne spent four hours dangling
by his parachute above the town square (which is now a
parking lot). With no sense of the obvious, from April to
November every year, the town puts a parachute on a cruddy
mannequin which hangs, cartoon-like and unconvincing, from
the church spire.
The fiftieth anniversary is now four weeks away. All over
Normandy workmen are preparing. There is a feeling of
resigned yet intensive desperation about their work. At
first we see them polishing plaques and markers. In St.
Mere Eglise some masons are replacing the cement and brick
pavement at the entrance to John Steele's church. Later we
see a memorial which is to be dedicated to General
Eisenhower; it looks like the work is less than half-
finished.
We finally realize how hopelessly the French are working to
complete their monuments and preparations when we see the
central island of an enormous traffic circle at the juncture
of two highways, where there will be yet another elaborate
memorial. Just thirty days before the arrival of the Prime
Ministers, the Presidents, the Kings and Queens, this
particular site is nothing but an enormous mudheap. It looks
as if it were dug up and turned over for the first time
yesterday. Normandy will once again be unprepared for the
coming invasion.
Our French guide, Liliane, speaks English fairly well.
However, there occur small crises in her conjugation which
cause her to utter vaguely alarming phrases, like "So, after
the Germans arrive, there will be an invasion of France.
Many thousands will die." She sounds like a less-cryptic
Nostradamus.
The Chateau d'Audrieu is a very expensive, impossibly
luxurious hotel located in an impressively authentic 18th
century chateau. Part of the association of fancy inns and
restaurants known as Relais & Chateaux, Audrieu has been in
the same family since the 11th century. It's the kind of
accomodation which makes one comfortable, relaxed, and
pleased with oneself for being there. My room has two sets
of french doors (literally, I realize) which open onto views
over the 50-plus acres of private land on the estate.
Gardens, wooded trails, contented cows grazing, the village
steeple which chimes every fifteen minutes....This is the
world right outside. It's a pleasantly bygone world for me,
and as I look around the room at the lovely antique
furniture and sheer gauze curtains rippling from the Norman
spring breeze, I lie down, thinking about the taste of
calvados and realizing that here, at last, is a hotel where
a person traveling alone can sleep in the middle of a king-
size bed.
[Next issue, the second half of the D-Day Journal - Ian]
- Andrew B. Shaindlin, Providence, Rhode Island
abs@brown.edu
------------
STAFF & INFO
------------
Editor/Publisher:
Ian Wojtowicz, Vancouver, Canada
editor@teletimes.com
Art Director:
Anand Mani, Vancouver, Canada
tt-art@teletimes.com
Arts & Entertainment Editor:
Ken Eisner, Vancouver, Canada
tt-entertainment@teletimes.com
Contributing Editor:
Daniel Sosnoski, Tokyo, Japan
joseki@tanuki.twics.com
Cover Artist:
Anand Mani, Vancouver, Canada
tt-art@teletimes.com
Past contributors:
Biko Agozino, Edinburgh, Scotland
Prasad & Surekha Akella, Japan
Ryan Crocker, Vancouver, Canada
Prasad Dharmasena, Silver Spring, USA
Ken Eisner, Vancouver, Canada
Ken Ewing, Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Jon Gould, Chicago, USA
Paul Gribble, Montreal, Canada
Jay Hipps, Petaluma, California, USA
Mike Matsunaga, Skokie, USA
Satya Prabhakar, Minneapolis, USA
Brian Quinby, Aurora, USA
Motamarri Saradhi, Singapore
Dr. Michael Schreiber, Vienna, Austria
Johnn Tann, Ogden, USA
Dr. Euan Taylor, Winnipeg, Canada
Seth Theriault, Lexington, USA
Alexander Varty, Vancouver, Canada
Marc A. Volovic, Jerusalem, Israel
Columnists:
Kent Barrett, The Keepers of Light
Tom Davis, The Wine Enthusiast
Ken Eisner, Music Notes & Movies
Andreas Seppelt, The Latin Quarter
Funding policy:
If you enjoy reading Teletimes on a constant basis and
would like us to continue bringing you good quality
articles, we ask that you send us a donation in the $10 to
$20 range. Checks should be made out to "International
Teletimes". Donations will be used to pay contributors and
to further improve International Teletimes. If you are
interested in placing an ad in Teletimes, please contact
the editor for details.
Submission policy:
Teletimes examines broad topics of interest and concern on
a global scale. The magazine strives to showcase the
unique differences and similarities in opinions and ideas
which are apparent in separate regions of the world.
Readers are encouraged to submit informative and
interesting articles, using the monthly topic as a
guideline if they wish. All articles should be submitted
along with a 50 word biography. Everyone submitting must
include their real name and the city and country where you
live. A Teletimes Writer's Guide and a Teletimes
Photographer's & Illustrator's Guide are available upon
request.
Upcoming themes:
January - Photon '94
March - Education
May - Religion
Deadline for articles:
March issue - February 10th, 1995
May issue - March 30th, 1995
E-mail:
editor@teletimes.com
Snail mail:
International Teletimes
3938 West 30th Ave.
Vancouver, B.C.
V6S 1X3
CANADA
Software and hardware credits:
Section headers and other internal graphics were done in
Fractal Painter 1.2 and Photoshop 3.0 on a Macintosh
Quadra 950. The layout and editing was done on a Power
Macintosh 6100/60 using MS Word 5.0 and BBEdit Lite 3.0.
Copyright notice:
International Teletimes is copyrighted (c)1995. All
articles are copyrighted by their respective authors
however International Teletimes retains the right to
reprint all material unless otherwise expressed by the
author. This magazine is free to be copied and distributed
UNCHANGED so long as it is not sold for profit. Editors
reserve the right to alter the content of submitted
articles. Submitting material is a sign that the submitter
agrees to all the above terms.
-----------
BIOGRAPHIES
-----------
Kent Barrett
Kent Barrett is a Vancouver artist with over twenty years
experience in photography. His work has been exhibited in
galleries across Canada from Vancouver, B.C. to St. John's,
Newfoundland. He is currently working on his first
nonfiction book and interactive CD-ROM, "Bitumen to Bitmap:
a history of photographic processes."
Ken Eisner
Originally from the San Francisco area, Ken Eisner is a
Contributing Editor to Vancouver's entertainment weekly, the
Georgia Straight, and Canadian correspondent/film critic for
Variety, in Los Angeles. He has also been a frequent arts
commentator on CBC TV and radio, and currently reviews new
movies for CKNW, throughout Western Canada.
Sheila Eldred
Currently studying English at Oxford University, Sheila will
return to the U.S. in July to continue her undergraduate
education at the College of St. Benedict in St. Joseph, MN.
She has been a runner for six years, and runs both cross-
country and track for her college teams. At Oxford she has
also been rowing with a novice team, but she is still a
runner at heart.
Anand Mani
Anand is a Vancouver, Canada-based corporate communications
consultant serving an international clientele. Originally an
airbrush artist, his painting equipment has been languishing
in a closet, replaced by the Mac. It waits for the day when
"that idea" grips him by the throat, breathily says, "Paint
Me" and drags him into the studioÑ not to be seen for
months.
Andrew Shaindlin
Andrew is Senior Assistant Director of Alumni Relations at
Brown University, in Providence, Rhode Island, USA. His
travels have taken him to many of the commonly-visited
places in Europe, as well as some of the less commonly-
visited ones. Among his favorites are Iceland, the Channel
Islands, Malta, and Tunisia.
Daniel Sosnoski
Tokyo resident since 1985. Didn't plan on being a permanent
expat but these things happen. Editor and freelance writer
for several magazines and business-oriented publications, he
can be found playing Go online and offline (IGS: Golgo13). A
Macintosh and internet addict, his life currently revolves
around a modem.
Dr. Euan R. Taylor
Euan grew up in England where he did a degree in
Biochemistry and a Ph.D. Before moving to Canada, Euan spent
6 months traveling in Asia. Now living in Winnipeg, he is
doing research in plant molecular biology, and waiting to
start Law School. Interests include writing, travel,
studying Spanish and Chinese, career changing and good
coffee. Pet peeves: weak coffee, wet socks and ironing.
Russell Weinberger
Russell is a senior double majoring in Creative Writing and
Sociology at the University of California in Davis. He grew
up in the middle of wine country where he spent his weekdays
in Catholic school and his weekends making sorties into the
depths of the San Fransisco night life.
Ian Wojtowicz
Ian is currently enrolled in the International Baccalaurate
program at a Vancouver high school. He is an avid fencer
(no, he doesn't sell stolen VCRs) and makes a habit of
sleeping in on the weekends. Born in Halifax, Canada in
1977, Ian has since lived in Nigeria, Hong Kong and Ottawa.
He now resides in Vancouver, the city known to millions as
"The Home of Teletimes".
