We saw Dom Irrera last night and I laughed so hard at times that no sound came out of my mouth! Although at time stunningly profane, Irrera was a scream.

Veteran comedian and actor Dom Irrera is looking forward to performing in Western Massachusetts again.

"I have friends in Springfield," Irrera told Reminder Publications in a telephone interview.

His busy performing schedule just hasn't allowed a local booking for quite some time. Irrera will be at the Comedy Connection at the Hu Ke Lau on April 28.

The Philadelphia native began his career in 1980 performing stand-up comedy, acting and improvisational comedy. His big breaks came in 1986 when he appeared on "The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson," and in 1987 when he was part of the line-up for an HBO Rodney Dangerfield comedy special.

Since then, Irrera has been nominated six times for an American Comedy Award and won two Cable ACE awards. Besides a string of comedy specials, Irrera's comedy series on sports, "Offsides," was seen for four seasons on Comedy Central and he has appeared in numerous guest spots on television sitcoms.

Irrera is well known for his Italian ethnic humor, which comes naturally as he grew up in a three-generational Italian household.

"I always felt I was going to be a comedian," he said,

His favorite comic has been Woody Allen. Irrera has long admired Allen's writing style, although it hasn't influenced his own comedy that much.

He noted that no one has ever come up to him after a performance and said, "Man did you rip off Woody Allen with that goomba act of yours."

Ethnic humor has both its advantages and disadvantages, he said. If you stick to ethnic humor, you tend to maintain a core fan base, he explained.

A comic can broaden his or her base by performing less ethnically oriented material, Irrera said. He recalled meeting the son of the late comic and actor Red Buttons after a performance who told him his father wanted to talk with him. Irrera called him and Buttons said, "Don't paint yourself into a corner with that goomba act. Don't be an Italian comedian, be a comedian who happens to be Italian."

Irrera took the advice to heart, but he still does some Italian humor.

"It does leave a lot of the audience out, especially the Persians," he added.

Irrera has built up a side career as a voice artist for animation. He is currently recording the voice of Duke the Dog for the up-coming series based on the animated feature "Barnyard."

He has also performed voices on "Hey Arnold," "Hercules," and "Dr. Katz, Professional Therapist."

He and his fellow cast members are given a script to perform, but are allowed to improvise, which is a lot of fun for Irrera.

Irrera has also appeared in a number of movies, the best known might be his funny bit as a chauffer in "The Big Lebowski." Irrera said he is a big fan of the Coen brothers who wrote and directed the shaggy dog tale starring Jeff bridges and had no idea they had attended one of his performances.

A script came in the mail with a notation the Coens wanted him to play the role and Irrera was amazed to see they had used lines from his stand-up performance for the character.

He had no idea the film would achieve cult status and admitted the first time he saw it he didn't care for it. By the second viewing, though, he was a fan.

Irrera has had plenty of television experience on sitcoms, but he's in no rush to try to get his own.

"Beware of what you wish for," he said. "It's [sitcom work] a drag compared to stand-up."

Irrera isn't a snob. He readily admitted that he would accept a starring sitcom role if offered. "I'm not willing to go around pitching and pitching [a show]."

After more than 25 years in the business, Irrera stills enjoys the "immediate gratification" one gets from performing stand-up comedy.
© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

Here's part two of the Kong article.

Something for the big monster fans

Here is the first of three posts of an article from a 1933 Popular Science story on how the sound effects were created for "King Kong." If you read it carefully, you'll notice that not all of the way it depicts the making of the film is exactly true.

Remember when comic books used to be "funny books?" No, well that's because if you're not a middle-age geezer like me, you probably never heard anyone emphasize the concept that at one point comic books were allowed to be humorous.

The field wasn't just about superheroics as it is today. There were some great books such as Sheldon Mayer's "Sugar and Spice" to the Donald Donald comics by Carl Barks. Some people still hold the John Stanley "Little Lulu" books quite dearly. And of course "Mad" stands as perhaps the greatest humor comic of them all.

Well, there's another great comic comic and the third issue is now out, "Runaway Comic" by Mark Martin. Now some of you who read this blog might just know Mark as a conservative guy who likes to poke me with a sharp stick every now and then.

He's more than that, but just to be clear he is NOT the race car driver.

I view Mark as one of the most talented cartoonists working today, but also one of the most under-appreciated. There are few people who can match his combination of a multi-layered art style with his quirk observations and recyclings of pop culture.

Although Mark has announced this is going to be the last issue of "Runaway," you should head over to www.paneltopanel.net and order all three.

I wrote this over a week ago and the terrible event at Virginia Tech pushed the national discussion of what is right and wrong in speech these days off of the media radar. The issues, of course, haven't been resolved.

What I've learned over the years – in some very bitter lessons – is that context is everything. One person can something specific in a conversation, but if another person responds in kind, it's wrong. Accusations and charges can be made about language without the context consideration.

Political context is similar. If I use critical speech in response to something nasty a righty has said, then it's unacceptable "hate" speech from me. That's what I've been told. I'm supposed to lay back and take the criticism because I deserve it as a "liberal."

Imus had no context to buffer his remarks, though. His feeble attempts at shock humor showed an inherent meaness.

The issue of "correct" speech does need to be explored, but it won't until the next time a situation such as this one arises. American society and the media have little stomach to really address this kind of thing.

It's been fascinating to see just how the talk radio industry actually the media in general has reacted to the Don Imus flap.

For those of you who have missed the incident from almost two weeks ago, the granddaddy of shock radio, Don Imus, referred to the Rutgers University womens basketball team by a term that insulted both their gender and race.

Some people have said it's just Imus doing what people expect of him: a crude comment from a once talented broadcaster who has evolved into a spent, nasty man.

What made this remark worse than the three million words of wisdom Imus has dispensed in the past is that it was aimed not at an elected official or celebrity, but at a group of young women who had taken their underdog team to the NCAA Final Four.

The conventional wisdom is that it's okay to attack people who court publicity, but not a group such as this team who were simply doing something they were supposed to do.

What has made the furor so interesting is its multiple tracks of discussion. Some talk show hosts have wondered if this is marking the beginning of a new form of censorship. Others have said that remarks made by right-wingers such as Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly should also be considered grounds for their removal from their programs. Issues of politics, censorship and commercial considerations have all come into the discussions.

What Imus said was supposedly in the context of humor, something that is being obscured by some people. Imus is known for his acid wit, so can that be considered "hate speech?" Are Savage's remarks attacking gays and Muslims different than Imus' attempts at humor? That's an interesting question to ponder where is the line drawn?

And who should draw that line? Should Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton both men with checkered pasts of their own be designated as the judges of correct speech? I hope not.

What isn't being spoken about is what is correct speech and what isn't, especially in the context of comedy. The late comedian Lenny Bruce, who served jail time for using profanity, would be gob-smacked to see what is generally accepted today.

Profanity is easier to define and control perhaps than the issues of race, gender and sex.

Carlos Mencia on Comedy Central has a weekly series largely built on exploiting racial stereotypes and relations. If a white or African-American comic used the word "beaner" in his or her act, they might be considered as having stepped over an acceptable line.

Are "blonde" jokes funny to blondes? Is it all right to laugh if a person of Polish heritage tells a Polish joke and you're not Polish? Are there Southerners who object to the images put forward by Larry the Cable Guy? If you see Mantan Moreland in an old horror movie say, "Feet, do your duty!" is it funny or an embarrassment?

I don't know. Do you?

Let's face it, most of have us have either made a remark deemed inappropriate or heard something that was simply wrong. And we all know that how someone says something, to whom and in what context colors that joke or comment.

If you're offended how do you change things? I like to think it's through discussion.

I hoping this national dialogue doesn't get sidetracked by politics or taken over by self-appointed holier-than-thous. People should start talking about what is acceptable speech.

By the way, in my opinion, I'm glad that Imus was fired for his remarks. It wasn't humor and it hurt innocent people.

© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

Finale of history lesson!

Part two of Porky's history lesson

First half of Porky teaches civics...from the October 1939 issue of Click "The National Pictorial Monthly."

WARNING: THE FOLLOWING POST IS ABOUT MASSACHUSETTS POLITICS. SO IT MIGHT BE A SNOOZE FEST FOR FOLKS LIVING OUTSIDE OF THE BAY STATES. MY APOLOGIES.
The first part of this post is what I wrote in my newspaper column that appeared just before the governor's appearance. I was able to get an exclusive sit-down with him at the event and that story follows.

What intersts me is the fact that Patrick was a popular candidate who handily beat his opponent, yet the Boston press has chosen to emphasize his public relations gaffes, rather than what he is actually doing.

The local daily has taken a highly critical position against Patrick as well with little apparent motive.


An open letter to Governor Patrick:

I just received an e-mail stating that you are going to appear in Springield on April 11 for a regional "town hall" style meeting. It will be conducted from 6 to 8 p.m. at Scibelli Hall on the campus of Springfield Technical Community College.

This is good news, because you know that some folks out here are saying about you: you have already forgotten Western Massachusetts.

I know that a governor's first 100 days in office is supposed to be a honeymoon. The Legislature should be in courtship mode, trying to get to know you and form a good working relationship.

The press should also be wearing kid gloves. Everyone who reports politics knows the importance of an honest, open relationship. Holding off on using the 10-pound sledgehammer is probably a good move.

The public is, of course, hopeful that you will come into your office with guns a blazing, taking aim at fulfilling the promises you made during the campaign. Everyone wants their issue dealt with first, though, and the unrealisitic anticipation is you will be able to cure the ills created over years in a matter of days.

These are expressions of conventional wisdom. Here's another conventional wisdom: candidates will tell Western Massachusetts voters that they will not forget them, but as soon as they are elected we become an after-thought.

Now there are some media outlets I won't name (but we can call them "The Republican") which seem determined to foster this last rule. A recent front-page article noted your perceived lack of attention to us as well as an unsigned editorial.

I'm sort of a direct guy governor. I like you. I voted for you. You've got one hell of a life story and career and I still think you were the right choice for the state.

I'm more than willing to give you time to make things happen.

You've got to get certain things under control, though. The public relations gaffes give morons such as Howie Carr fodder to bash you. You're suffering a death of a thousand paper cuts. Please understand that people elected you as a reformer and they don't want to hear about business as usual abuses.

So, if you're willing to take some advice from a working class guy from Springfield, these are a few things I think you need to do if you want to counter the "he's forgotten us" line being spun by some folks:

Open up the Western Massachusetts Governor's Office. Appoint a good person with many local ties and connections who can help you service your constituents.

Tell us your agenda for Western Massachusetts and what we need to do to help you get it done. Letters to state reps and senators? Petitions?

Got a message for us? You have to campaign. Use the local media. Develop relations with us.

Focus on what our mayors are saying and hone in on a few things with which people can identify. For instance, the formula for Additional Assistance, the local aid so many communities need, has to be revised so it is fair to all of the municipalities in the Commonwealth.

Listen I know you probably already have dinner plans, but I would be happy to show you some Western Massachusetts hospitality. What's you choice? Italian? Cajun? Asian? Barbeque? Just let me know.

Here's the follow-up story.

SPRINGFIELD – Before a backdrop of 50 Springfield Technical Community College students, Governor Deval Patrick told a standing-room only audience at Scibelli Hall on April 11 that not only did he want to hear their concerns, but also he called for their support to seek answers for problems.

In an effort to speak directly with his supporters and re-energize his base, the governor told the audience what he said he tells his staff: “Bring any problem you like, but bring a solution, too.”

***
In an exclusive interview with Reminder Publications prior to his meeting, Patrick remarked on media accounts of the reactions the state budget he has proposed has garnered from members of the Legislature and how to build a relationship with the House and Senate.

“The [budget] process has really just begun,” he said.

Describing his budget as “thoughtful and balanced,” Patrick said the House’s budget came out that day and it embraces some of his ideas, and scales back other aspects of his budget. He added the House’s version does not address the financial structural issues his budget includes and predicted that if the Legislature ignores those structural concerns, they will still be an issue next year.

The Senate will be releasing their version next month and Patrick said at that point the negotiations would begin.
“We are going to fight for the doubling of spending for early daycare programs and a 46 percent increase in all-day kindergarten programs, Patrick said of two of his line items.

“COPS” is another program Patrick wants funded as that will give the state the flexibility to work with individual police chiefs on “tailored solutions” for their communities. He said, for example, some chiefs might call for more community policing efforts, while others want more officers on the streets. After-school and summer camp programs for at-risk youth are also tools available to prevent crime under this program.

“There’s no doubt there are things every new governor has to learn about working with the Legislature, but there are things this legislature has to learn about working with me,” Patrick said.

He said he wants “the latitude to govern,” which he does not think diminishes the role of the legislature. He explained that consolidating many line items give him greater flexibility to govern.

He used an example illustrating this flexibility. Recently Thomas Menino, the mayor of Boston, asked for help in combating guns and gang violence. Patrick said his administration was able to identify $5.4 million to fund summer jobs for at-risk youth and $2.2 million of that will go to Boston.

Menino also needed financing that would allow a class of police officers to move forward. Patrick said he could find a small portion of what was needed, but not the full amount. If the Legislature would allow the governor the authority to transfer funds from a $25 million emergency fund, he could solve the entire problem.

When asked about the opposition from the local tourism industry for Patrick’s support of a local option for municipalities to impose additional meal and hotel taxes, Patrick said his support comes from the pressure to relieve the property tax burden in the state.

Patrick has several initiatives in his budget to help communities lower their property taxes. Individual taxpayers could qualify for an increased tax credit program and cities and towns could reduce costs in health insurance and pensions by joining the state’s programs.

The governor said his support is to allow each community to decide if they want to put “another penny or two on that hamburger, on that room tax” He said that even if municipalities went to the maximum allowed by the legislation the state would still be lower than many other cities around the country with which the state competes for tourist dollars.

Patrick said he wasn’t supporting the measure lightly and that it was part of his effort to partner with communities.
“I’m asking a lot from them,” he said. I’m asking for better planning regionally and across the Commonwealth. I’m asking them to join us in streamlining the permitting process, as that is part of our economic initiative. And I want to be able to provide things in return that can help communities strengthen themselves.”

When asked about the media coverage of his first 100 days in office, he said, “We’ve been at this for 97 days. There is a long list of tangible accomplishments that are about implementing the vision that I campaigned on. I’m just getting started. I’m not worried about all that [negative media reports].”

He said he couldn’t take the time to analyze why the media has emphasized certain stories, but he has learned of the “intrusiveness of the job.” He said it takes twice as long to go through a grocery checkout line and that he has to be aware that people might mis-interpret a facial expression. He said his children have been warning him for years that his look when he concentrates on what someone is saying could be mis-interpreted as a frown.

He said he had a recent lengthy conversation with President Bill Clinton who told him how important it was to concentrate on long-term goals. Patrick said his job was to focus on doing his job.

***
Patrick used the first half hour of his town meeting to talk about some of the specific accomplishments of his first three months in office. He said he has reduced the permitting time for many businesses from two to three years to six months and two months for insurance products. He has appointed a “sales team” that is reviewing a list of 382 businesses determining what each needs to stay in the state or how they can be brought to the state. Patrick asserted this effort, when it is completed, could result in as many as 100,000 new jobs by the end of his term.

The governor said he has also signed the regional green house gas agreement, he said he can auction off the credits earned by the state through this agreement to create a funding pool that will advance the development of energy-saving technologies.

He has worked with the Legislature to create a small business loan fund and a $1.47 bond bill to finance needed infrastructure improvements on the state’s roads and bridges.

Patrick also has reversed former Governor Mitt Romney’s stand on stem cell research.

He said he was “governing for the long term,” and that vision was not enough to govern. He needs power and influence to move along his agenda. That power is not from 20-year relationships with legislators but from the voters who support him.
“I didn’t expect you to return to repose [after the election],” Patrick said.

“You want property tax relief?” he asked. “Come and get them. Make your voices heard. They’re on the table.”
“Every day you have to act like the State House is your house,” he added.

Patrick heard issues ranging from the controversial logging in Agawam’s Robinson State Park to working to preserve the Commonwealth’s dairy farms.
A re-occurring theme was the establishment of a governor’s office in Western Massachusetts. Romney had eliminated the office that had been established by governors before him.

Patrick, who owns a vacation home in Richmond, joked he’d like to have the office in Pittsfield, as it would be 15 minutes from his house. He conceded that Springfield would be a better location.

Funding is what is holding up the Springfield office, and Patrick said the office would be a reality if “the budget process works out as we hoped.”

Patrick said the Finance Control Board will be extended by one year to July 2008, but the composition of the board might change as will its role. The governor envisions the board to help implement the economic development plans Patrick’s administration is working on for Springfield.

In other answers to questions, Patrick voiced his support for a bill that would eliminate a 92-year-old tax exemption telephone companies have enjoyed on poles and lines. Other states have eliminated similar exemptions without an increase in telephone rates and communities would be the beneficiaries of the new tax. Springfield, for example, would receive $2.7 million.

In a show of cooperation, Patrick said he and the leadership of the Legislature have agreed to form a commission to simplify the state’s tax code. Massachusetts, Patrick said, is ranked 40th in the national for its total tax burden, despite the nickname “Taxachusetts,” but has an overly complicated tax code.

After speaking for about an hour-and-a-half, Patrick said he would stay as long as necessary to answer questions as there were still people lined up to speak.

© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

I spent five years in talk radio as the house liberal during the Reagan years ( I got the best hate mail!). I love the medium so that's why I was drawn to watching the documentary on Al Franken like a moth to a flame. He was simply a lousy broadcaster who had little concept of what a successful talk show should be.

Although I loathe Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage for being the hatemongers that they are, I have to give them credit for understanding how broadcasting works, unlike Franken.

I saw Franken in person at the Talkers Magazine annual conference on the medium and he came across as a smug horse's ass. I may agree with some of his politics but I think he is incapable of swaying people to think about issues. Instead he preaches to the choir and that does little good in trying to create a dialogue.

Three very different films are reviewed in this edition of the DVD column.

Al Franken: God Spoke

Like most people I first saw Al Franken on "Saturday Night Live" where he practiced a form of egocentric comedy. One of his shticks was to perform a monologue where he inserted his name in random places.

I always thought he was a fairly amusing guy and it was interesting to see him evolve into a political commentator and eventually a radio talk show host.

This documentary traced that evolution showing Franken on book tours prior to his hiring as a radio show host for Air America. Along the way we're treated to some very amusing firefights between him and many conservatives including Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter.

The film ended with Franken moving his radio show to Minnesota, where he was raised, in order to establish residency for a run for the Senate.

The two directors of this film got some great footage I particularly liked when Franken got into a "Newsweek" party for Republicans but they did the viewers a disservice of not identifying people. Unless you knew them already, you would not have known the other members of "the cast."

What was also glossed over were the many trials and tribulations of Franken's time on Air America. What the footage indicated, but does not elaborate on, was Franken's inexperience with radio and the fact that Air America chose to push his show rather than those of seasoned broadcasters such as Randi Rhodes and Rachel Maddow.

Franken's show, which did not take callers, was ultimately as egocentric as Rush Limbaugh's program, Franken's target in many markets.

The result is a film that played like those "Saturday Night Live" routines in which Franken repeated his name constantly. It's all about Al Franken, even though Franken's story isn't just about him.

For more information, log onto www.godspoke.com.



The Kingmaker

For many years, I've been an Asian movie junkie. Hong Kong movies are my meat and potatoes, but I've certainly open to films from other countries as well. Recently they have been a slight influx of martial arts films for Thailand, but this movie marks a new kind of genre: part martial arts, mostly historical drama, part romance and a little bit of a music video.

The result is a film that recalls the Indian "Bollywood" films that include a wide variety of genres storylines into a production. The Bollywood films can be audaciously entertaining, but this film sort of lurches from scene to scene not knowing exactly what it is.

Supposedly drawn from a true story, Gary Stretch plays De Gama, a Portuguese sailor sold into slavery by Arab traders in 16th century Thailand. A beautiful Portuguese woman, whose father has been hired by the Thai king to build fort, rescues him. Naturally, they fall in love.

De Gama fights in the Thai king's army and does so well he is promoted to be one of the king's bodyguards. When the jealous queen poisons the king, De Gama and his fellow bodyguard are set up to take the blame.

The look of the film is quite impressive, but the acting is wooden and the plot is convoluted. While technically, this film is more than competent, the acting and story drag it down into the depths.

For more information, log onto www.sonypictures.com.



Attack of the Gryphon

The rule of thumb is the SciFi Channel is capable of producing some very good series but the network's made for television movies generally are awful.

This one is no exception. A sword and sorcery story, "Attack of the Gryphon" is brought to earth by cardboard characters, predictable situations, and a very hammy performance by Larry Drake as the evil wizard and, worse of all, a terribly animated gryphon.

The trouble with computer animation these days is that too many people think the computer will do all the work for them. One actually had to master the art of animation first and clearly the folks behind the monster haven't.

A rule of monster movies is that a good monster can redeem a tired plot. Nothing redeems this little film.

For more information, log onto www.sonypictures.com.

©2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

Okay, I'm posting twice. I’ve never done that before but it's been a week and there are some things I'd like to share.

Governor Patrick will be in Springfield on April 11 at Springfield Technical Community College for a two-hour town meeting filled with Q&A time starting at 6 p.m. in Scibelli Hall. I hope there will be a good turnout that will include people who are not sold yet on his brand of leadership or the substance of his first 100 days in office.

I'm very tired of people who sit back and either complain without taking some sort of action to make conditions better and people who ignore their local politics in order to be a pundit on the national stuff. I don't care if you agree with Patrick or not, but being involved and being informed is far superior than ripping off a juicy blog post based on third or fourth hand information and believe you're "connected."

Hope to see you there.

I had the pleasure recently of interviewing Stanley Nelson, the director of the new documentary about Jonestown that was recently aired on PBS and released on DVD. When doing research prior to the interview I found a site that bitterly criticized the film and nelson's approach. The author of the blog believed Nelson was a trying to whitewash Jim Jones and not portray him as the deeply disturbed man he obviously was.

This film tries to strike a balance between the natural freak show aspects of the story and trying to humanize the Jonestown experience. I think he did a fairly good job, although I do have certain criticisms.

People remember that the 1978 deaths at Jonestown in Guyana in South America as the largest mass suicide in recorded history. Filmmaker Stanley Nelson wanted audiences to remember more than just the hideous end for over 900 people he wanted to explore what brought them to an isolated section of the South American jungle.

Nelson's new documentary, "Jonestown, the Life and Death of Peoples Temple," will make its television and DVD debut on April 9. It will be seen on PBS station as an episode of "American Experience."

Charismatic preacher Jim Jones and his social experiment have been the subjects of films before. A wildly exploitive drive-in movie "Guyana: Crime of the Century" was released in 1979, while a more sober television production, "Guyana Tragedy: The Story of Jim Jones," won an Emmy in 1980 when it was broadcast.

Nelson spent almost three years working on the film that weaves interviews with 25 people, two of which actually escaped from Jonestown, with archival footage and sound.

Nelson said he remembered hearing about Jones and the Peoples Temple on the radio in the 1970s. He said that members of the San Francisco-based church were living out socially progressive ideals.

"It sounded so sane," Nelson recalled to Reminder Publications in a telephone interview.

That perception changed when the 1978 mass suicide and the murder of Congressman Leo Ryan was reported. Nelson said the story of "the crazy man" stopped with his death and the deaths of many of his followers.

In his research Nelson found that Jones was "a very complicated man. It was hard to make it simple."

Nelson went back to Jones' Indiana hometown and said that Jones "was never normal. He was a strange guy who hid [his true feelings]."

As an adult Jones became a controversial preacher who broke down racial barriers and fought for social change. He and his wife adopted African-American and Asian children, making them one of the first multi-racial families in his home state.

He formed a successful commune in California and then decided to bring his ministry to a large city, San Francisco, where he became a political force.

Although Nelson said that "on the surface, [the church] was very, very attractive" to many people, there were problems revolving around Jones' sexual practices and faked healings, among other issues.

With his church under greater scrutiny, eventually Jones decided that he and his congregation could only practice their brand of religion and socialism outside of the United States. Jones acquired property in Guyana and built a small town there.

Nelson believes there was no one trigger to Jones' deteriorating mental state that led to the move to Guyana and the abuses that culminated in the suicide. He thinks Jones' problems started with childhood and grew more severe.

"With more and more power, things got worse," Nelson said. "In Guyana, he was totally isolated. He built a little kingdom."

Nelson said that people who have seen the film have been affected by it.

"It's such a dark story. People joined [the Peoples Temple] with all of the best intentions and were led astray."

"There's no happy ending to it," he said. "It's a cautionary tale."

Review

There's an old saying in show business that a performer should always leave an audience wanting more. I'm not sure if that's the best approach in documentary filmmaking, but at the end of "Jonestown: The Life and Death of Peoples Temple" I did want more.

Nelson's film goes a very long way in humanizing the people who joined Peoples Temple. Through numerous interviews, it becomes clear the congregation was not made up of people who could be simply be written off as mindless members of a cult. Instead these were people who were swept up in the idealism of the 1960s and early '70s and saw this church as a true vehicle of change.

The film is also effective in showing how Jim Jones, undoubtedly plagued with mental health issues for most of his life, slowly went from being a preacher with ideas to a paranoid who said he was the reincarnation of Jesus and Buddha.

The filmmakers interviewed Jim Jones, Jr., who was away from Jonestown the day of the suicide, and I wanted them to ask him what kind of man his father was, how did his mother figure into the Peoples Temple and how his life has been for him in the years since the suicide.

They didn't broach those subjects and the film is weaker because of it.

The film doesn't try to whitewash Jones nor does it vilify him. It is a very sad, melancholic production because we know the ending of it. And Nelson is right in saying it is a cautionary tale. In turbulent times, another Jones might be around the corner.

© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

Cinefest!

In the mid-1980s when I was a talk show host, I met a local film collector with whom I was a friend for the better part of 10 years. He had been exchanging prints of films with Alex Gordon, the film producer and archivist who at that time was working for his boyhood idol Gene Autry.

When my friend learned Alex was going to be in Syracuse NY for a film festival called “Cinefest,” he rounded several of us up for a day trip to meet Alex.

It should be noted that driving for the better part of four hours, visiting the show for a few hours and then driving back was not a lot of fun, but the trip accomplished two things: it introduced me to one of my favorite events and to the Gordon brothers, Alex and Richard.

Alex was dumbfounded – rightly so – that we had driven all the distance just for a few hours. One of our car mates, a devoted Bela Lugosi fan, once introduced to Alex wanted to know who was a better actor: Boris Karloff or Lugosi. I can’t remember Alex’s answer except at the time I was greatly embarrassed by the pure fanboy-ness of the question.

In the years that followed I tried to go to Cinefest every spring. I know I missed two, but I think I’ve turned up to all of them since 1985 or ’86. The rest of my initial group long since stopped due to shifting interests and friendships.

Unlike Chiller Theater or comic cons, Cinefest is about one thing: watching films, primarily American to British films from the silent days to about 1948. Collector and archivist bring their 16mm prints to be screened and there is a 35mm presentation in an impressive restored film palace in downtown Syracuse.

You simply can’t see some of the films that unreel at Syracuse anywhere else. That’s what makes it so special.

There’s a small dealers area, which despite its size always has some great finds and bargains. Unlike so many conventions that have become niche flea markets, Cinefest holds true to its mission of being about movies.

Occasionally there have been celebrities at the show, aside from Alex and Richard. Director Radley Metzger is a regular as is film historian Leonard Maltin. The late film historian William K. Everson was also at the show every year. However these guys are there just to watch and talk movies and not sign autographs. Unless you know them by sight, you would probably never realize they are there.

There have been a trickle of authors who come to sell a book, but the organizers of Cinefest have always acted as if they sort of don’t know what to do with them.

This year was an exception as former 1930s child star (and a member of Our Gang), Jerry Schatz “Tucker” presented a slide show of his career and one of his best Our Gang short “Hi Neighbor” was shown. Schatz is a very nice guy and it was a pleasure to see him again (I had seen his presentation at a Sons of the Desert meeting back in the 1980s.)

This year Cinefest had its share of neat little discoveries and films I can’t say were particularly good, but were well worth watching. Here’s a run-down:

I Was a Spy: A 1932 WWI spy drama based on the life of Belgian woman who risked her life getting information to the Allies. Despite dumpy Herbert Marshall as the male lead, this film was a treat. Of course I’ll watch almost anything with the accomplished German actor Conrad Veidt who played the German commandant in the film. Veidt could have simply turned in a standard dirty Hun performance, but instead gives it a human quality that gives the film a welcomed complexity.

The best scene in the show is when Madeleine Carroll, playing the spy, accompanies a group of German soldiers out to field for an outdoor mass. She has tipped off the Allies and they bomb the gathering, which included wounded men. Her grief at what she had done mixed with the victory against the Germans portrays the true horrors of war.

Beau Brummel: John Barrymore (Drew’s grandfather) made a number of big costume dramas for Warner Brothers. They were the prestige productions for the company prior to “The Jazz Singer.” This one tells the story of the rise and fall of, for lack of a better term, a dandy. Brummel sets the fashions of London until he angers the Prince of Wales and he falls from grace. Although impressive in its look and performances, it was a bit of a downer.

White Savage: Now here’s the antidote for a downer. Holy smoke! This cotton candy Technicolor South Seas romance is an amazing example of escapist entertainment, especially considering it was made in 1943 at the height of World War II.

Maria Montez stars as the queen of an island and Jon Hall is the shark fisherman who wants permission to fish in the island’s waters. Naturally there are complications with bad guys and a volcano god! It appears this is the only part of the Pacific not affected by the war. With attractive leads, lush color photography and a very silly plot, this film was a highlight of the show.

Amateur Daddy: Cinefest seems to a have a soft spot for Warner Baxter, the actor best known for playing the director in “42nd Street,” and have a Baxter film almost every year. This year, there was an actually moving, if somewhat improbable, film in which Baxter’s character takes over rearing the kids of a dead co-worker. Baxter puts in a great performance and how could I not like a film with Frankie Darro is a prominent supporting role?

Things to Come: Science Fiction author H G Wells had one foray into filmmaking and this 1936 film featured both social commentary and, for the time, some amazing visuals. I hadn’t seen it since college and the print presented at Cinefest was one edited together from several sources to attempt to show the film was it might have originally looked. The film is actually quite involving until the last segment at which Wells gets onto a rickety soapbox. Still it was very worth watching.

Hal Roach expert Richard Ban showed a number of rarities from the studio that gave us Laurel and Hardy, among others, and while from an academic sense I was happy to see these shorts, many of them were just painful to sit through.
The Harry Langdon short shot in Spanish showed once just how unfunny a 45 year-old man can be while continuing a screen persona that calls for him to be an arrested infant. A Charlie Chase golf short, this one in French, went on and on and on. I had to leave. There was a great Max Davidson short that featured a very young Gordon “Wild Bill” Elliott before his cowboy days and an interesting entry in Roach’s The Boy Friends” series that starred stuntman great David Sharpe.

While Paris Sleeps: This 1932 drama starred a very subdued Victor McLaglen as a French convict who escapes from prison when he receives a letter from his wife shortly before her death imploring him to try to do something to help their daughter. The daughter, by the way, thinks her father dies a hero in WWI. This is a weepie, but one with some pretty hard edges. It was quite good, though.

Once in a Blue Moon: Oh, my, God! One of the best parts of Cinefest is having the opportunity to see a film that is a train wreck, a forgotten failure. This romantic comedy was written, directed and produced by Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur, titans of the American stage and was one of three films they made on the east coast through the Astoria Studios. The plot involves a group of Russian aristocrats who were attempting to get out of revolution Russia and not be executed by the Communists. They happen upon a traveling clown who has lost his theatrical troupe. He adopts them and they make their way – with some peril – eventually to Paris. Jimmy Savo plays the clown in a manner that would suggest his character was the unholy love child and Harry Langdon and Charles Chapin. It was such a cloying, saccharine mess I couldn’t tear my eyes of the screen. Boy, do I want this on video or DVD for further study!

There were other films I saw (a very funny jack Benny film “Man About Town” and the booze-soaked “The Captain Hates the Sea, among others) and I’m looking forward to next year’s show.

© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

I was afraid I'd get bushels of angry letters about this column, but I've received nothing so far. I really do believe that eliminating things such as class rankings wind up hurting kids rather than helping them.

To me this is perfect example of overly "liberal" thinking. We need to prepare our kids and support them but not coddle them.

Life isn't pretty for many people and we lie to our kids enough as is.

Leigh Catchepaugh, one of our graphic artists and all around smart guy, noticed in last week's rant a similar tone to a typical Andy Rooney screed the slightly out-of-touch geezer who is complaining about the mundane aspects of life.

I'm afraid that this week's column might also seem as if I'm stealing Rooney's shtick.

The decision of the Hampden-Wilbraham School Committee to phase out class standings for the class of 2010 is just plain silly. The idea is that ranking students in order of their academic achievements by percentile (top ten percent, top twenty percent, etc.) rather than number is supposed to force colleges to look at the whole student and not just grades.

The folks in Hampden and Wilbraham aren't the only people who have made this change. School officials in Amherst and Longmeadow have also switched.

Well, it if was good enough for me when I was in high school, wading through three-foot drifts to get to that one-room school house where I would dip Mary Lou's pigtails into the inkwell dang! There's Rooney again!

Many colleges already have admission procedures that consider more than grades, SATS and MCAS. Every parent who has a child currently in college knows a variety of factors come into play to jump over admission hurdles.

One of them is whether or not a college is desperate. Let's face it folks, when admissions are on the decline, colleges stretch their rules a bit. Don't ever forget that higher education is a business and they have to keep those class seats filled.

What I fear is this is further erosion of introducing young people to the fact that the playing field of life is not level. When it comes to issues such as race, religion and gender everyone must be equal, but that equality cannot and should not extend to abilities and performance.

When I was in high school (Class of 1972, Granby Junior-Senior High School), there was one honor roll. Either you were on it or you weren't. Now there are "high honors" and "honors" distinctions that are more inclusive.

The theory is by creating a lower tier schools can encourage more students to do better by affording them some academic recognition.

I don't buy that. I think the inclination is if a student makes the lower honors that may be good enough. It's time to pull up a comfy laurel to rest upon.

Life is built on perceptions and people use shorthand methods to form those perceptions. A grade point average and a class standing doesn't tell the whole story there are plenty of book-smart people who are real life morons but they are useful indicators.

What's next? No grades? Handling out As and Fs is too repressive and creates an unnecessary distraction? I hope not.

The goal of education should be to guide a student to find what is right for him or her. That kind of discovery can mean some tough times for a young ego, but that's okay with the right support from family, friends and school officials.

In an increasingly competitive world, we need more guidelines to help students achieve and not less.

© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

There is a whole bunch of television series making their way on DVD and into this week's column.

Secret Agent/Danger Man: The Complete Series

A&E Home Video has received all 86 episodes of the under-appreciated spy drama staring Patrick McGoohan. Popular culture in the 1960s was filled with spy movies, televisions and novels that were undoubtedly fueled by the Cold War.

The James Bond films and novels led the pack and many of the properties inspired by Ian Fleming's creation put greater emphasis on the sex and gadgets to the point of silliness.

The British production of "Danger Man" took a different tact. In well-written half hours, John Drake (played by McGoohan) used few gadgets or even guns to accomplish his tasks given to him at first by NATO, and then later by a somewhat sinister boss.

Drake was not above arguing with his bosses and wasn't afraid to allow people to see him sweat. This much more realistic approach created a show that was far different than the splashier "Man from U.N.C.L.E."

The show was expanded from a half-hour to an hour and the last two episodes a two-parter were shot in color.

After his run on "Danger Man," (which was known as "Secret Agent" when aired in this country), McGoohan went on to write and produce "The Prisoner," which many people saw as the unofficial sequel to the series.

These are shows that stand up to the test of time and, if you're a fan of "The Prisoner," they are must viewing.

For more information, log onto www.AETV.com.

The Hee Haw Collection

Now let's talk a series that doesn't stand the passing of years. "Hee Haw" was supposed to be a countrified version of "Laugh In," but it far surpassed "Laugh In" in longevity. "Hee Haw" was on the air as a syndicated show for more than 20 years.

By that measure it was certainly successful, but for non-country music fans the show was hard to take. Corny, stale jokes delivered by some dubious talent were the show's hallmarks that and a tremendous amount of exposed skin for a family show.

This release is one 50-minute show from 1983 and the highlights include performances by George Strait and Statler Brothers. Again, this a plus for country music fans, but for anyone else it's a snooze.

For more information, log onto www.timelife.com.

Whose Line Is It Anyway? The Original British Series Uncut and Uncensored

This four-disc set presents the origin for one of the most popular comedy series of recent years and covers the years 1988 to 1990.

The improvisational show lives and dies on the strength of its cast. Some people are much better than others and as such some half-hours are funnier. The earlier episodes are well worth watching, but seem a little ragged as the talented comedians were getting familiar to the show's format and with working with one another.

The show started out with an all-Brit cast and some, such as Tony Slattery, John Sessions, and Josie Lawrence are standouts. In this set, North Americans Greg Proops, Mike McShane, and Ryan Stiles were introduced.

One challenge some viewers will have is the use of British slang and references. As the series matured, or with the introduction of American and Canadian cast members, the local material seemed to be less prominent.

A very funny show, this set is something anyone who enjoys fresh comedy will appreciate.

For more information, log onto www.AETV.com.

© 2007 by G. Michael Dobbs

Here in Springfield, the majority of people drive or walk by the site of an event that was a turning point for our nation and never realize it. In January, the anniversary of Shay's Rebellion was noted here. I wrote the following piece for the papers I edit.

I really believe we live in very dangerous times. We have a president bent on unjustified war. We have a Congress lacking the will to stop him. Corporations control more and more of our daily lives. The era of the American middle class appears to be almost over. More and more people are working poor with little real hope for economic advancement.

We need a rebellion. Not with guns, not with violence, but with a re-affirmation of what this country represents. We need to bring jobs back to this country. NAFTA should be repealed. We need to protect American manufacturing with tariffs. We need a tax code that is fair to everyone. We should realize that new jobs must come out of the effort to address the conditions that have caused global warming. We need to protect ourselves by actually attacking the root causes that create terrorist activities.

I don't think it's too late for this nation, but the clock is ticking.

It's hard to believe that a Burger King stands almost on the spot of one of the most significant events in American history, but the fast food restaurant at the corner of State and Federal Streets is about where a group of angry farmers and Revolutionary War veterans made history.

It was there that Daniel Shays and his group of rebels were marching to take over the arsenal at the Springfield Armory. Although they failed, Shays's action proved to be the catalyst for the call for a Constitutional Congress and the drafting of the American Constitution.

Shays's place in American history was recently examined by a two-day symposium on Jan. 27 and 28 sponsored by the Springfield Armory National Historic Site and Springfield Technical Community College (STCC).

Richard Colton, the historian for the Armory museum, recently took this writer on a tour around the STCC grounds and where Shays's army made history.

***

Colton began the tour in the archives of the Armory museum. There he used several books from the collection to explain why Shays and his followers took the step of armed rebellion.

In one almanac from 1780, Colton pointed out a chart showing the inflation of the paper currency from the time of the Revolution to that year what had been $100 just a few years before now was $4,000.

The severe decrease in the value of money was coupled with high taxes to pay off the cost of the war, he explained. Actions by the Massachusetts Legislature had disenfranchised many residents taking away from them the ability to vote and make legal changes.

Colton said the Massachusetts Constitution, the oldest printed constitution, stipulated that one had to own property in order to vote and run for office.

"The true elite were unresponsive to the common people," Colton said.

With hard economic times, the state's courts were seizing farms and throwing people into debtor's prison.

"People thought the courts were out of control," Colton added.

The Articles of the Federation, Colton added, had not resulted in creating a nation, but instead "13 little countries" bound loosely together. Each state, for instance, produced its own currency.

Shays was one western Massachusetts resident who decided to take steps to correct matters. A Pelham farmer and landowner, Shays was a highly decorated Revolutionary War veteran who left the military with the rank of captain.

The deteriorating conditions of the early Commonwealth promoted Shays to band with others who felt the need for a new revolution and on Jan. 25, 1787, Shays led a makeshift army of about 1,200 to the federal arsenal in Springfield.

The arsenal, Colton said, had more guns, artillery and ammunition than anyplace in New England. Colton said if Shays had captured the arsenal he could have made Springfield his base camp for a longer challenge to Boston's power. He could have even established a new capitol here.

***

It is a numbingly cold day on the STCC campus and one wonders if it was as cold when Shays led his army down what was then called Boston Road, but what is now known as State Street. Shays had assembled his forces in the east and was marching from Wilbraham to the federal arsenal.

As Colton led me across the green in the center of the campus, he pointed out that this is not the complex Shays would have been approaching. Even though a number of the buildings are well over a century old the West Arsenal building built in 1808 is almost 200 years old none of them were standing when Shays and his men came.

Walking toward the entrance of the college, Colton said a militia force had been called to protect the arsenal from Shays. Although roughly the same size, the militia had the advantage of field pieces or cannons.

Colton said that Shays was hoping to rout the arsenal's defenders simply by intimidation of his forces, however, when Shays was fired upon by the cannon, the battle was over.

Old Boston Road had a curve to it and Shays had placed his most experienced men in the front of his formation. The cannon fire did not hit them but fired over them and struck the less seasoned fighters who were marching around the curve.

The green troops fled and Shays's army had to retreat. Shays had a price on his head and fled to Vermont. He eventually settled in New York where he received a pardon and died in 1825.

Colton said that contemporary historians did not treat Shays very well and wrote accounts of the rebellion with a pro-government slant. Even with that bias, Shays's actions pointed out the inequities that existed the need for a stronger federal government.

The symposium attracted historians from throughout New England to address the rebellions and its impact.

In a letter to James Madison on Jan. 30, 1787, Thomas Jefferson wrote about Shays's Rebellion: "I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."

© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

My buddy Mark always wants input on our new governor. Here's the latest I wrote.

There are many things in life that I do not understand.

For instance, I've noticed of late that everything has to be some sort of food flavor. Billboards on I-91 for Yankee Candle have proclaimed new scents that are actually food flavors, such as honeydew melon.

We're in the midst of the "flavorization" of America.

My wife recently bought toasted vanilla shampoo and a pink grapefruit body wash. When I was a kid, there was one flavor of lip balm wax with undertones of petroleum jelly. Now, there are dozens of flavors.

There's even flavored floss for cleaning your teeth.

No wonder I have trouble losing weight there are food reminders all around me!

For the life of me I don't know why women want to wear sweatpants with slogans across the seat. Why is Paris Hilton still famous? Why do some people pay for O.J. Simpson's autograph? Why don't people like Shemp?

And I don't understand why people are up in arms about Governor Patrick's declaration of wanting to take care of his wife during her treatment for depression and exhaustion.

The issue is so polarizing that my friends Brad Shepard and Bo Sullivan on WHYN sounded as if they were about to go at one another the other morning. Thank goodness, John "Binky" Baibak was there to stand between them. Whew!

The issue with any elected official who suffers a health emergency, either personally or within his or her family, is whether or not the duties of the office can still be performed.

As far as I can tell, Patrick has simply expressed concern for his wife's health and well being as any concerned spouse would. He has not said that he is taking a less active role in government or that he is turning over duties to others such as Lt. Governor Tim Murray.

He just wants to have some time, evenings and weekends, for his wife.

Of course that doesn't stop the hate-mongers such as Howie Carr from using this issue as fodder on his radio show.
According to Carr's web site, the question is whether or not a governor should have "flex time."

I thought Carr was supposed to be a smart big city media guy just oozing wisdom. All mayors, governors and presidents are on flextime Howie. How could you miss this one?

Did Carr and other critics count how many days their boy Romney was out of the state on his own agenda during his term?

The interesting thing is the people who hate Patrick are using his wife's illness as a means to bash him.

It's not fair.

If they want to bash him, they have too many real issues, the most recent being his misstep over making an inappropriate political phone call supporting ACC Capital Holdings' efforts to a loan from Citigroup.

I'm not pleased that a lawyer as smart as he is couldn't tell this was none of his business.

I still believe that Patrick was a good choice for governor and that he still has the potential to effectively lead the state. He has to get his act together, though, to build the political capital needed to make meaningful change.

Two new films are featured in the week's DVD column.

Casino Royale

Toss out nearly all of the sex. Delete the double entendres. Leave the gadgets at home.

The producers of the latest James Bond film are asking audiences to forget almost everything they know about the venerable spy character. In "Casino Royale" we all start from scratch.

Their new approach to the material is a fast moving highly entertainment action picture.

Bond (Daniel Craig) is a headstrong brutish British agent who has just earned his "license to kill." He has little respect for his boss "M" (Dame Judi Dench) who, in turn, has little respect for him.

The pair finds they do need each other as Bond tries to track down a financier of international terrorism. To trap Le Chiffre, (Mads Mikkelsen) Bond intends to bankrupt him by beating him at a high stakes poker game. Le Chiffre's terrorist clients won't let him live if he loses the money they've given him to invest.

Accompanying Bond to the game Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) a British treasury official who is essentially Bond's banker. Since Bond is playing with $10 million of government money, Lynd is supposed to keep her eye on him.

"Casino Royale" is an origin film for the Bond character and it is clearly designed to set the tone for future Bond films with Craig.

In many ways, the filmmakers have taken a page out of Hong Kong action movies to revitalize the series. Many American action films rely upon guns and cars to drive the thrills. Hong Kong films have used athleticism of their stars (and stunt doubles) as their base.

Although there are guns and cars in this film, the shift has been away from technology and to what Bond can do all by himself. The opening sequence, in which Bond pursues a suspected terrorist bomber through a construction site, is breath taking. The sequences can boast of great stunt work, exhilarating editing and a conclusion that speaks volumes of Bond's character.

There is also a welcomed departure from the classic "Bond girl," the alluring heroine, supporting character or villain whose main purpose was to add sex appeal to the picture. Eva Green's character, while providing some romance and sex appeal, is not there merely as scenery.

The two-disc set includes a couple of great extras including a documentary on "Bond girls," and an analysis on how key action sequences in the film were realized.

For more information, log onto www.sonypictures.com.



The Holiday



Normally, I wouldn't waste the limited time I have on this Earth watching a film that I suspect from the trailer would be formulaic, but "The Holiday" hooked me with the prospect of seeing Jack Black as a romantic leading man.

Most comics are seldom satisfied with simply making people laugh. They want to be taken "seriously." So we have Adam Sandler and Jim Carrey the latest in a long line of funnymen tackling dramatic roles to show their range as performers.

Granted I think successful comedies are among the most difficult films to produce and people in the business would agree. The British actor Donald Wolfit once said, "Dying is easy; comedy is hard."

That does not stop folks from trying and in "The Holiday," Black is pretty successful making us believe Kate Winslet's character could fall in love with him. Dressed in black and looking slimmer, Black has very of his characteristic manic mannerisms.

The movie is about two women trying to distance themselves from the pain of a bad relationship by exchanging houses over the Christmas vacation. Winslet swaps her English country house for Cameron Diaz's Los Angeles mansion. Naturally, both women meet men who heal their hurts and love and hilarity ensues.

Supposedly.

Well, director and writer Nancy Myers doesn't understand how the element of surprise can be used to make a film entertaining. Instead she is quite content trotting out standard romantic comedy elements that we have seen a million times.

The fast-forward button comes in quite handy with this film.

For more information, log onto www.sonypictures.com.

© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

Everyone is always yapping these days about losing rights. It used to be when I was a mere boy and beardless youth that it was conservatives who were concerned about losing their freedoms. Conservatives led the march against fluoridation. They said that people should receive some sort of compensation for sending their kids to private school. And goddamn it, they won't stand for helmet laws or seatbelt laws or bottle bills.

"Don't make me do something that's good for me. I want the right to act stupidly!"

It's funny how so many people who identify themsleves as conservative had a hard time with equal rights for women or breaking down color barriers. Make them wear a helmet so their brain don't splatter on the sidewaltk though and thems fightin' words!

These days it's been many liberals who are concerned about their loss of rights through the Patriot Act and other Bush inspired legal actions. It's funny that not too many conservatives don't talk about the erosion of habeas corpus. They don't speak about warrantless searches. Nope, that kind of freedom loss doesn't seem to bother them. Old Rushie and his ilk don't allow talk about that.

Oh, but it's okay to out an undercover CIA agent because her husband embarassed the Regime. That freedom of speech is just fine.

The beauty of America is that one person's freedom is not necessarily important to another person. If your ox isn't being gored then so what? Right? Aren't we supposed to protect the Constitution and the public good?

The rant I wrote below probably confused some of my readers as I really support the rights of private clubs to participate in lawful activities and smoking for adults is lawful. I do think that public health board are acting in a hypocritical manner. Banning smoking should now lead to a prohibition of tobacco, booze, McDonald's fries, lap dances, corned beef sandwiches, and all candy.

I wonder if liberals and conservatives could find middle ground on those "freedoms."

I'm not much of a smoker. I've never tried cigarettes. I have a cigar a couple of times a year outside where it won't stink up the house. My father had quit smoking before I was born and my mother never smoked.

My wife doesn't smoke. My foster daughter doesn't and I hope my grand daughter never starts.

All of this is to say I'm not an advocate of smoking at all and yet I think Springfield's Public Health Council and the corresponding bodies in Holyoke, Chicopee and Agawam did something with which I can't agree: they all banned smoking in private clubs.

The argument I heard the other night was that the health dangers of smoking trumped the rights of individuals who are members of private clubs. Smoking creates severe health problems, the members of the Council all said. A ban would help protect club employees from second hand smoke as well.

Now I'm all in favor of seat belt laws. I think recycling bottles is just fine, too. A lot of people in the Commonwealth fought both measures despite the public good these laws created.

I think that laws that govern how one person's behavior can affect the public are mostly good for us. Yeah, I'm a liberal.

I do think, though, that laws that dictate private lawful behaviors cross a line.

I don't care what you do in your own house, as long it's legal. Don't tell me what to do in my house, either.

And private clubs should be treated in the same way.

Maybe now I'm a libertarian.

No one holds a gun to your head and tells you to be an Elk. If you're interested in joining you know that part of that experience might include smokers in the bar at the Lodge. Your membership is consent to activities such as smoking.

If you really don't like smoking, you probably wouldn't join and would seek another activity. There are plenty of ways to seek fellowship and do something positive for your community.

Adults can smoke. It's legal in certain places. No one at last week's meeting expressed any opposition to the idea that smoking has been banned from workplaces, bars, restaurants and other public areas. They just wanted to be allowed to smoke in their private members-only clubs.

Here's the great unsaid: our society includes behaviors that are dangerous and stupid, but are so ingrained they are legal. No one wants to debate the overall legality of smoking, knowing full well a prohibition would be a disaster.

So we must tolerate the habit. Kids shouldn't be allowed to smoke and taking it out of the public arena makes sense. Allowing in private areas makes sense, also.

The decision now politicizes the issue. It has become an argument of "rights."

Here is what I would have done if I had been a member of a Board of Health in one of these communities: I would have met with representatives of the various organizations and asked to run smoking education and other health programs at their locations.

I bet they would have agreed. Perhaps some would have considered going smoke free.


© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs

Getting Personal
You want personal? Here's a photo from our foster daughter's wedding reception of our dog, Lucky the Wonder Bichon, in his tux.

I've started a new blog, Animation Review (see the link over yonder) where I hope to build up a community of animation fans carping about the bad and touting the good in animation these days.

Why start another blog? Since I’m not a famous type whose fans hang on his or her most mundane of activities, I’ve seldom written about anything truly personal. I mean who the hell cares about me, my wife, our foster daughter and granddaughter, etc. except our family and circle of friends?

Hey I’m not on the cross here…I need the wood, too. I just don’t want to fall into the category of blogging that one of former staffers disparaged so much: personal stuff.

And because I work for a company sensitive about their image, I’ve been reluctant to write anything much about myself. There are always topics that I would like to explore that I cannot for fear of severe reactions from a variety of folks.

This year I will hit age 53 and I will have been a professional writer for 32 years. I’ve have been very lucky. I’ve interviewed people I’ve admired and have had the chance to work in radio, run a nationally distributed magazine and teach college classes. I’ve had a lot of fun. I’ve made crap for money, but I’ve had fun. And fun counts pretty large in life.

I’m on the downhill slide of my life span and I’ve got a lot of stuff I still need to accomplish. So, I’m trying to write more, set up a film festival and complete a couple of books.

So no trophy wife for me (I already have one of 28 years). No fancy car. No plastic surgery. No comb-over. My middle age mania is getting stuff transferred out of head and files and onto pages.

End of personal stuff. Check my four blogs regularly as new posts will pop up more often.

© 2007 by Gordon Michael Dobbs