2016 Oscars

The Oscars

Why do I continue to watch this award show when I haven’t seen one of the movies nominated and have rarely seen more than two or three in other years? Sometimes I tune in to watch a particular host I enjoy. I usually like the opening numbers and the performances of the songs nominated. I used to like the anticipation of hearing winners’ speeches, but now that they have so ruthlessly cut the time for each, not much of interest gets said. A continual list of thank-yous quickly becomes boring. Even the memorial for those who have died in the past year has been truncated and modified to banality.

Yet I continue to watch, maybe out of habit or tradition. I started watching as a child with my parents and can remember being nail-bitingly invested in who won in years past. I feel no anticipation anymore and certainly am not invested in the outcomes, and yet I watch.

2016 Awards

I watched the fashion parade prior to the show, which I don’t care about but, gold being this year’s haute couture, it was interesting to see how many shades and variations in style the gowns managed. The opening number was a nice song but tame to the point of ho-hum compared to past years. I thought the In Memoriam was a little better this year—a pretty song and some nice outtakes from the actors highlighted, ending with Carrie Fisher, as Leia, saying, “May the force be with you.”   

Considering the political passion of the last year, comments were fairly few, restrained, and respectful, except of course for the comic bits of the host, Jimmy Kimmel. He made a special point of eliciting a standing ovation in support of the overrated, has-been Meryl Streep (President Trump’s comments after she exhorted people to stand up and be vigilant against attacks on our civil liberties at the Golden Globes).

It was sweet though I couldn’t help wondering if some in the audience felt peer pressure to stand despite the fact that they thought she shouldn’t have used the Golden Globes as a political forum. Normally I agree with that. There are better forums than award shows. But Ms. Streep was receiving a life-achievement award, which should probably leave latitude for the recipient to talk about what is most important to them.

I was happy to see Jungle Book win for visual effects, which I thought were stunning. So I did see one movie nominated. I’d forgotten it was part of this year’s awards.

The Oops Moment

Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway gave the award for Best Picture and had the wrong card (it was for a different category) and announced the winner to be La La Land when it was actually Moonlight. Mr. Beatty looked odd when he read it and handed it to poor Ms. Dunaway to read. Price Waterhouse took responsibility for placing the wrong card in the envelope. I’m sure they will be very careful next year not to repeat what could have been a fiasco, but Jimmy Kimmel handled it well. Not the best, not the worst of the Oscar shows. I’ll no doubt watch again next year.

Supporting Your Children

Supporting Your Children

Not too long ago one of the cohosts on The View, who has young teenagers, said she thought it  was a parent’s job to encourage and support his or her children in all their dreams and endeavors no matter how unlikely or how little talent they might have for them. The world was more than able and ready to shoot them down. Home was their haven.

This simple perspective on parenting jarred me and I wasn’t sure why. Hadn’t I always encouraged my kids? Not unconditionally, I had to admit. One of them wants to make a living in a band, the other as a writer. I have a vivid imagination but am grounded in reality and have a rather literal mind. I talked to them about the hard work and determined persistence it takes to succeed at their dreams. Then in the same breath, I listed jobs where people were or would be needed.

My youngest considered pursuing massage therapy. I agreed he would be good at it but told him, for the same amount of schooling, there were more jobs for physical therapy assistants. He hasn’t looked into either since.

Financial Realities

The woman on The View has a successful career and is married to a successful man, not rich but certainly well off compared to many in the sinking middle class. Even those with better finances have to sacrifice for their children’s education. For parents with less means, their children exploring multiple career options in the education system would take more than they can afford. The child gets one shot and still may wind up with crushing student loans and a career they aren’t happy with or worse—all that education and no job.

It isn’t any wonder that parents feel constrained to guide their kids onto paths they hope will fill their financial needs. Statistics show that because of finances kids are staying longer in their parents’ home or coming back after attempts at independence lead to financial distress. For the most part it isn’t poor parenting or overly entitled kids causing the problem. The economy has changed drastically from two generations ago and many of us either didn’t see it or don’t know how to cope with it.

A Changing Economy

My parents’ generation was able to stop at a high-school diploma, buy a house, and raise a family—often on one income. They worked twenty or more years at one job and retired with a pension. Today’s college graduates frequently start their careers with temporary or part-time jobs, rarely stay at one job more than ten years, have to provide their own retirement income, and can’t survive on one job, despite daycare costs taking the majority of the second or third income.

All that begs the question, do you unconditionally support your teens’ dreams, bolster them against the world’s coldness, or steer them onto more secure paths? I’m still not sure of the answer.

Guilty Pleasure Books

Guilty Pleasure Books

I read a wide variety of books, sometimes to see what the current trends are—didn’t care for the Girl books: Gone Girl, Girl on the Train or some other popular and critically acclaimed literary fiction—The Golden Finch. I did like We Are Not Ourselves, about a family dealing with Alzheimer Disease. There was no plot per se other than the day-to-day struggles of the wife and son as they dealt with their husband and father’s illness.

I read murder mysteries and thrillers because they’re so popular and to see how pacing and plot structure make a page-turner. Otherwise, they aren’t my favorite genres. Iris Johansen is a popular author with a series about policewoman Eve Duncan. I read Quicksand and didn’t care for the graphic details of child torture or the one-dimensional villain. The rest of the characters were engaging, though Johansen didn’t go deeply into their psyches. Heather Graham’s The Cursed, part of a series called the Krewe of Hunters, seemed silly and over the top.

Books set in the Scottish Highlands

Have to admit I enjoy these books, as silly as the titles and stories can be, usually set in the 18^th or 19^th century. They run the gamut from Diana Gabaldon’s critically acclaimed and wildly popular Outlander Series to titles such as Hannah Howell’s Highland Master and Highland Chieftain, the second part of a series about the Murray family. The first lacked tension—didn’t believe anything bad would really befall the characters—but was still fun. The second was about a girl whose stepfather kidnapped young boys to work his farm. She was accused of killing the man, part of a plot to wrest land from unprotected women in the area. The torture and rape to wring confessions out of the women seemed gratuitous. The emotional consequences were discussed almost as an afterthought. I won’t read the rest of the series.

Heather Graham wrote a number of these books in her earlier career: Knight Triumphant, in which the heroine came across as too much a feminist for the time, while on the other hand, a stereotypically emotional/hysteric female compared to the steadfast, strong but silent hero. Still one of the better stories I’ve read. Seize the Dawn was set during the time of Wallace, a real Scottish hero. An interesting plot, a few chapters set at sea, which gave an interesting glimpse of piracy of that time. The heroine falls for a commoner but the story was believable.

What I Call the Duke Books

These are books set primarily in 19^th century England with the basic plot that a Duke or other titled gentleman needs a wife, and the conflicts and tensions the hero and heroine undergo to get together. The heroine’s used to be primarily naïve but spirited virgins under twenty who mainly had sex after marriage. I see a trend now toward older, worldlier women who succumb to the hero before the wedding, though they always get married.

Duke of My Heart (silly title) by Kelly Bowen had the older woman with a shady past, definitely not a virgin. The climax of the story was filled with tension but the ending fizzled into an exercise just to finish off the threads of the story. Liked the different heroine though couldn’t help but think she never would have been accepted in reality at that time period.

Eloisa James is popular. My American Duchess was deeply romantic and managed good tension without the common overdone conflicts. The heroine being American added unusual and interesting aspects. James’s A Duke of Her Own was less morally constrained than usual. A Duke with six illegitimate children seeks a wife to mother them. Typical misunderstandings and obstacles arise to add conflict between the Duke and the woman he chooses, but the different, more mature way the characters face them was refreshing.

The Pledge of Allegiance

The Pledge of Allegiance

A pledge to the country had nothing to do with the Founding Fathers. Colonel George Balch, a veteran of the Civil War, wrote a pledge in 1887, which said: “We give our head and hearts to God and our country; one country, one language, one flag!” A pledge written by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister and Christian socialist, wrote the version present-day Americans know as part of a publicity campaign for the Youth’s Companion, a children’s magazine with the largest magazine circulation of the late 1890s.

Bellamy worked for the publication and made the pledge part of a campaign to sell American flags to all public schools in time for the 400^th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’s arrival on the American continent. Many of the flags were sold at a discount by children also selling subscriptions to the magazine. Bellamy’s original version said: “I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

The two pledge versions were used by different organizations until Congress adopted Bellamy’s in 1942. “My” was changed to “the” and “of the United States” was added in 1923 during the National Flag Conference.

Under God

Legislation to add “under God” was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Eisenhower on Flag Day of 1954 to differentiate America from other nations, especially those espousing atheistic Communism.

President Eisenhower said in his address, “From this day forward, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim… the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty… We are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America’s heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country’s most powerful resource, in peace or in war.”

Controversy

The founding fathers never mentioned or advocated any pledge in a Constitution aimed at freedom of thought and speech and very decidedly advocated a separation between state and religion to guarantee religious freedoms for all. Cases have gone all the way to the Supreme Court in protest and children are no longer required to say the pledge, though only four states no longer include it as a daily exercise.

Francis Bellamy went on to become a successful New York City advertising man, though in 1923 he wrote that the pledge was his favorite. He wrote (according to the Smithsonian Magazine), “This little formula has been pounding away on the impressionable minds of children for a generation.”