Tag Archives: scott sheldon

The Pursuit of Happiness/Georgia On My Mind

Because I live in New Jersey, my idea of a happy life has mostly been to get the hell out and live somewhere less vapid, brutish, and rampantly assaholic.  In fact, we’ve spent five years “interviewing” more likely locations.  (Our current favorites are Savannah during the teaching year and Martha’s Vineyard over the summers).  If only we’d known that modern technology could have saved us all that travel.  Take this ten-question quiz, and the good folks at TIME Magazine will automatically match you up with the state that most suits you.  Go ahead.  I’ll wait.

Remarkably, when we took the test, each of us came up Georgia.  Guess I’d better start developing a taste for mint juleps.

But, look.  I know that happiness doesn’t come at the butt end of a moving van, even if that van is headed away from Jersey.  To quote Confucius by way of Buckaroo Banzai, no matter where you go, that’s where you are.  And, even more to the point:  No matter where I go, when I get there I’ll be retired, displaced, and staring into the face of the pursuit of happiness.

So, after 56 years, what exactly do I know about my own happiness?

My first thought is, not much.  When I look back at my life so far, it seems to me that instead of pursuing happiness, I’ve been content with avoiding unhappiness.  Not to cue the violins, but I’m an abandoned kid.  Inevitably, an abandoned kid grows into an adult who is convinced that he is unlovable, undeserving of happiness, and baffled by the ways that other people seem to slide easily and contentedly through the world.  So, I’ve never had a nose for joy.  Mostly, “joy” for me has been the cold relief of avoiding a constant toxic feeling of wrongness and shame.

But, that’s not really fair.  True, I haven’t spent my life chasing pleasure.  There’ve been no sports cars, five-star restaurants, or beachfront resorts.  I cringe at the idea of getting a massage or other “pampering.”  Heck, I’ve never even tasted coffee or tried a cigarette.  My life has been much smaller:  Holding down a workaday job, being a husband and father, a few hobbies mostly in the homely worlds of folk music and community theater.  Nevertheless, like the great majority of Americans, I would say I’m happy.  I mean, it’s not like I am clueless when asked to choose between Red Lobster and Le Bernardin.  I have some instinct for joy.  So, what is it that makes me happy?

Thoreau, by way of LL Cool J, said:  “Do what you love.”  (Thoreau continued, “Know your own bone,” advice that seems directly related to his famed love for solitude).  That would make a nice motto on some poster with a playful kitten, but really, it’s not very helpful.  “Do what you love” means, happiness is doing things that make you happy.  Sort of begs the question, no?

If pursuing happiness were as easy as “doing what you love,” then we’d all be blissed-out pleasure zombies, rather than thin-lipped, rueful, and rudderless.  Yes, we all have hobbies, interests, diversions, sometimes even passions.  But, despite all those pastimes, we no more know what makes us happy than we know how our cells accomplish mitosis.

Just consider the groaning shelf of “what to do when you retire” books at your local bookstore.  The audience for those books are folks who fear that, without a job to fill our waking hours, we’ll fill them instead with reality television, outlet-mall shopping, and Bud Light swilled from cans.   If people believed that “doing what you love,” whether golf, ballroom dancing, or building model ships in bottles, would actually produce happiness, we’d never see “what to do when you retire” books.

And yet, somehow, we are happy.  We stumble through life, doing what we do rather than “doing what we love.”  And, doing what we do makes us happy.  How does the one lead to the other?  Let’s see.

  • For me, most of my waking hours are spent practicing law.  Most lawyers, and especially trial lawyers like me, hate their jobs.  But, I get real happiness from mine.  I enjoy the problem-solving, the Dutch-uncle schmoozing, the gathering teetering piles of facts and law into a solid structure.   However misguidedly, those parts of being a lawyer make me feel competent, clear-thinking, and effective.  And, that makes me happy.
  • The next largest block of my time is spent being a husband.  My marriage has an unusually strong balance of yin and yang.  Barbara’s awesome strengths are in creating visual beauty, giving love loyally, and intuiting emotional truths.   In the hollow of that womanly curve, she allows me, and confidently expects me, to try to be a good man, which means for example accepting and cherishing her love, being confident, respectful, and reliable, and knowing when to advise and when to hold my peace.  When I can live up to that role, it feels like being forty feet tall.  And, that makes me happy.
  • And yes, I do have hobbies.  They’ve always been creative hobbies:  Writing, teaching, acting, singing, songwriting, and most recently creating a concert series.  I’m an awful actor, mediocre professor, and made a fair botch of my short career as a singer/songwriter.  And yet, creating my classes, writing my songs or articles or reviews, taking a concert series from a little hole in the wall to a pulsing community with thousands of participants, all made me feel creative and engaged.  And, that’s made me feel happy.

I do what I do.  And, at their best, the things I do make me feel competent, creative, and nurturing.  There, I think, is the secret of my future happiness.  Doing what I love is not about playing ultimate Frisbee or reading the classics or learning the piano.  Doing what I love is putting myself in a position to be creative, build community, nurture others, be a good man.  Whether that means teaching at community college, leading walking tours, or volunteering to give advice at small claims court, this has to be the goal.  As long as there are mint juleps waiting.

3 Comments

November 5, 2013 · 6:32 am

About Happiness

It took eight years and a Wallace Shawn play for me to appreciate Ella, the last woman I dated before I met Barbara.  It turns out that Ella, with Wally’s help, taught me two important lessons:  First, that there is value in seeking out the remarkable rather than making do with the mundane; and, second, that it is essential to happiness for each of us to find our own “remarkable”…which is not always what we expect.

Ella was an icily beautiful and shamelessly mercenary Russian woman who knew exactly what she wanted:  A wealthy man who could make a better life for her and her daughter.  And by better life, she meant a fabulous life.  One night at a restaurant, she asked me to assure her that I wanted the “five-star lifestyle” she craved.  “You know what I hate?,” she lamented. “Cheap men.  Men who want discounts.  Men who use coupons.”  I hastily tossed my Groupon under the table; soon, she followed.

Because, the fact is, I have never wanted a five-star lifestyle (or even a life that could be called a “life style”).  If Barbara would go along with it, I would happily eat at diners, stay in roadside motels, and entertain myself with whatever diversions are available at the discount ticket outlets.  I drive a fourteen-year-old Camry.  I cringe at $100 theater tickets and $40 restaurant plates.

In fact, my cheap manliness has gone deeper than clipping coupons.  For most of my single life, I dated whatever women happened to be available, interested, and more or less suitable.  I approached dating the way most shoppers approach buying a vacuum cleaner:  Of the five models on display, that one looks good enough, and lo, one more shopping chore is done.  Similarly, for almost my entire work life I’ve taken jobs that demand little creativity or emotional investment, and provide no particular satisfaction.  I’ve taken a similar approach to clothes, cars, food, and the other pleasures of life.

So, maybe I am the “cheap man” that Ella despised…or, maybe, there’s some other reason.  As to which, cue Wally Shawn.

A few weeks back, Barbara let me know that she was dying to see Wallace Shawn’s play, “The Designated Mourner,” in its short revival at The Public Theater.  I flinched when I saw that tickets were $90.  What could possibly make 80 minutes of theater worth $90? Isn’t there a movie version on Netflix?  Won’t it soon be produced in some nearby community theater?

Nevertheless, the dutiful husband, after I found that the entire run was sold out I stood in the lobby of the theater for five hours to get wait-list seats.  And, for my troubles, I learned two things.

First, The Designated Mourner was a pretty remarkable experience.  To be crass about it, sometimes 80 minutes of remarkable theater at $90 can be worth more than a whole week of run-of-the-mill entertainment selected from the discount lists.  I’m guessing that the same is true for remarkable music, remarkable bottles of wine, remarkable restaurants, and so on.  This is in keeping with the moral I gleaned from Anthony Bourdain’s latest book, “Medium Raw”:  If need be, go hungry for six days out of the week, and spend all your money on one transcendent dining experience on the seventh.

(Notice any resemblance?)

Perhaps I am late to this life lesson.  I scoffed at Ella’s “five-star lifestyle,” but really, she was saying only that she preferred the remarkable, the memorable, and the precious over the mundane.  And, although Barbara’s day-to-day tastes are more modest, she also has tried to pry into my hard head the message that we must not be cheap men and women when we are presented with the occasional remarkable piece of clothing, remarkable chance to travel, or indeed remarkable friend.

Second, I learned something from Wally Shawn’s character in the play.  Jack is an admitted “lowbrow”…someone “who likes to take the easy way in the cultural sphere – the funny papers, pinups. You know, cheap entertainment.”  He pretends to be a highbrow – “you know, saving the Rembrandt from the burning building rather than the baby” – but finally embraces his true lowbrow tastes (including lavishing attention on a bag of pornography, which he refers to as his “Experiment in Privacy”).  Jack’s quest is to find his own definition of “remarkable.”

In other words, it is one thing to be willing to hold out for what I really want, rather than settling for what is merely easy.  But, it is another thing entirely to recognize what I want in the first place.

Like Jack (who confronts his own Lowbrowness after he leaves his wife and loses all of his friends who “can read John Donne”), and indeed like the Wallace Shawn character in “My Dinner With Andre” (who waxes elegiac about the pleasure of finding that no roaches are swimming in last night’s cup of coffee), I will soon need to ask myself the hard questions about what makes me happy.

Wise people like Barbara have a finely-tuned instinct for happiness:  For her, it’s family, beauty, deeply creative work and a successful rhubarb pie.  But, I’ve never really considered what makes me happy.  Oddly, it’s never been important to me.  I spend hundreds of hours organizing concerts (and, before that, threw myself into community theater and songwriting) :  Does that mean that my happiness is in creating entertainment?  I get an undeniable thrill from bicycling across gorgeous landscapes:  Should I seek out more adventure travel?  And, is my lowbrow enjoyment of diners, motels, reality television, Lee Childs potboilers, folk music, and Rutt’s Hut deep-fried hot dogs real happiness, or just my Cheap Manliness?

Given my current plan to downscale my work life in about four years, it’s time to ponder the Remarkable (no matter how unremarkable), and my own happiness.  I’ll consider this my own Experiment in Privacy.

Leave a comment

September 3, 2013 · 9:26 am

My Old Man

Father’s Day is set appropriately in mid-June, that tail end of Spring lousy with baseball, beer, and boozy screen-porch sentimentality.  Everyone, it seemed, was jostling last month to deliver an encomium to his Dear Old Dad.  I, though, am a wallflower at that orgy.  I have nothing at all to say about the wonders of growing up with a Pop, or even about the sadness of losing one.  My father, y’see, chose to go 1500 miles away and to pretend that I don’t exist.

If you listen to Steve Goodman’s brilliant song “My Old Man” or read this week’s Richard Ford essay “The Song Of The Suburbs,” you’ll get the impression that growing up with a father produces a lifetime of stories.  Not true for me.  Because my dad left when I was seven, I have barely a cocktail-party anecdote.

I remember him mostly as a self-invented “character”:  A jocular, impenetrable, and always larger-than-life fellow who cultivated a drily-amused plummy voice, a jazz hipster wardrobe, and an inventory of scripted “bits” that spared him from any sort of authentic connection to other people.  I’m sure that women (and apparently there were several during his marriage to my mom) saw him as charming, dangerous within acceptable limits, and maddeningly aloof.  My impression is that he lived his life as though rules did not apply to him, which (as we know from “Mad Men”) can be irresistible.

There is no way that my parents’ marriage was ever going to last.  She married him for the exact reasons that he was not marriage material:  He was rakish, unpredictable, and spontaneous.  She was ostentatious, self-absorbed, and brittle.  Their marriage must have felt like the closing act of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf (or Cat On A Hot Tin Roof, or hell, anything starring Elizabeth Taylor after National Velvet).  For as long as they could live the edgy life, taking daring cross-country drives chasing nonexistent jobs or mingling in the nightclub culture of Batista-era Miami Beach or working as a bandleader at the Borscht-Belt Catskills hotels, there was enough bubbly high octane in their marriage to keep it going.  But, by the time Fidel took power, they had two babies and a suburban apartment in New Jersey.  The party was over.  After a series of false starts, my old man left for good.

There is nothing remarkable about parents getting divorced.  The unusual part of this story is that my father left and never looked back.  He didn’t simply disappear, as fathers sometimes do.  He moved in with and married his girlfriend, left for Oklahoma and, for almost fifty years, has simply chosen not to acknowledge my existence.

I’ve always known my dad’s address and his telephone number, and he’s always known mine.   Perhaps five times in those fifty years, I’ve been in the Oklahoma area and have gone to visit him.  Every time, he’s been studiously polite and thoughtful, the way you’d be if a business associate came calling.  He takes me to dinner, introduces me to his wife’s family, gives me little gifts to take away with me.  And, every time, after he drops me at the airport and promises to stay in touch, he forgets that I ever existed.

I thought of my dad on the day George Carlin died, June 2008.  George’s  on-stage voice, with its carefully-cultivated tone of knowing bemusement (“Why is it that someone going slower than you is an idiot, but someone going faster than you is a maniac?”),  reminded me of my father’s way of talking.   So, after maybe five years of silence, I called him.  I told him my latest news, which produced no reaction at all.  I asked him about his life, which elicited one-word responses.  After a short and awkward call, we hung up and he promised to send me his email address.  He never did.  He has not contacted me in the five years since then.

My old man is 83 next month.  I don’t expect I’ll ever speak to him again.  So, what have I learned from a lifetime of fatherlessness?

It would be too easy to talk about how I never learned how to be a man because I never had a father.  I do suspect that boys watch their dads closely, and adopt or reject their fathers’ values and manner.  So, it’s true that I never watched my Dad avoid a brawl, or copied my Dad’s way of shaking hands, or had anyone to teach me how to tie a Windsor knot.  But, if that is the only effect of fatherlessness, it’s awfully easy to overcome.  We parentless kids know full well that we haven’t learned the ways of the world.  We become as intensely observant as someone who’s lost his sight or hearing.  And, we learn.  It’s not as though I’ve gone through life with my neckties untied.

No, the lasting effect of my fatherlessness is the same as the lasting effect of my motherlessness.  When a parent chooses not to be a parent (or is an alcoholic, or mentally ill), the only way that the child can hold his world together is to excuse the parent and blame himself.  To blame the parent means accepting that the parent can’t be relied on; that the child is completely on his own; and that all that is left is anger and despair.  I found it far easier to believe that my parents were blameless, and that they chose not to parent me because I was so unlovable as to be not worth parenting.

Over a half-century, I’ve learned how to shake hands and tie a Windsor knot.  I’ve mostly gotten over my lifelong conviction that I must be unworthy of love (and of the parentless kid’s constant sense of cluelessness in social situations).  But, most of all, after many decades, I’ve given up on contacting my old man and believing that I can convince him to be my parent.  And that is the most important Father’s Day gift of all.

1 Comment

July 12, 2013 · 5:14 pm

“Amour”….et Mariage

Sex, sex, sex. FBI cell phones used for “sexting”! Roger Clemens’ tragic 15-year-old mistress, who says Roger had bedroom problems from steroid use! This fabulous infographic, “What We Can Learn From 10,000 Porn Stars”!  (Go ahead.  I’ll wait.)

We are intensely curious about other folks’ sex lives.  This is an odd subject for curiosity: Bedroom hi-jinks are generally so straightforward and pedestrian that midgets, puddings, and random buzzing implements are added to give them some variety.  There’s not much to learn from all of our curiosity.

On the other hand, we rarely are particularly curious about other peoples’ marriages.  While we love to spy into bedrooms, we rarely spy into living rooms.  This is equally odd, because marriage is fascinating.  What could be more complex and mysterious than the ways that two people work out a lifelong companionship?  What could be more esoteric and valuable than an understanding of how couples “make marriage work”?

The first fascinating thing about marriage is how such a thing is possible at all…that is, a conscious and satisfying lifetime connection with another person.  Of course, it is not hard for two people to say some vows and then live their lives as two strangers sharing a blanket.  As Gary Shteyngart’s Dr. Girshkin put it, in The Russian Debutante’s Handbook:

Your mother, nu, I picture she’ll be here with me till the end.  We are like one of those many unfortunate corporate mergers they’ve had in the past decade; we are like Yugoslavia.

My touchstone when it comes to the unlikelhood of marriage is the television program “Shipmates,” a reality show produced in 2001-2003 that really should be cited more often by sociologists.  In each episode of “Shipmates,” a single man and a single woman are sent on a three-day-long blind date on a cruise ship.  Typically, the polite veneers of these strangers wear thin quickly as they spend entirely too much time together, burdened by the expectation that they will find chemistry with one another.  This inevitably results in story lines that lie somewhere between Lord of The Flies and Heart of Darkness.  The two ordinarily end up fleeing to opposite ends of the boat, putting on their game faces and dramatically grind-dancing with unwitting other passengers to prove that the failure of the blind date was the other dater’s fault.  Yugoslavia, indeed.

Unhappy marriages are as inevitable and predictable as the weary conflicts on “Shipmates.”  As Billy Joel put it, they are the cold remains of what began with a passionate start.

Successful marriage, on the other hand, is a true mystery.  What makes a marriage work?  There is a book that attempts a methodical description of marriage, Intimate Partners…but that was published in 1986, when couples were still watching Casablanca on Betamax videotape.

Understanding a successful marriage is made even harder by the fact that husbands and wives often spend their first years focused on nest-building.  They get promotions, fix up a house or apartment, raise small children, go to PTA meetings.  emergency rooms, and Home Depots.  They are not unhappily married; their romance is just on unattended auto-pilot.  Divorce often comes when this “Marriage, Incorporated” phase ends.

So, to the Oscar-nominated feature “Amour,” which is on my mind this Academy Awards Sunday.

“Amour” takes place entirely in the Paris apartment of a long-married couple, Georges and Anne, who are in their 80’s.  They are retired music teachers who love the cultural life of Paris.  They go out to recitals and discuss the performance as they make tea in their modest kitchen.  They are too feeble to carry groceries up the stairs to their apartment, and ultimately are too feeble to go out at all.  They have only one another and the daily routines of their shut-in lives.  They do this with patience, kindness, and a tender regard for one another, despite the health problems that make up the narrative of the film.

The producers were smart to title their film “Amour.”  It’s easy to think of love in the Hollywood rom-com way: Fresh-faced and big-spirited couples who meet cute and wisecrack their way into realizing that their concavities and convexities might just fit.  We are satisfied that when Benjamin rides away with Elaine on a bus, she still in her wedding dress, or when Harry and Sally finally kiss at the stroke of New Year’s Day, their story has been fully told.  But, “Amour” asks a bigger question about love: What is it that we call “love” when all that is left of a marriage is the companionship of two lifetime partners, without any of the shared activities, sex, or even conversation, that fill most marriages?  What does it mean to be committed, patient, and supportive when life consists of nothing but the routine of caretaking?

In that very French way, the answer seems to be, there is no question to answer.  There is no question of commitment, patience, or support.  Georges and Anne are married.  They are two parts of a single unit.  They nurture and feed and look out for one another in the same way that a person will look out for himself.  When Anne falls ill, there is no question about whether Georges will continue to care for her, or whether he will honor his promise never to allow her to go back into the hospital.

“Amour,” in this film, is not romance, or nest-building, or “making marriage work,” or even happiness,  It is two people living as if they are one.  If there is any satisfying definition of a true marriage, any window into that most complex and unlikely of miracles, I would say that this is the one.

 

1 Comment

February 24, 2013 · 8:47 am

“Wallace Shawn’s Penis,” And Other Curious Internet Searches That Led To My Blog

From “Wallace Shawn’s Penis” to “Was Elvis A Mudgeon?“,  the search terms that have led Internet surfers to this blog are an entertaining and often puzzling collection.  Here are my Top Ten (a full list is at the end).

1.  “Pat Benetar Teeth”  (Blog is not in top 75 results on Google)
Wow.  This apparently is quite a hot topic, especially given “Hit Me With Your Best Shot” came out almost 35 years ago.  Three different searchers came to the blog by entering this search; and there are hundreds of search results in Google.  Here are some excerpts from the Google search results on this topic:
  • Comment on TMZ.com“You’d think she’d have had enough dough all these years to get those  rabbit/chipmunk teeth fixed. Godawful ugly woman.”
  • Bio on Rhapsody.com“Pat Benatar hit the late ’70s rock scene like a teeth-and-spandex tornado.”
  • On-Line Poll:  Who Would Win A Cage Match, Debbie Harry or Pat Benatar“Pat Benatar.  Those front teeth look like lethal weapons.” (BTW, the final vote was Debbie Harry 55%, Pat Benatar 26%, and No Opinion 19%.  I am dumbfounded that one out of five people who responded to this intriguing thought-exercise did so only to register “No Opinion”).
  • THIS.

2.  “Wallace Shawn’s Penis” (#14 search result on Google)

Maybe this searcher was looking for a mental image to use to prolong sex, in the same way that some men feverishly imagine the Russian Roulette scene from “The Deer Hunter” or scroll mentally through the batting order of the ’78 Expos.  I pondered if the searcher meant the New Yorker editor Wallace Shawn or his lovable son, the actor Wally Shawn….until I saw a second search request, which read “My Dinner With Andre Sex.”

TV Teachers Wallace Shawn From Clueless Then

There are no Web sites that provide My Dinner With Andre Sex.  So, as a public service for those in search of that singular bit of slap and tickle,  here are some classic lines from “My Dinner With Andre,” using the old fortune-cookie trick of adding the phrase “in bed”:

advertisement[Upon entering the restaurant] Wally: I was beginning to realize that the only way to make this evening bearable, would be to ask Andre a few questions IN BED.
Andre: So I said, well if you could give me 40 Jewish women who speak neither English nor French, either women who’d been in the theater for a long time and want to leave it but don’t know why, or young women who love theater but had never seen a theater they could love. And if these women could play the trumpet or the harp, and if I could work in a forest, I’d come…IN BED.
Wally: There’s nothing better than getting up in the morning and having the cup of cold coffee that’s been waiting for me all night, still there for me to drink in the morning.  And no cockroach or fly has died in it overnight.  I mean, I just can’t imagine how anybody could enjoy something else any more than that IN BED.
Andre:  Yes, we are bored.  We’re all bored now. And somebody who’s bored is asleep, and somebody who’s asleep will not say no IN BED.
You’re welcome.
3.  “Bangkok Strippers Ping Pong” (Blog is #3 Google search result)
Perhaps, in this Super Bowl week, the searcher is interested in combining play and pulchritude, along the lines of Beach Blanket Bingo or The Lingerie Bowl.  More likely, of course, the searcher was looking for that quaint entertainment found in Bangkok strip clubs, in which the entertainers demonstrate how to serve a ping pong ball without the use of hands or a paddle.  Given that, as the Avenue Q puppets put it, “The Internet Is For Porn,” I just wonder how this Blog could possibly be the #3 search result for this phrase. 

4.  “How Is The Nucleus Like The Godfather”  (Blog is #3 result for this search on Google)

This is a true moment of Zen….or maybe it’s one of those head-scratching SAT Test “Analogy” questions.  But, I can see some similarities between the Nucleus and The Godfather.  According to this Web site, “The cell nucleus acts like the brain of the cell. If it happens in a cell, chances are the nucleus knows about it. The nucleus is not always in the center of the cell. You probably won’t find it near the edge of a cell because that might be a dangerous place for the nucleus to be.”  And, really, isn’t The Godfather also the brains of his operation, knowing everything that happens while keeping away from dangerous places for him to be?  Indeed, don’t Godfathers usually end up in a cell?

5.  “I Am Old”  (Blog is not in top 75 results on Google)
It’s not clear what Dear Searcher was hoping to find by this search (perhaps a reassuring, “Oh, no, dear.  You’re just ‘experienced'”?).  But, if you type in “I Am Old,” the Google search engine helpfully suggests other, more meaningful searches, including:
  • How Old Am I Quiz and How Old Am I Calculator:  Apparently, these are on-line tools for those who need a little extra help in figuring out their own age.
  • How Old Am I Really:  For those who are not satisfied with the answers from the above quiz or calculator.
  • How Old Am I In Dog Years:  For those who would prefer to think of themselves as seven times their actual age, but are having trouble with the math.  (Yes, there are entire Web sites that calculate this for you).
6. “Was Elvis A Mudgeon?” (Blog is #1, #2 and #3 Google search result)
Not surprisingly, none of the Google results for this search addresses this question.  So, Dear Searcher, allow me to respond from my own experience.  I missed out on the Elvis years; so until I visited Graceland I thought Elvis was a cartoonish Las Vegas lounge singer in a sausage-casing jumpsuit studded with rhinestones.  However, when I went to Gracelend I honestly (no, this is not post-modern irony) was moved by this modest and big-hearted kid who was so generous with his family, his fans, and local charities.  So, I would say no, Elvis was not a Mudgeon.
Unless, of course, the searcher meant Elvis Costello.
7.  “Mr. Obama Please Let Leonard Peltier Freezer” (#1 search result on Google)
Proof, I assume, that the Auto-Complete function on “smart” phones can create some wicked good poetry.
8.  “Superhuman Powers Betting Sports”  (Blog is #1 search result on Google)
I am pleased that the blog is the #1 Google result for this search, but I have the feeling that Dear Searcher’s information need was not satisfied by my blog post regarding betting on sporting events based on which team mascot would win in a mascot-on-mascot throwdown.
9.  “Family Lessons Sex”  (Blog is #11 search result on Google)
Dozens of searches for combinations of these three words led family-(sex)-minded searchers to this blog.  It’s refreshing to know that the basic impulse that drove readers to Tijuana Bibles has carried forward to the Digital Age.
10.  “Will He Love Me Like Calvin Loves Alice”  (Blog is #10 search result on Google)
Finally, I am truly tickled that this blog came up in more than fifty searches for the love story of Calvin and Alice Trillin.  I purloined their story in my post about my own marriage, which I called “Calvin Trillin, Alice, Barbara and Me: A Love Story.”  It’s heartening to see that so many other people know the Calvin and Alice story, want to hear more about it, and wonder wistfully, “Will He Love Me Like Calvin Loves Alice?”
Search Views
gruntled mudgeon 16
family lessons sex tumblr 15
calvin trillin alice 14
alice stewart trillin 12
alice trillin 10
calvin trillin 8
family sex lessons 4
porno 4
pat benatar teeth 3
padmalakshi and husband 3
familylovesex 3
surrender sex com 3
family love sex 3
alice trillin photo 3
mudgeon 3
famly sex 3
google 2
families sex lessons 2
www all family love sex 2
calvin alice trillin 2
calvin trillin alice trillin 2
stanley tucci wnyc never turn it off 2
famyli love sex 2
sports academy zombie airsoft guns 2
barry goldwater buttons 2
scott brown male model 2
calvin trillin images 2
martha vineyard 2
sex and surrender 2
bangkok strippers 2
family lesson sex 2
carnal desires steve ginsburg 2
padma lakshmi tall with husband 2
family sex lesson 2
pat benatar plastic surgery 2
i am old 2
close family sex 1
que quiere decir karma has no deadline 1
love.sex 1
images of man comforting another 1
my life familie sex 1
freud’s quotation about love and work 1
girl chasing guy sadie hawkins 1
calvin trillin cds 1
love roman lesson sex 1
des gruntled evening news 1
hysterical personality disorder 1
significa name age sex blood birth 1
wnyc never turn it off tucci 1
love sex lesson 1
lesson sex family 1
usa famely love sexs 1
love sex 1
sex lesson family 1
wnyc never turn it off stanley tucci 1
wnyc never turn it off 1
office man 1
meaning of revelation 10 1
alice trillin photos 1
live family sex 1
tom jones family 1
i ´m old but i´m happy 1
exie carry on gif 1
elvis presley -50,000,000 elvis fans can’t be wrong 1
display of missionary position 1
revelation horses 1
frank bruni bad columnist 1
golden future chess set 1
is calvin trillin girlfriend 1
creatures of revelations 1
thegruntledmudgeon.wordpress.com 1
loving sex 1
creatures pictures in revelations 1
joseph smith huckster 1
review of gruntled + adele 1
superhuman powers betting sports 1
“scott sheldon” barbara nj 1
calvin trillin alice trillin nora ephron 1
calvin trillin on love quotes marriage 1
young elvis presley 1
family lpve sex 1
loves sex 1
creatures in revelations 1
hillary scott porno video 1
using game theory for sports betting 1
apostle john patmos 1
how is the nucleus like the godfather 1
im old but im happy 1
alice trillin wife of calvin trillin 1
stanley tucci voice over for wnyc ads 1
reply of alice when barbara asks whether alice husband is unfaithful 1
susan rice 1
steve buscemi arthritis 1
trillin alice calvin 1
“as calvin loved” 1
out work love sex 1
sports authority airsoft zombie apocalypse 1
people who don’t look their age 1
frank bruni 1
how old is joan rivers 1
sex and love in spinish and images 1
nigella lawson nude esquire 1
sex family love 1
lesson sex famile 1
look at me i am old but i am happy 1
bangkok strippers ping pong 1
emperor nero 666 1
time goes about its immemorial work of making everyone look and feel like shit 1
frank bruni column 2012 water 1
stanley tucci wnyc ad 1
bangkok women strippers 1
williams sonoma gingerbread butter 1
famili lesson sex 1
celebrities old lady with plastic surgery 1
border battle vikings/packers 1
kasparov judaism 1
what do strippers in bangkok look like 1
about alice trillen will he love me like calvin loves alice 1
chrismas men nude 1
work, family, love 1
bangkok stripper for women 1
steve buscemi aging 1
stanley tucci npr promo 1
mr obama please let leonard peltier freezer 1
why are palestinians so hot blooded 1
fbi the gruntled 1
calvin trillin ex-wife poems 1
rifle casing art 1
vikings vs packers logos 1
african belief that mud houses sugnficy creation 1
david shields 55 books 1
bangkok stripper pics 1
wallace shawns penis 1
pictures of the creatures from the book of revelations 1
what are the outcomes of tribalism 1
padma lakshmi parents 1
google desktop abandon 2012 1
ny housewives 1
was elvis a mudgeon 1
mudgeon tribe 1
best way to martha vineyard from nj 1
sonneti harlem 2 blue 1
work lesson sex 1
2012 holiday window ny crate&barrel 1
npr moth radio hour death bed revelation 1
what does baby aspirin look like 1
vikings packers desktop 1
bangkok stripper 1
wnyc ads never turn it off 1
slot cars bangkok 1
exhausted person 1
how to live on martha’s vineyard 1
sports authority zombie kit airsoft guns 1
my dinner with andre sex 1
frank bruni bad writing 1
sports gambling theories methods 1
c. hitchens debates on revelation 1
mudgeon scott sheldon 1
easy simple drawings charactertures of rock stars 1
scot sheldon rapper 1
old age things to look forward to funny 1
mos def kills agents 1
“scott sheldon ” nj 1
crate and barrel payrole holidays 1
how bib is marthas vineyard 1
why should we embrace our old age? 1
lesson off sex in familly 1
why argue against apostlke john writing revelation? 1
professor david shields 1
zombie pellet gun 1
fly away sticks crate and barrel 1
why are women who surrender to a man seen as sexy? 1
the revelation story

2 Comments

January 27, 2013 · 1:39 pm

Wallflower At The Protest Rally

I spent Friday evening with Pete Seeger, Harry Belafonte, Jackson Browne, Michael Moore, Hurricane Carter, and my Republican buddy Mike.  The event was called “Bring Leonard Peltier Home in 2012,” and was meant to remind folks that the Native American activist Leonard Peltier is still in jail for the murder of two federal agents, in spite of questions about his guilt.

More than 2000 audience members stood and cheered whenever speakers described Peltier as a “political prisoner,” or cried racism, or railed more generally against “our society” or “Wall Street.”

I remained seated.  And now, I’m figuring out why.

First, I don’t think that I am stone-hearted or ironically aloof by nature.  I was genuinely moved by Michael Moore’s eloquence and passion, which included his response to the shootings of schoolchildren in Connecticut that morning.  I was wowed by Native American singer/songwriter Bill Miller‘s big spirit, which reminded me of Richie Havens in his prime.  Hearing Hurricane Carter tell the story of his wrongful conviction with humor, resignation, and pride, was moving.

So, why was I so skeptical and cold-blooded about most of the event?  Why was I the wallflower at the protest rally?

As I think back on it, as I think of the more than three hours of speakers and singers railing that Leonard Peltier is a proud and pure-hearted Native American, railroaded by the vindictive and hasty FBI, I realize the answer: I instinctively bristle when I hear easy, broad-brush caricatures that take the place of careful, detailed argument.  When a conclusion sounds too easy, my first instinct is to doubt it.  I am, in short, a Mudgeon.

The speakers told us that Leonard Peltier was framed by the FBI for the murders of two FBI agents at the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in June 1975.  Why? Well, that was not completely clear, but the words “racist” and “political prisoner” were used a lot.

I don’t know if Leonard Peltier shot those agents.  The agents had entered the reservation in pursuit of Jimmy Eagle, who was wanted for assaulting and robbing some local ranch workers.  They were found dead in their cars, which had been sprayed with more than one hundred bullets.  No eyewitness has ever identified the shooters.  So, the evidence against Leonard Peltier was circumstantial.

Three witnesses said that Peltier was in the vicinity of the crime.  Later, the three said that their statements had been coerced.  Shell casings at the scene were said to match a rifle owned by Peltier.  Later, a memo from the FBI ballistics expert was discovered, showing that the casings were not a match.  When Peltier was extradited from Canada to stand trial, the basis was an affidavit from a woman who claimed that she was his girlfriend and knew that he had shot the agents.  That affidavit turned out to be false.

Some evidence is more damning.  After the murders, Peltier and two other suspects fled in a station wagon and an RV.  When police stopped the RV, which was being driven by Peltier, he shot at the police and fled.  One of the murdered agents’ guns was found under the driver’s seat, with Peltier’s fingerprint on it.  The station wagon, filled with explosives and driven by one of the other suspects who had fled with Peltier, exploded accidentally on a Kansas highway.  Police found the other FBI agent’s gun in it, as well as a rifle of the same type as Peltier’s.  Peltier claimed several conflicting alibis at the time, but in his memoir published a quarter-century later, he admits that he shot at the agents, but denies murdering them.

So, while my fellow audience members are hooting about racism and political imprisonment, I’m thinking that, at least,  there was plenty of evidence to prove that Peltier was one of the shooters (which he now doesn’t deny), and federal law considers an accomplice to murder to be just as guilty as the murderer.  And, when speaker after speaker calls for the President to commute Leonard Peltier’s sentence I am thinking that Bill Clinton did not commute Leonard Peltier’s sentence, and Barack Obama will never commute Leonard Peltier’s sentence, because this was the murder of two FBI agents, by someone who admits shooting at them, and if you’re the president there’s no upside to pissing off the FBI.  This is not like the story of Hurricane, the man the authorities came to blame, for something that he never done.

Leonard Peltier isn’t the only too-easy argument that turns me into an instant skeptic.  Opponents of hydrofracturing fret reflexively about fracking fluid “laden with industrial and toxic chemicals” that have caused “massive fish kills, sick children, dead livestock, and contaminated tap water.”  When I hear this, I think, wouldn’t this be front-page news if it were true?  And wouldn’t the EPA be all over it if there was a health risk?  Anti-union business interests have been supporting the “right” of unionized employees to get the benefits of a union’s collective bargaining work without paying dues, by arguing that unions are corrupt and skim almost all of their dues for internal administrative costs and left-wing politicking.  I think, if this were true, wouldn’t union members vote bums like that out of leadership?  And, when the rapper Mos Def told us on Friday that rap had been the authentic voice of the community until “Wall Street” corrupted it, was I the only person who thought, “Huh?  What does the banking industry have to do with rap music?  And aren’t rap artists mostly promoted by rap moguls like Def Jam and Roc a Fella?”

It was Ernest Hemingway who wrote, “Isn’t it pretty to think so?”  I’d like to think that Ernest, surely a Mudgeon in his own time, would also have sat on his hands at the Peltier rally, quietly asking himself “isn’t it too easy to think so?”  Maybe Leonard Peltier is innocent; and maybe the Occupy Wall Streeters were all dangerous bums looking for free sandwiches; and maybe the EPA is corrupt and looking the other way as ‘frackers destroy the Marcellus shale bed, or cell phones and microwave ovens cause cancer.  But, my Mudgeonly hide will always thicken when these things are presented as though they are beyond question, by partisans who believe because they have an interest in believing, and not because a convincing case has been made.

Leave a comment

Filed under identity politics, philosophy, Politics, protest, skepticism, Uncategorized

Work, Family, Love, Sex and Surrender: The Five Lessons That Changed My Life — Lesson 4

So, as they might say in a British bedroom farce:  On to the sex.

I’ll skip over the unanswerable question of why we glory in other completely carnal acts, such as eating – sharing our meals, writing and talking freely about food, and elevating chefs into television stars – but treat sex as a the act that “dare not speak its name.”  (Why violent criminals are simply released after being punished, while only sex offenders are branded for life, sounds like a future blog topic).  So, suffice to say here that this blog post is about sex, and the squeamish should stop reading now.

It is unusual for a man to talk about sex.  Although locker-room talk is full of hubba-hubba what-I’d-do-to-her wink-wink nudge-nudge say-no-more, men never talk candidly about sex.  To us men, “talking about sex” means, at the most, spinning James Bond-like yarns of “what I did to her” conquests, in which we, the conquerors, are faceless, emotionless, and barely present. (Or, in a much more amusing variant, the “I never get any anymore” rant).

It may be that men don’t talk intimately about sex because there’s truly nothing to say.  The stereotype, at least, is that sex is an automatic and uncomplicated act for men, driven blindly by instinct and hormones.  There may therefore be no more to say about a man’s experience of sex than there is to say about a man’s experience of breathing.  I don’t think so.  Maybe that’s true for Stanley Kowalski; but, brother, it’s never been true for me.  For me, at least for most of my adult life, sex has been 90% cerebellum and 10% genetellum (insert if you must a further rhyme for KY petroleum jellum).   It has been anything but unconflicted instinct.

For me, sex has been as far removed from the simple carnal romp as My Dinner With Andre is removed from the Tantalizing Feast scene in the movie “Tom Jones.”  Maybe I’m unusual in this way.  Maybe I am a rare Wally Shawn in a sea of Albert Finneys….but I doubt it.

(At this point, you may want to view the 30-second version of My Dinner With Andre, re-enacted by bunnies.  Go ahead.  I’ll wait).

For even the least neurotic of men, sex is fraught with a weighty set of expectations and anxieties.  Women, we are told at an early age, want a man who is “good in bed” (a standard to which 85% of men believe they measure up, but only 65% of their partners agree).  We are never told, however, what this means.  We, along with Randy Newman, quietly wonder if maybe we’re doing it wrong. (How else to explain the enduring success of that overstuffed Christmas turkey of a book, “How To Please A Woman Every Time,” which consists of two hundred pages of filler and one paragraph describing the author’s recommended gradual-insertion technique?).  We are expected to be masterful lovers by instinct, with the cost of failure being emasculation and a steady hiss of whispers behind our backs.  This dovetails with other male anxieties, from the tawdry and unwinnable quest to have a large-enough penis to the now-medically-reduced fear of impotence.

Early in my aduly life, I found what I thought was a reasonable solution to the “good in bed” question.  In keeping with my nature and with the “sensitive new age guy” palaver of the time, I concluded that a man’s job is to be a pleaser:  To ask nothing and to focus entirely on giving pleasure.

This sounds admirable in the abstract, but has at least two enormous drawbacks.  First, making love to a man who asks for nothing must surely be like kissing your brother through a screen door.  It lacks the ardor that comes from mutual selfishness.  Second, this approach to sex feels more like a military maneuver than a pas de deux:  It isn’t ever heedless, sloppy, or spontaneous.  It is in essence, in the terminology of one quaint sexual fetish, CMNF – clothed male, naked female.  Finally, and most important, having put aside my own desires for so long, I lost touch with exactly what those desires were.

Just as Ruth Reichl doesn’t lick bacon grease off of her fingers, my cerebral and studiedly unselfish approach to sex meant that I had no clue as to what sexual chemistry meant.  I chose partners for their wit, or their mischief, or their mystery….and also with an eye toward whether they resembled the physical ideals that movies and magazines feature…but never for pure chemistry.  This was not a sign of my catholic tastes in women, but rather was a sign of my being completely out of touch with my own moxie.

Other men might share some of this sangfroid with me.  We are all bombarded with mainstream image of sex appeal.  (And, with the advent of the Internet, that mainstream image can be combined at will with images of midgets, goats, or Cuban cigars).  We are easily convinced that we are aroused by Cameron Diaz or Mila Kunis (ok, I don’t know who that is, but every month Esquire tells me that I should).  We lose touch with that part of us that yearns instead for Queen Latifah or Adele.

For me, this disconnect was disconnected even farther by the “love the one you’re with” mandate of dating.  By way of unappetizing metaphor, if you come home every night to a dinner of spinach souffle, it’s only natural to believe that your favorite meal is spinach souffle.

So, here’s my point.  It took me most of my adult life to realize that sex is about chemistry and attraction, and not about accomplishment, performance, and magazine publishers’ ideas of sex appeal.  Not to wax too rhapsodic here, but if I’d been at all mindful of my own hormones decades ago, I would have realized that there was a reason that I yearned to see Nigella Lawson cook knaidlach, or more recently why I paid complete attention to the Mad Men scenes with Christina Hendricks, and none at all to those with January Jones.   I imagine that I am a late bloomer in this regard, and that this is a lesson that induces some amount of quease when delivered by a middle-aged Dad.  But, because I wish every man his own Nigella Lawson, I am delivering it nonetheless.

Leave a comment

Filed under dating, life lessons, love, relationships, romance, sex, Uncategorized