Category Archives: miscellaneous; general interest

“It’s all over!” (Havlicek stole the ball)

 

 

The play happened in the seventh and final game of the 1965 Eastern Conference finals. between the Boston Celtics and the Philadelphia 76ers. at the old Boston Garden.

On April 15, 1965,

I was a freshman in college. I attended the game with my best friend Johnny Harris.

*****************************************************

In the closing seconds, an inbound pass from Bill Russell struck one of the basket’s guide wires. The refs went into a conference — there was a delay — until they decided that the ball should be awarded to the 76ers.

Johnny and I were sitting in the balcony, at the end of the court opposite Havlicek’s play.

Hal Greer threw an inbounds pass for the 76ers. Havlicek stood with his back to Greer; he was guarding Chet Walker. He spun and tipped the pass to Sam Jones.

I recall watching Jones gleefully dribbling out the clock

*****************************************************

At a point around 0:22 in the audio, you can hear the announcer saying (the audio is garbled). “Bill Russell hugs him. He squeezes John Havlicek,” as Havlicek is being carried off the court.

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

   April 2026

turtlenecked nerds.

 

What was once shocking becomes quaint: That’s how it goes. The Charleston now looks like a silly dance, Elvis is just a sweaty guy, nobody’s fainting while watching screenings of “The Exorcist” anymore and jazz is now the province of turtlenecked nerds. We’re assured there was a time when van Gogh’s paintings horrified audiences, but today reproductions of them hang in college dorm rooms. This process is not tragic; as these things lose their power to shock, they reveal new virtues. Nothing stays boundary-pushing forever. …

— “The Greatest Love Story of All Time Is Also the Strangest,” By B.D. McClay, The New York Times, February 14,  2026

*****************************************************

Very true. Clever.

As my wife put it — very well, I thought — there are defining moments in popular culture.

I once though Jefferson Airplane was cool.

I am not sure what I thought about the Doors, but I listened repeatedly to “Shana Light My Fire.”

I bought Dylan LPs and played them over and over again.

I thought Pat Boone was cool once, and wished I could become another Elvis.

I read The Cather in the Rye and absorbed its social criticisms.

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

  March 2026

a letter to editor re the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

 

Regarding the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, see my post:

letter to editor

 

— Roger W. Smith

  November 2024

post updated

 

a witness at the Nurermberg trials

This post has gotten surprisingly little readership. I think the letter posted is of intrinsic interest. I have transcribed the letter, which should make it easier to read.

— Roger W Smith

  September 2024
 

 

dedications

 

Each man’s joy is joy to me
Each man’s grief is my own

— Joan Baez, “No Man Is an Island”

Then said a rich man, Speak to us of Giving.
And he answered:
You give but little when you give of your possessions.
It is when you give of yourself that you truly give.

— Kahlil Gibran, The Prophet

 

 

From a ceremony held at an LRY (Liberal Religious Youth) meeting in 1964, sixty years ago.

At the ceremony in my honor — I had served for a year as Chairman of the New England Regional Committee (NERC) — I was given two books with these dedications on the flyleaves.

The handwriting is that of either Ruth Wahtera or Sandi Mosher. They collaborated on choosing the books and passages to quote. The quotes are from the lyrics to the song “No Man Is an Island” and Kahlil Gibran’s The Prophet.

Kind words. I feel — modesty aside — that they were true. They saw something in me; empathy, concern for others.

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

   July 2024

the head versus the heart

 

Mr Casaubon and Dorthea’s letters

 

The Word document posted here (above) is an excerpt from Chapter V of George Eliot’s Middlemarch, in which there is an exchange of letters between Rev, Edward Casaubon and Dorothea Brooke. Mr. Casaubon has decided to propose to Dorothea.

Mr. Casaubon’s letter is a great example of over intellectualizing the emotions (such as I myself used to do sometimes in my youth; reading about the life of distant others can help one to better understand oneself), and of verbosity. So that would could be said plainly becomes encumbered in exposition.

Note how Dorothea does just the opposite in her response, saying what needs to be said in just three sentences.

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

   June 2024

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, « La Conquête de l’Indochine et le capital financier (1873-1885)”

 

In the summer of 1984, I contacted Professor Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie and asked him, was an article published in 1954 in Cahiers internationaux – Revue internationale du monde du travail his?

The full citation was: « La Conquête de l’Indochine et le capital financier (1873-1885),” Cahiers internationaux – Revue internationale du monde du travaill – n° 56-57, Mai-juin 1954, pp. 75-76.

It was published under the pseudonym Pierre Chavanay.

Le Roy Ladurie mentions this article on page 118 of his Paris-Montpellier: P.C. – P.S.U. 1945-1963 (Gallimard, 1982). He referred to an article which he did not give the title of that was published in the mid-1950s (“est paru au milieu des années 1950”).

Yes, it was his, he told me.

pages 116-118

He asked me if I would send him a copy. He had lost his.

I am posting the full article here. I have also posted:

 

the original article:

Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, ‘La conquete de l’Indochine et le capital financier’

 

my article on Le Roy Ladurie:

“Le Roy Ladurie, Emmanuel (Bernard),” Current Biography, July 1984

Roger W. Smith, ‘Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie’ – Current Biography, June 1985

Roger W. Smith, ‘Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie’ – Current Biography, June 1985

 

Le Roy Ladurie’s obituary:

“Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, Who Looked at History From the Bottom Up, Dies at 94,” By Jonathan Kandell, The New York Times, November 23, 2023

Emanuel Le Roy Ladurie obit – NY Times 11-23-2023

 

— posted by Roger W Smith

   December 2023

 

an obliterated artwork … jejune writing

 

Robert E. Lee – NY Times 10-27-2023

‘Controversial Statue Surrenders to the Furnace’

 

re:

“The Most Controversial Statue in America Surrenders to the Furnace”

By Erin Thompson

The New York Times

October 27, 2023

 

The piece is verbose, bloated, windy; and is way too long for an op-ed.

Generic writing characterized by simplistic formulations that are foreseen as sounding good to the target audience, but which, in themselves are simplistic and nonsensical. It’s equivalent to the type of writing (in different venues) known as psychobabble.

One can imagine (the writer is a professor) the writers of such essays being products of the educational system predominant now and which seems to have existed since the 1970s, in which English composition classes were watered down — and anything purporting to be a statement of a student’s views was judged to be worthy of an A, despite questions of intellectual rigor and what our English teachers in the 1960s told us to avoid: fuzzy writing and generalities.

Some of the broad, sweeping, meaningless assertions — devoid of any informational content or substance — are highlighted by me below in bold. The quotations are from Professor Thompson’s op-ed.

 

*****************************************************

Last Saturday in a small foundry, a man in heat-resistant attire pulled down his gold-plated visor, turned on his plasma torch and sliced into the face of Robert E. Lee. The hollow bronze head glowed green and purple as the flame burned through layers of patina and wax. Drops of molten red metal cascaded to the ground.

[Roger W. Smith: re “Drops of molten red metal cascaded to the ground.” I highlighted this sentence because it is meant to affect us with a profound sensation as a poet or novelist might do — or, if not quite that — to achieve a rhetorical affect. like Martin Luther King Jr.’s “With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope.”

Here it is bathos.]

I stood next to Andrea Douglas and Jalane Schmidt, who had invited me to witness the last moments of the figure that had gazed down on Charlottesville, Va., from atop a massive steed from 1924, when it was installed, until 2021, when it was removed by the City Council. Dr. Douglas and Dr. Schmidt are the founders of the Swords Into Plowshares project, a community group that led a campaign to melt the statue down and use the metal to make a new public artwork. ,,,

Lee’s journey to the melting pot began more than seven years and two lawsuits ago, when a Charlottesville high school student, Zyahna Bryant, started a petition to remove the monument. “I am offended every time I pass it,” she wrote. “I am reminded over and over again of the pain of my ancestors.” The Charlottesville City Council voted to move the statue, but a lawsuit was quickly filed by a coalition of Confederate heritage supporters to keep it in place. A series of rallies by Klan members, white nationalists and others sought to protect the “world of gods and heroes like Robert E. Lee,” as Richard Spencer put it while leading a tiki-torch-lit march. …

Yet we never reached any consensus about what should become of these artifacts. Some were reinstalled with additional historical context or placed in private hands, but many simply disappeared into storage. I like to think of them as America’s strategic racism reserve.

What should we do with them? Just leaving them there for some future generation to deal with dishonors the intensity of emotions for all involved. But each possible outcome has costs and consequences. Each carries important symbolic weight. And no, we can’t just give them all to the Smithsonian.

The way our communities dispose of these artifacts may influence America’s racial dynamic over the next century, just as erecting them did for the hundred-year period now ending. Three years after George Floyd’s death, seven years after Ms. Bryant’s petition, 99 years after the monument’s installation and 158 years after the end of the Civil War, it’s high time we start figuring this out.

***

… Dr. Schmidt … described the Lee monument as “a lie from the time it was put in.” More than half of the residents of Charlottesville and the surrounding county were enslaved during the Civil War, meaning that “the majority of our community was elated when the Union troops came.” …

But as her perspective evolved, Dr. Schmidt no longer wanted to put Lee in a museum. She was thinking of something much more primal.

Confederate monuments bear what the anthropological theorist Michael Taussig would call a public secret: something that is privately known but collectively denied. It does no good to simply reveal the secret — in this case, to tell people that most of the Confederate monuments were erected not at the end of the Civil War, to honor those who fought, but at the height of Jim Crow, to entrench a system of racial hierarchy. That’s already part of their appeal. Dr. Taussig has argued that public secrets don’t lose their power unless they are transformed in a manner that does justice to the scale of the secret. He compares the process to desecration. How can you expect people to stop believing in their gods without providing some other way of making sense of this world and our future?

Swords Into Plowshares might have been the first to propose melting, but other communities are working out their own creative visions for Lee’s afterlife. …

Covering this story over the past few years, I’ve come to realize two things. First, when a monument disappears without a ceremony to mark why it is coming down, a community has no chance to recognize that it has itself changed. (Ideally the ceremony is public, but because of safety concerns, the melting I attended was not.) Second, if you are outraged that something’s happening to your community’s heroic statue of Lee, you’re not going to be any less outraged if the statue is moved to some hidden storeroom than if it’s thrown into a landfill. So if all changes, large or small, will be resisted, why not go for the ones with the most symbolic resonance?

[Roger W. Smith: “the melting”: this is new jargon indeed, a neologism that is ridiculous … what is “a melting?: .. is it of the same order of words as a christening or a seance?]

That’s why the idea to melt Lee down, as violent as it might initially seem, struck me as so apt. Confederate monuments went up with rich, emotional ceremonies that created historical memory and solidified group identity. The way we remove them should be just as emotional, striking and memorable. Instead of quietly tucking statues away, we can use monuments one final time to bind ourselves together into new communities. …

***

A very different process is consuming the world’s largest Lee, who rides, 76 feet tall, across the granite cliff face of Stone Mountain, just outside Atlanta. …

Lee’s face was the last piece to go into the crucible. Given how often the monument and its ideals were celebrated with flames — from Klansmen’s torches to the tiki torches of white nationalists in 2017 — it seemed fitting for flames to close over the monument.

— posted by Roger W. Smith

October 2023

 

*****************************************************

Addendum:

The Washington Post also published on op-ed:

“Lee’s statue is gone. What it unleashed remains.”

By Theresa Vargas

October 28, 2023

‘Lee’s Statue iIs Gone’

 

Reader comments touched upon the question of destroying a work of art. I feel that this is regrettable and depressing to contemplate. It’s similar in my mind to the removal of the Theodore Roosevelt Statue from in front of the Museum of Natural History three years ago.

A few random comments from the current Washington Post article:

 

* * *

What you’re missing is that it’s a work of art. Shall we destroy paintings of [Lee] and other people in history that we disdain today? A statue is no different. Did you read the story of Napoleon’s statue? He was forced out of France into exile. But the statue is art.

* * *

Somehow your reasoning feels disingenuous. When art causes maltreatment of another, it needs to be done away with.

* * *

The Lee statue was not a work of art. Art informs. Art brings joy and peace. Art is inclusive. This statue was erected during the height of the Jim Crow era to intimidate Black Charlottesville residents. Learn your history. And don’t begin that journey by looking at statues.

* * *

Are you aware that the National Portrait Gallery in Washington has a portrait of Benedict Arnold hanging on its walls? What’s the difference here? It’s a work of art, my friend. Put it in the Smithsonian.

* * *

You mean blasting off the images, like the Taliban did to the Buddha statues at Bamiyan?

 

*****************************************************

See also my posts:

 

“I like it the way it is.”

“I like it the way it is.”

 

pompous pontificating, clumsy locutions, a tissue of generalities; doublespeak … how NOT to write

pompous pontificating, clumsy locutions, a tissue of generalities; doublespeak … how NOT to write

 

how to say nothing in 1,035 words … generic writing II

how to say nothing in 1,035 words … generic writing II

post updated

 

to note and wonder at each precise fact or thing

 

parenting

 

Addendum (June 23)

I just thought of something.

This post was inspired by a book I have been reading, the early chapters thereof: George Eliot’s The Mill on the Floss.

 

*****************************************************

I am fortunate in the parents and family I had.

They were good people. The highest moral standards and character. So respectful, appreciative of, and kind to other people. Taught their children such behavior by example.

They always said we love you all (four children) equally: the same. This sounded good, but wasn’t really true. Their affections fluctuated and were not consistent. They would admire and favor one of us for some particular attribute at one time or another.

My siblings and I were very fortunate to have had an intact and stable nuclear family with two parents in a stable, loving relationship.

My mother. Beautiful. Great taste and personal qualities. Refinement. The best values. Discretion and tact. Yet by no means a snob. Modest. So genuine with other people. Met them at the most common level, by which I mean sincere and genuine, not that she somehow condescended to be nice to her “inferiors.”

My father. Not easy to get a handle on. My siblings often get pleasure from portraying him as a rake and a boor. He was very far from that — there was a lot to admire. I myself never fully appreciated the good things. He wasn’t a great father. But he was, in his own way, a good role model.

Distant and inaccessible at times. Sometimes the exact opposite (a genial host and a kind of Santa Claus on holidays; gregarious and affectionate at such and other times). Devoted to work and my mother. Great with and well liked by people in general. His behavior in this respect set a very good example. That meant a lot — means a lot — to a boy. I had thereby some notion of maleness and manhood, which are important to have as one reaches adulthood.

 

*****************************************************

I have more to say regarding parenting.

It seemed in many respects that my nuclear family – this was the 50s and 60s – was straight out of the situation comedy Father Knows Best.

But it wasn’t that. My parents were far from perfect, and their insecurities and neuroses were a factor. (Of course, none of this was evident to me then.)

They weren’t snobs, but they were very insecure about, very concerned with, being well thought of by their peers. This was something that, by extension, we children were burdened with.

By all means, don’t do anything that might embarrass them. This was paramount. Doing wrong in this respect would bring disapproval and a tacit withdrawal or withholding of affection.

 

*****************************************************

Re parenting. As I experienced it.

(It should be noted and acknowledged that this was a different time.)

One thing that I think was very fortunate then: and which, in retrospect, is the way I think things should be: My parents weren’t mean, and although they could be critical (not necessarily a bad thing, since they enforced and were setting standards), they were usually loving and kindly. They very much wanted us to reflect credit upon them (as I observed above). So much so that, as my former therapist observed, it amounted to a form of narcissism. But they actually left us alone a lot. Allowed us to just be kids.

I feel a lot of today’s parents don’t do this. Regarding this, I think I myself very much failed and missed the boat as a parent.

In my childhood, we kids went out and played. For hours on end. With no supervision or parental intervention.

Games such as Hide and Go Seek and Giant Step. Later, board and card games. Playing ball. Building snow forts. Going places. Movies. Comic books. The toy store and candy bars. Hanging out on the stoop or curbside. Telling tall tales and being out after dark.

Hardly any scheduled or programmed activities. Until things like Little League. (And, of course, school activities and sports, most of which came later). No play dates. No karate classes, golf or tennis lessons. (My older brother and I were enrolled in ballroom dancing classes; my parents undoubtedly thought young men should be taught how to dance. And my siblings and I all took piano lessons, with varying degrees of success,) Most afternoons and evenings (and summer vacation time) were open for free play and associating with friends, outdoors or indoors.

This in my opinion is crucial. Essential for individual development, for developing one’s tastes, ideas, and a personality.

Parents must let kids be kids. Not proto adults or achievers in residence. Not paradigms. Just goofy, loveable, inchoate little people. Soon to grow up on their own schedule and in their own way.

 

– Roger W. Smith

  June 2023