Thursday, March 31, 2011

Steve Early on the history of the UFW



Steve Early on the history of the UFW

socialistworker.org | Mar 16th 2011 11:26 PM

by Steve Early, Spring 2011

No modern American union has a larger alumni association or a bigger shelf of books about itself than the United Farm Workers (UFW). Even at its membership peak thirty years ago, this relatively small labor organization never represented more than 100,000 workers. Yet, in the 1960s and '70s, the UFW commanded the loyalty of many hundreds of thousands of strike and boycott supporters throughout the U.S. and Canada. While the union is now a shell of its former self, the UFW diaspora — from young organizers who flocked to its banner to key farm worker activists shaped by its struggles — remain an influential generational cohort in many other fields: public interest law, liberal academia, California politics, labor and community organizing, social change philanthropy and the ministry. Like the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) several decades later, with its "Justice for Janitors" campaigns, the UFW generated widespread public sympathy and support because it championed low-paid, much-exploited workers — people of color courageously struggling for dignity and respect on the job. Its original multi-racial campaigns were inspiring and their legacy is lasting.

Most other late 20th century labor organizations had an inadequate social justice orientation and a far more insular approach; at best, they tried to improve workplace conditions for their own members, in a single occupation or industrial sector, and helped secure protective labor legislation for everyone else. Their appeals for solidarity from non-labor groups tended to be few in number and transactional in nature. Few unions, except during the 1930s, ever became such an important training ground for future organizers of all kinds or built as many lasting ties with far-flung community allies. As San Francisco lawyer, journalist, and housing activist Randy Shaw documents in Beyond The Fields, there is a strong historical link between the UFW in its heyday and myriad forms of progressive activism today. UFW alumni, ideas, and strategies have influenced Latino political empowerment, the immigrant rights movement, union membership growth, and on-going coalitions between labor, community, campus, and religious groups. During the 2008 presidential race, the union's old rallying cry--“Yes, we can!”-- even became the campaign theme of a former community organizer from Chicago who now resides in the White House. The same determined chant can still be heard, in its original Spanish, at marches, rallies, and union events involving Latino workers throughout the country.

Shaw’s book, and those by Miriam Pawel and Marshall Ganz, are not in the cheerleading tradition of earlier volumes written during the UFW’s glory days. Other writers about the union, including John Gregory Dunne, Jacques Levy, and Peter Matthiessen tended to be ardent admirers of its founder and president, César Chávez. The latest literature about farm worker unionism in California tries to explain, in more complex ways, how the union achieved its remarkable early success but then, ended up in a 30-year downward spiral. Such questions are not just a matter of historical interest to academics and journalists. And they’re not just the personal concern of the many people, once connected to the union, who have contributed their own vivid memories and postmortems to Leroy Chatfield’s unusual online archive, the Farmworker Movement Documentation Project. In California and elsewhere over the last several years, Farm Worker veterans have found themselves on opposite sides of the barricades in the biggest inter and intra-union conflicts since the UFW squared off against the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, when it became an agribusiness-ally four decades ago. These high-profile fights have, ironically, involved the two unions—SEIU and UNITE-HERE—which have the most UFW alumni in their leadership and staff. The deep disagreements about union structure and strategy that triggered recent civil warfare, within labor’s progressive wing, contain a distinct echo of the internal tensions and struggles within the UFW recounted by Shaw, Ganz, and Pawel. Controversy over the role of union democracy, membership dissent, and charismatic leadership is very much alive and still unresolved in the labor movement today,

Even for authors less focused on the UFW’s founding father, it’s hard to separate the UFW saga from the compelling personal story of César Chávez. All the books under review here recount, in different ways, his legendary career as a trade unionist. No novice as an organizer, Chávez spent nearly a decade knocking on doors in urban and rural barrios to build community organization throughout California. Before that, he had been a rebellious teenager, working in the fields alongside his family and chafing at “Whites Only” signs in restaurants and the “colored sections” in movie theaters, where Mexican-Americans and Filipinos were consigned, along with Blacks. In the 1940s and 50s, Chicanos faced a humiliating system of discrimination in jobs, schools, housing, and public accommodations that would have been very familiar to African-Americans in the segregationist South. Chávez responded to these conditions by becoming a voting rights activist. Under the tutelage of Fred Ross, an apostle of Saul Alinsky-style grassroots organizing, Chávez succeeded in mobilizing tens of thousands of Mexican-Americans to register to vote and use their newly acquired political clout to deal with issues ranging from potholes to police brutality. In 1962, he set aside voter registration and political agitation to organize farm workers. His fledgling National Farm Workers Association (later to become the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee and then the UFW) faced competition from several other groups; at the time, none seemed capable of breaking with California’s long history of failed unionization efforts in agriculture throughout the first half of the 20th century.

Agribusiness didn’t come to the bargaining table quickly or easily. Powerful growers of fruits and vegetables had every reason to believe they would never have to negotiate with Chávez's organization, or any other. Farm workers lacked any rights under the National Labor Relations Act, which covers most non-agricultural workers in the private sector. Before 1975, this left them with no mechanism for securing union recognition, other than conducting strikes and consumer boycotts. Workers had no legal recourse if they were fired for union activity, a penalty which also included eviction and black-listing of entire families from grower-owned migrant labor camps. When grape or lettuce pickers walked off the job to join UFW picket lines, they faced court injunctions, damage suits, mass arrests, deadly physical attacks by hired guards, and the widespread hostility of racist local cops. How Chávez, his union, and their diverse allies overcame such formidable obstacles was not only inspirational. As Shaw and Ganz both note, the UFW provided useable models for later campaigning by other unions, which have focused on sectors of the economy where Spanish-speaking immigrants migrated, in large numbers, when their employment options were no longer limited to back-breaking agricultural labor. More than any other union in the past half-century, the UFW creatively employed recognition walk-outs, consumer boycotts, hunger strikes, long distance marches, vigils, and creative disruptions of all kinds to win its first contracts.

Chávez's own public persona contributed much to the union's appeal. Deeply religious, the UFW president was, like Martin Luther King, Jr., a home-grown Ghandian frequently criticized, as King was, for opposing the war in Vietnam. In 1968, as strike-related confrontations swirled around him, Chávez embarked on the first of many widely-publicized fasts to demonstrate the power of moral witness and non-violent action. California farm workers became a national cause célèbre that attracted college students, civil rights activists, liberal clergy, and political figures like Robert Kennedy, who conducted U. S. Senate hearings on working conditions in the vineyards of Delano and visited Chávez when he ended his fast. Among the cross-over talents drawn to the union from a background in campus and civil rights organizing was the author of Why David Sometimes Wins. A Bakersfield native and son of a local rabbi, Marshall Ganz participated in the “Freedom Summer” campaign in Mississippi in 1964. He dropped out of Harvard to work full-time for the civil rights movement and had his first contact with unions during a Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) training session at the Highlander Center in Tennessee. When he returned home to California, Ganz observed, in Shaw’s words, “that the plight of California’s rural farm workers involved many of the same injustices he had witnessed being perpetrated against black people in the South.” Ganz played a major role in building the UFW over the next sixteen years, becoming its organizing director and an executive board member before leaving in 1981.

Within the ranks of the UFW, many indigenous militants emerged under the tutelage of Chávez, his co-worker Dolores Huerta, and recruits from the outside like Ganz. Some, like Eliseo Medina who is profiled in Pawel’s book, went on to careers in labor lasting far longer than Ganz’s. When Medina first showed up at a UFW hiring hall in 1966, he was only 19-years old and seeking work as a grape picker. Instead, he was recruited by Huerta to help win a hotly-contested union representation vote at DiGiorgio Corporation, an agricultural conglomerate then the largest grape grower in the Delano area. As the target of a UFW strike and boycott, DiGiorgio favored the management-friendly Teamsters. IBT goons surrounded Medina in a UFW sound-truck, smashing his face and sending him to the hospital to get four stitches in his lip. Nevertheless, the UFW beat the Teamsters by a margin of 528 to 328, in what proved to be a crucial victory for the smaller union. It also helped propel Medina into a multifaceted 44 year organizing career. After his departure from the UFW leadership in 1978, Medina spent time working for the Communications Workers of America in Texas and then SEIU in California. He later became an executive vice-president of SEIU, its chief public advocate for immigration reform, and, in the fall of 2010, national secretary-treasurer of the union.

The UFW's initial gains were nearly swept away when growers signed sweetheart contracts with the Teamsters to freeze out the dreaded "Chavistas.” Today, the 1.4 million IBT and the 6,000-member UFW are, ironically, fellow members of Change To Win, the dwindling band of unions that broke away from the AFL-CIO in 2005, under the leadership of SEIU. Back in the 1960s and '70s, the Teamster bureaucracy was corrupt, gangster-ridden, and very prone to the use of violence and intimidation for a variety of purposes (including keeping its own members in line). The conservative, Richard Nixon-endorsing IBT was the personification of top-down “business unionism” and thus, a handy, if brutal, foil for the UFW. As Pawel, a former reporter for The Los Angeles Times, writes:

The Teamsters were about money, not empowerment. As the leader of the Western conference of Teamsters [Einar Mohn] explained in an interview, he saw no point in having membership meetings for farmworkers. ‘I’m not sure how effective a union can be when it is composed of Mexican-Americans and Mexican nationals with temporary visas … As jobs become more attractive to whites, then we can build a union that can have structure and that can negotiate from strength and have membership participation.

The inter-union mayhem, between the UFW and IBT, finally ended when California legislators were forced to act. After UFW-backed Democrat Jerry Brown became governor (the first time) in 1974, he created an Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) to referee farm labor disputes. Before the ALRB was eventually subverted by Brown's Republican successors, UFW victories in government-run elections drove the Teamsters out of the fields, while briefly stabilizing job conditions in California's central valley. At long last, some farm workers were finally getting a living wage, health benefits, better housing, and protection against dangerous pesticide use. Unfortunately, the UFW fared worse than most unions during the ensuing Reagan-Bush-Clinton-Bush era. The steady erosion of its membership and influence has stemmed from never-ending grower opposition, the massive influx of undocumented workers from Mexico, over-reliance on appeals to consumers, and a related failure to link boycott activity to ongoing organizing in the fields. The UFW also suffered, in rather fatal fashion, from its own deeply flawed internal structure. Virtually all power was concentrated in Chávez's hands, leaving rank-and-file members with little ability to curb his increasingly autocratic behavior when it began to tarnish the union's reputation and make future gains impossible.

This painful but important detail has been airbrushed out of many glowing official portraits of Chávez. Since his death at age 66 in 1995, the UFW founder has, as Shaw notes, been posthumously transformed into "a national icon," while his darker side has "been minimized or ignored." The aura of secular sainthood that surrounds him obscures one major reason for the terminal decay of a union once so dynamic and respected. As Shaw, Pawel, and Ganz all confirm, Chávez was not accountable to anyone within the UFW. Rank-and-file critics of his charismatic leadership were purged, then black-listed, and driven from the fields in truly disgraceful fashion. In The Union of Their Dreams, Pawels recounts this story most poignantly by profiling Mario Bustamante, a lettuce strike leader from Salinas. Bustamante bravely challenged Chávez over the issue of elected ranch committee leaders, whose role the union president wanted to curtail, lest they defy his authority in their day-to-day dealings with employers. Bustamante also sought to expand rank-and-file representation on the staff-dominated UFW executive board. His opposition slate, composed of working members, was ruled ineligible to run at the UFW's 1981 convention. Bustamante, his brother Chava, and their supporters walked out forever to shouts of "Bajao los traidores" ("Down with the traitors") and "Muerte a lost Bustamantes" ("Death to the Bustamontes"). Chávez made sure his critics were unemployable in the fields; he even sued nine of them for libel and slander, seeking $25 million in damages. Mario became a taxi driver and, later, was even denied a small UFW pension.

Other potential rivals like Medina, a UFW vice-president, and key staffers, like Ganz, had already left the union in dismay (although neither aided the UFW rebels in 1981). Medina’s differences with Chávez prefigured disagreements, thirty years later, about union priorities within Medina’s new home, SEIU. Just as the UFW was gaining greater traction under the state’s new farm labor law, Chávez began pushing the idea that UFW should become a broader (but more amorphous) “Poor Peoples Union.” He was not happy, Pawel reports, that UFW was now focusing on “issues he considered more mundane—contracts, wages, benefits, and grievances.” If UFW organizers “did not embrace poor people in the cities, Chávez warned, the movement would wither.” Medina, on the other hand, took the more pragmatic and sensible view that fragile contract gains had to be consolidated first. “Our business is take care of home base—our members, “ he wrote in a strategy memo. He argued that the union could not “run off to do crusades, instead of service the membership,” because UFW activists faced continuing opposition from their employers and needed stronger backing at the local-level.

Over time, rational debate about such policy differences became difficult, if not, impossible at La Paz, the union’s headquarters. Both Medina and Ganz were there when Chávez began to consolidate his rule by employing a bizarre and destructive group therapy exercise known as "the Game." Chávez borrowed this tool of control from Synanon, a cultish drug treatment program already controversial in California. "The Game" required participants to "clear the air" by launching personal attacks against one another, an experience that created much anger, bitterness, and emotional trauma. As former UFW research director Michael Yates describes, with great vividness, in his recent memoir, In and Out of the Working Class, these exercises were manipulated by Chávez personally to humiliate, isolate, and then cast out staff members he disliked or distrusted. In 1977, Yates saw "a screaming mob of 'Game' initiates" purge 'enemies of the union'" at La Paz. When one victim had the audacity to ask for a formal hearing on the trumped-up charges against him, Chávez called the police, had the volunteer arrested for trespassing, and taken to jail. Over time, Chávez further stifled "creative internal deliberation" by replacing "experienced UFW leaders with a new, younger cadre, for whom loyalty was the essential qualification,” Shaw reports. The result was a dysfunctional personality cult. Since its founder’s death, the UFW has been tightly controlled by Chávez family members, in the same nepotistic North Korean fashion as some local affiliates of the Teamsters or various building trade unions.

In Why David Sometimes Wins, Ganz describes how Chávez also used union centralization, quite systematically, to crowd out constructive criticism and political pluralism. "Control over resources at the top and the absence of any intermediate levels of political accountability — districts, locals, or regions — meant that potential challengers could never organize, build a base, or mount a real challenge to incumbents,” Ganz writes. In an interview with Shaw for Beyond The Fields, he recalls that "[T]he UFW was not giving workers any real power or responsibilities in setting the union's direction ... Chávez's decision that the UFW would not have geographically distinct 'locals' left the union without the vehicles traditionally used by organized labor to obtain worker input. [As early as 1978] the UFW's executive board had no farm worker representation, leaving those working in the fields with no way to influence the UFW's direction."

As Chávez critic Frank Bardacke points out in his forthcoming book from Verso, Trampling Out The Vintage, UFW leaders and staff were even more detached from the membership than in other, more labor organizations because UFW “had its own source of income, separate from union dues.” Between 1970 and 1985, payments from workers represented less than 50 percent of UFW income; the rest of the union’s money was generated by boycott-related direct mail activity or from donations by wealthy individuals, other unions, and church groups. The UFW established and continues to operate, in the name of its dead founder, “a network of organizations which receive money form private foundations and government grants.” The UFW was always a combination of farm worker advocacy group and collective bargaining organization. According to Bardacke, initial (but hard to reproduce) UFW success with wine, table grape, and lettuce boycotts convinced Chávez “that the essential power of the union was among its supporters in the cities rather than among workers in the fields.”

As Pawel notes, a new generation of workers now toils in those fields, under terrible conditions with little or no UFW contract protection, and few active urban supporters. Many are undocumented, indigenous Mexicans who arrive not even speaking Spanish. They earn the minimum wage, lack health care coverage, and “desperately need the kind of help the union once offered.” How UFW veterans have processed this sad history and its present-day consequences varies widely. Reconciling proud memories with the profound sadness and political disillusionment that sometimes followed Farm Worker duty is not easy, particularly amid contemporary union conflicts that contain distinct echoes of the UFW’s troubled past. Between 2008 and early 2010, the charismatic leader of SEIU, Andy Stern, used his similarly unchecked powers as national union president to unleash a series of Chávez-like attacks on internal adversaries. The result was widespread turmoil among SEIU-represented health care workers in California, accompanied by 18 months of open warfare with UNITE HERE, the garment and hotel workers union that was once Stern’s closest ally in Change to Win.

Both conflicts were triggered, in part, by major disagreements about union structure, organizing and bargaining strategy. These were eerily similar to the differences that emerged within the UFW over its leadership, staff roles, and functioning. Under Stern, who retired as president last year (and has since joined the board of directors of a drug company), SEIU turned away from strong contract enforcement for the benefit of existing members. Smaller SEIU affiliates were consolidated into multi-state “mega-locals,” often under the direction of national union officials who were appointed by Stern, rather than elected by the membership. The role of union stewards — the equivalent of elected UFW ranch committee leaders — was increasingly undermined and replaced by the use of corporate-style “customer service centers” to handle member problems and complaints — an experiment that has been a disaster. Greater union centralization and top-down control was necessary in SEIU, Stern argued, so more resources could be shifted to large-scale, staff-run campaigns for membership growth and political influence. Until recently — and the attacks on public workers in Wisconsin, including SEIU members there — the union tended to downplay battles over existing contract standards and benefits, as a selfish defense of “just us,” instead of a broader fight for “justice for all” (as if the two were mutually exclusive).

Like the dissident Chavistas who raised the banner of democracy and membership control in the UFW long ago — only to be crushed and expelled — some west coast SEIU activists organized a reform movement in 2008 that challenged Andy Stern’s autocratic rule and flawed political vision. Led by Sal Rosselli, a longtime SEIU vice-president (and one-time UFW grape boycott volunteer), these dissidents sought greater membership participation in the union and a strong rank-and-file voice in bargaining and new organizing. In response, Stern spent tens of millions of dollars on a military-style take-over of Rosselli’s 150,000-member local, the second largest in California. Since this January, 2009 SEIU “trusteeship” over United Healthcare Workers-West (UHW), hundreds of elected stewards have been purged for "disloyalty;” 16 ousted elected leaders (including Rosselli) were sued by SEIU for $1.5 million in damages. A rival health care union has been formed, and most organizing of the unorganized in California health care has ground to a halt while the new National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) and SEIU battle it out, David & Goliath-style, for the right to represent tens of thousands of already unionized workers at Kaiser Permanente and other hospital chains.

This SEIU family feud is replete with ironic role reversals from the old days. When Rosselli was removed as UHW president, he was replaced by a team of Stern loyalists that included Eliseo Medina. Mario Bustamante's brother Chava, is now a SEIU trusteeship staffer and personally removes stewards who favor the rival NUHW. Legal work aimed at crushing the rebellion has been handled by a California law firm headed by Glenn Rothner, a one-time UFW lawyer. Among other prominent UFW alumni on the SEIU side are Scott Washburn and Stephen Lerner, architect of SEIU’s Justice for Janitors campaigns. Meanwhile, Dolores Huerta, the still formidable 80-year old founding mother of UFW, has become an outspoken champion of worker dissent within SEIU — even though she sided with Chávez when he pushed out the Bustamantes and drove away Ganz and Medina. At a recent NUHW press conference, Huerta accused SEIU staffers of Teamster-style bullying when she tried to meet with health care workers at Kaiser in Los Angles. Her fellow campaigners for NUHW include former UFW staffers Gary Guthman, Fred Ross, Jr. (the son of Chávez’s old mentor), and Mike Casey, from UNITE HERE, whose union has pumped several million dollars and many organizers into NUHW campaigning against SEIU in 2009 and 2010.

Mike Wilzoch, is one of many former UFW staffers, caught up in the carnage. He spent 23 years working as an SEIU organizer. In a May, 2008 to Stern, Wilzoch urged the then-SEIU president to end his "destructive conflict with UHW" before it tarnished his personal legacy and SEIU’s own future prospects. "I remember all too well what happened to the UFW in the 1970s after it devolved into loyalty oaths and vicious personal attacks on anyone asking pesky questions," Wilzoch wrote. "They burned their culture and so many top flight organizers that it did permanent internal and external damage to the union and the dreams of the workers." Nine months, later Stern went ahead with his take-over of UHW, ousting all of its elected leaders and staffers, including Wilzoch. In his letter to the SEIU president, Wilzoch noted that "history is replete with tales of radicals and reformers who became what they once despised. Even the smartest and bravest fuck up sometimes. Tragically, few had the raw courage to pull back in time, find the best in themselves that had gotten sidetracked somehow, and repair the damage." As Shaw, Ganz, and Powell reveal in their important new books, that course correction never occurred in the United Farm Workers of César Chávez. With the UFW experience in mind, many labor observers now wonder what it will take, in the wake of Stern’s departure last year, to repair the latest union dreams shattered so badly in California and elsewhere.

Steve Early was a Boston-based organizer for the Communications Workers of America for 27 years. He is the author of two books, Embedded With Organized Labor: Journalistic Reflections on the Class War at Home, from Monthly Review Press, 2009, and The Civil Wars in U.S. Labor from Haymarket Books in 2010.



Original Page: http://socialistworker.org/blog/critical-reading/2011/03/16/steve-early-history-ufw

Shared from Read It Later

Terry Southern Lives!



New Web-Based Project And a Day in Dallas Will Prove That Even Now, Terry Southern Lives!

by Sam Merte, blogs.dallasobserver.com
March 14th 2011

​At this late date, tell me there's no need to remind you who Terry Southern is. No? We're good? Fantastic.

Well, OK, in case you're still not clear: He's Alvarado-born, Oak Cliff-raised, SMU-educated writer who bridged the gap between the Beat 1950s and the Beatles 1960s -- the author of masterpiece novels (The Magic Christian and Blue Movie, among 'em), a scriptwriter of no small legend (Dr. Strangelove, Barbarella and Easy Rider, no matter what Dennis Hopper said, etc.) and the gonzo scribbler without whom there'd have been no Hunter S. Thompson. Terry's not on the cover of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band for nothing. Now that we're clear.

Come May 1, you'll hear this all over again: I'm moderating a Q&A with Terry's boy Nile at the Texas Theatre, in between a Strangelove screening and a few minutes of Nile's doc-in-progress about his old man Dad Strangelove, which Nile was in town shooting way back last April. May 1 would have been Terry's 87th birthday, had he not died in October 1995. Filmmaker Kirby Warnock (Border Bandits, Return to Giant) put the whole thing together. L.A.-based painter Matt Aston will debut his portrait of Terry in the lobby, and Warnock tells Unfair Park today he even got council member Delia Jasso on board with having the city of Dallas proclaim it Terry Southern Day, fingers crossed. Maybe Mayor Dwaine can give Terry's ghost the key to the city.

"I don't know if the proclamation's a shoe-in, but I am thrilled that's what's happening," says Nile, who maintains this rich website in his dad's honor in an attempt to reach the audience that has no idea who Terry Southern was. "There's a time and a place for everything, and it has to do with someone like Kirby having the idea and then others following suit. It takes all kinds of people to make something happen. Frankly, Dallas wasn't ready for Terry in this way prior to now, because some efforts were made, but I find Alvarado and Dallas open to celebrating their long-lost wayward son now."

And now may indeed be Terry's time: One of the most intriguing announcements to come out of Austin during South by Southwest so far has to do with Terry. On Saturday, during the interactive portion of the multimedia fest, University of Colorado at Boulder's Boulder Digital Works and Terry's son Nile introduced something called the Red Dirt Collective -- so named for the Texas-set short story "Red Dirt Marijuana" that ranks among the most autobiographical tales in his estimable canon.

Nile says he got involved after being contacted by Boulder Digital Works' executive director, David Slayden, an old friend who's well-versed in Nile's efforts to keep alive his father's literary legacy -- no small task given the mess in which Nile found his dad's estate 16 years back.

But ... what the hell is it, anyhow? Besides a "transmedia project ... inviting the user community to collect and display original works of writing, film and art created in the spirit of Southern," as USA Today describes it. (There's a video trailer below, explaining further, in which you can see Nile.)

"It's something guys our age don't cotton to that quickly," he says, laughing. "But it has to do with tweeting and crowd-sourcing and the new ways young people build community. They decided to take Terry Southern as a test-case project in something called transmedia storytelling. There's a definition of that out there somewhere -- I don't know if I'm a reliable source -- but it has to do with generating communities of interest around a subject or a product or a brand and having them cross-pollinate through different media. It sounds crass, but it's a way to get young people engaged with Terry Southern's work. None of these 25 students in digital studies had ever heard of Terry Southern. Not one. But they're a very creative lot, and they do know all about twittering." And, again, he laughs.

"It's an experiment. It's the first step toward building more active engagement with Terry's work on the Internet, and when his books come out in e-book form -- which will be soon, I hope -- we'll have a better understanding of how to connect with a younger audience. This was a spontaneous impulse on my part to jump into this situation. I guess that's my modus operandi. Call me an opportunist, but anyone who says, 'Let's try this with Terry Southern's work, let's do this,' I kinda go for it. That's my first impulse.

"People who manage literary estates don't do that. They're very cautious, but I'd like to be done with this work for a while and let it carry its own weight. It does take some special handling. It requires some treatment other authors don't need because Terry's work is so hard to classify. It's material that is sometimes scandalous or heavy-duty or maybe even anachronistic. It's all good, though. I often say if I were Raymond Chandler or John Steinbeck' son I wouldn't feel the same compulsion to put the work out there because it's already out there, but Terry's work isn't -- and it's still full of surprises."

See Video: http://www.vimeo.com/20855728

BDW Terry Southern Transmedia Project - Part One from Boulder Digital Works on Vimeo.



Original Page: http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2011/03/terry_southern_lives.php

Shared from Read It Later

Art review: 'Streetwise: Masters of '60s Photography' at the Museum of Phot



Art review: 'Streetwise: Masters of '60s Photography' at the Museum of Photographic Arts

latimesblogs.latimes.com | Mar 16th 2011

 
 
“Streetwise: Masters of '60s Photography,” at the Museum of Photographic Arts, contains a fair number of indelible images: Garry Winogrand’s confounding shot of a stern-faced, mixed-race couple out for a day at the Central Park Zoo, each partner balancing a chimp in children’s clothing on one hip; Danny Lyon’s gorgeous, tragedy-tinged picture of young black prisoners in Texas, backs bent in syncopated rhythm over a cotton field; Bruce Davidson’s view down onto the utterly calm and contained face of a civil rights protester being dragged across brick pavement by faceless men in badges.

There are more too, but overall “Streetwise” is oddly inert, never quite summoning the energy of the era it aims to represent. Neither broadly comprehensive nor tightly focused, the show features nine photographers, with Robert Frank serving as ‘50s forerunner for the work of Diane Arbus, Ruth-Marion Baruch, Jerry Berndt, Lee Friedlander, Ernest Withers, Winogrand, Lyon and Davidson. Organized by MoPA director Deborah Klochko, in consultation with critic and curator Andy Grundberg, the exhibition is accompanied by an attractive but equally unsatisfying catalogue.

If change and redefinition are operative terms to describe the culture and politics of the '60s, so too do they apply to the medium of photography during those turbulent years. The boundaries between documentation and storytelling, personal observation and professional reportage became increasingly porous.

In 1967, the Museum of Modern Art took a step toward codifying the socio-aesthetic strategy in its “New Documents” show, featuring Arbus, Winogrand and Friedlander. A similar phenomenon was taking place in print with the so-called New Journalism of Truman Capote, Tom Wolfe, Hunter S. Thompson and others, all immersing themselves in their subjects and emerging with idiosyncratic tales, based in fact and recounted using the mechanics of fiction.

The photographers here are documentarians of this new sort, and street photographers too, if you zoom out on the label, as Grundberg does in his essay, so that street photography is less about location than approach -- “one that prizes chance composition, an engagement with social reality, and the unfettered, subjective reflexes of the photographer.”

Frank is given homage as prime progenitor of the mode, and 10 pictures from “The Americans,” his road-trip essay on varieties of estrangement, are intended to set the tone for the show. Unfortunately, they are among Frank’s quieter images, relatively light on social friction, so the exhibition starts off with more of a gurgle than a bang.

What follows is a period sampler of art born of equal parts curiosity and indignation, images that negotiate the relationship between individual freedoms and collective power. The dynamic between the one and many threads through the show, in photographs like Davidson’s, of the protester whose tranquil expression anchors the scene even as it reverberates outward like a question demanding an answer.

Or “Texas” (1965), Friedlander’s visual summation of segregated society, showing a smiling white man and child on one side of a sign reading “Private Keep Out,” while a black woman passes in blurred profile on the other. Or the Withers picture of a mass of striking sanitation workers, each holding high a sign proclaiming “I Am a Man,” on what turned out to be Martin Luther King Jr.’s last march.

Racial inequity and the civil rights struggle dominate, as far as social issues go. Indications of other conflicts central to the era—over Vietnam, for instance, or women’s rights—are absent. Where the show lags as a history lesson, it shines as a dysfunctional family album. Berndt shoots a wannabe pimp with endearing pathos. His image of a prostitute alone in a pizza parlor has all the tender desperation of a Hopper painting. He toughens up other images of Boston’s red-light district with noirish, inky shadows and grainy blur.

Winogrand is a master at chronicling the everyday, unrehearsed theater of the absurd, snapping powerful and powerless with equally merciless wit. Arbus homes in on unconventional sorts, fringe characters like “Jack Dracula, the Marked Man,” whose tattooed body reads like a scrambled lexicon of Americana. Her picture of a man dressed as Uncle Sam, standing in a desolate alleyway, is an incisive portrait of individual and collective delusion. These are among Arbus’ lesser-known images, and the group is not consistently strong. Baruch’s heroicized portraits of members and leaders of the Black Panthers contribute to the story of the '60s, but feel out of place alongside work with more editorial edge.

“Streetwise” nibbles at the piquant feast that is '60s photography. In ironic contrast to much of the assertive, impassioned work within, the show as a whole comes across as tempered and tame.

--Leah Ollman

“Streetwise: Masters of '60s Photography,” Museum of Photographic Arts, 1649 El Prado, Balboa Park, San Diego, (619) 238-7559, through May 15. www.mopa.org

Photos: Top, "Texas, 1965" by Lee Friedlander.  Above: "Hooker in the Window of the King of Pizza, Washington Street, c. 1am, the Combat Zone, Boston, MA, 1967"  by Jerry Berndt. Credits: "Texas: 1965," © Lee Friedlander, courtesy Fraenkel Gallery, San Francisco Collection of the Museum of Photographic Arts. "Hooker" © J. Berndt 1967, courtesy the artist 



Original Page: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2011/03/art-review-streetwise-masters-of-60s-photography-at-the-museum-of-photographic-arts-1.html

Shared from Read It Later

Stars Celebrate Hunter S. Thompson



Stars Celebrate Hunter S. Thompson

nbcnewyork.com | Mar 17th 2011 10:45 AM

It’s been 40 years since Hunter S. Thompson wrote Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, his classic semi-autobiographical novel about a drug-fueled road trip.

A group of actors and writers who have been inspired by Thompson, as well as an editor who worked with him, took to the stage at Symphony Space Wednesday night to celebrate the anniversary of the landmark work.

The evening featured hilarious stories from Thompson’s life and career interspersed with readings from “Fear and Loathing” itself.

Theater actors Scott Shepherd (star of this season’s “Gatz”) and Anthony Rapp (“Rent”) each read a chapter from the beginning of the book while Michael Imperioli of “The Sopranos” read one from the end.

Terry McDonell, editor of Sports Illustrated Group and former editor of Rolling Stone, edited much of Thompson’s work and famously interviewed him for “The Paris Review.” He talked about the connection between Thompson’s wild, drug-addled life and the “Gonzo” style of journalism that he pioneered.

“The idea that [his life] was all crazy was something that he actually cultivated,” McDonell said. “[He believed] that the best way to work as a journalist was to be more interesting to the people he was interviewing than they were to him.”

McDonell recalled a memorable interaction from 15 years ago, when he brought his two sons, then 4 and 6, to meet Thompson at a party.

“When we got there, Hunter said, ‘Jesus. Where you been? I’ve been waiting for you. Here, do you guys want a smoke?’ And he handed my sons each a cigarette,” he said. “You cannot have that in your life and not smile.”

Chuck Klosterman, author of books including “Eating the Dinosaur” and “Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs,” said Thompson’s work was one-of-a-kind.

 “When people want to write like him, they end up ripping off his voice, or the structure of his writing, or maybe just his attitude or his sense of humor," Klosterman said. "But to really be like him, you need to live like him, and no person can — like, there’s no person alive who can actually live the way he did.”



Original Page: http://www.nbcnewyork.com/blogs/niteside/Hunter-S-Thompson-is-Celebrated-at-Symphony-Space-118153414.html

Shared from Read It Later

Monday, March 28, 2011

D.L. Cox, a Leader of Radicals During 1960s, Dies at 74

D.L. Cox, a Leader of Radicals During 1960s, Dies at 74

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/us/14cox.html

By BRUCE WEBER
Published: March 13, 2011

Donald L. Cox, who was at the center of black radical politics as a
member of the Black Panther Party high command and who earned a
moment of celebrity in 1970 when he spoke at the Leonard Bernstein
fund-raising party in Manhattan made notorious by the writer Tom
Wolfe, died on Feb. 19 at his home in Camps-sur-l'Agly, France. He was 74.

His wife, Barbara Cox Easley, did not specify a cause. He had been
living abroad since the early 1970s, when he fled the country after
being implicated in a Baltimore murder.

Known as D. C., Mr. Cox held the title of field marshal with the
Panthers, the socialist movement founded by Huey P. Newton and Bobby
Seale in Oakland, Calif., in 1966. Mr. Cox was living in San
Francisco at the time and became part of a group known as the central
committee, which included Mr. Newton, Mr. Seale, Eldridge Cleaver and
a handful of others.

Mr. Cox's job was to travel the country to establish and supervise
branch offices. But he was also the Panthers' arms expert ­ writing
about the proper use of guns in The Black Panther, the party
newspaper, teaching party members to shoot and even procuring guns.
The Panthers embraced the use of guns in defense of what they saw as
black liberation from a white racist establishment; Mr. Cox liked to
say he was in charge of the Panther military.

He also served the Panthers as a spokesman, and in January 1970 he
appeared with a handful of Panthers and some 80 other guests at the
Bernstein apartment on Park Avenue. The occasion was a fund-raiser
for the legal defense of the New York Panther 21 ­ 19 men and 2 women
who had been indicted on charges of plotting to kill police officers
and blow up several sites, including Midtown stores, police precinct
houses and the New York Botanical Garden.

"Some people think that we are racist, because the news media find it
useful to create that impression in order to support the power
structure," Mr. Cox told Mr. Bernstein's guests. "They like for the
Black Panther Party to be made to look like a racist organization,
because that camouflages the true class nature of the struggle."

The fund-raiser was notable for its clash of cultures. As Charlotte
Curtis of The New York Times reported, "There they were, the Black
Panthers from the ghetto and the black and white liberals from the
middle, upper-middle and upper classes studying one another
cautiously over the expensive furnishings, the elaborate flower
arrangements, the cocktails and the silver trays of canapés."

Among the conversations Ms. Curtis noted was an exchange between Mr.
Bernstein and Mr. Cox.

Mr. Bernstein: "Now about your goals. I'm not sure I understand how
you're going to achieve them. I mean, what are your tactics?"

Mr. Cox: "If business won't give us full employment, then we must
take the means of production and put them in the hands of the people."

Mr. Bernstein: "I dig absolutely."

The event raised nearly $10,000, Ms. Curtis reported. In May 1971 all
21 of the accused Panthers were acquitted. In June 1970 Mr. Wolfe's
article, "Radical Chic: That Party at Lenny's," was published in New
York magazine. A skewering of Mr. Bernstein and his guests, it
advanced Mr. Wolfe's career as a leading proponent of the so-called
new journalism. But it was reviled by Mr. Cox. The guests that night,
he told Roz Payne, who documented the history of the Panthers in a
series of films, "were really a concerned bunch of people."

He added that "it was those media freaks and that bloodsucking Tom
Wolfe" who exploited the cause of black liberation to make money from
it and "to be part of the machinery that tried to ridiculize it."

Donald Lee Cox was born on April 16, 1936, in Appleton, in west
central Missouri, where he grew up hunting small game and reading
everything he could find about nature and the outdoors.

"I read all the books in the library about snakes," he told Ms. Payne
for her film series. (That series has been released on DVD under the
title taken from the Panther party platform: "What We Want, What We Believe.")

He moved to San Francisco at 17, by his own account an ignorant
country boy who was politically naïve until he joined the Panthers.

But as he explained in interviews, anger had been building up in him
over attacks on black people, like the bombing of the 16th Street
Baptist Church in Birmingham, Ala., in 1963, which killed four black
girls, and, closer to home, the shooting of an unarmed black teenager
by policemen that set off a riot in the Hunters Point neighborhood of
San Francisco in 1966.

"It was a steady accumulation of pressure, like a volcano," he said.

Shortly after the Bernstein dinner, Mr. Cox was charged as a
conspirator in the July 1969 murder of Eugene Anderson, a Panther who
had been a police informer in Baltimore. Mr. Cox said he had had
nothing to do with the killing. One of several co-defendants was
convicted of the crime.

After a warrant was issued for his arrest, Mr. Cox left the country,
first living in Algeria and then in France. His first marriage, in
San Francisco, ended in divorce. He met Ms. Easley, who lives in
Philadelphia, in the 1960s, and though they had not lived together
since he left the country, she said, they married in 2006 so that she
would have legal standing in his affairs.

In addition to Ms. Easley, he is survived by a daughter, Kimberly Cox
Marshall of Vallejo, Calif.; two sons, Donald, of Dallas, and
Jonathan, of Philadelphia; five grandchildren; and a great-grandson.

"He created a very comfortable life here," his wife said in a phone
interview from Camps-sur-l'Agly, where she was tending to her
husband's matters, though she added that the isolation had begun to
wear on him.

"Exile will do that to you," she said.

.

Sunday, March 27, 2011

A ’60s Mash-Up That Didn’t Happen

A '60s Mash-Up That Didn't Happen

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/06/arts/music/06alarm.html

By ALLAN KOZINN
Published: March 4, 2011

WHATEVER else it may accomplish, "1969," the latest thematic project
of the contemporary-music ensemble Alarm Will Sound, proves that you
can build something substantial ­ a historically astute program that
makes solid, provocative points ­ around a notion thoroughly lacking
in substance.

The show, which the group will perform at Zankel Hall on Thursday
evening, is a tightly scripted, continuously morphing collage of
music, dialogue and visual images that explores the compositional and
political currents that swirled in the late 1960s and continue to
resonate. Yet its conceptual starting point was a vague report, noted
in Michael Kurtz's biography of the iconoclastic German avant-garde
composer Karlheinz Stockhausen, that Stockhausen had arranged to meet
with one of the Beatles at the composer Lukas Foss's New York
apartment on Feb. 9, 1969, to discuss a joint concert. Stockhausen
waited, the story goes, but a blizzard prevented the Beatle ­ John
Lennon, Alarm Will Sound has decided for musical and dramatic reasons
­ from arriving.

The prospect is tantalizing, not least because there were points of
contact between Stockhausen and the Beatles. Paul McCartney
occasionally mentioned his fascination with Stockhausen's "Gesang der
Jünglinge" in interviews in 1967, and the Beatles included him in the
crowd montage on the cover of "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band"
that year. Lennon's "Revolution 9" ­ the long musique concrète
soundscape on the "White Album" ­ seems at least partly inspired by
Stockhausen's "Hymnen." And in Mr. Kurtz's book (and the script of
"1969") Stockhausen is quoted calling Lennon "the most important
mediator between popular and serious music in this century."

But the story is unlikely. Though Lennon and Yoko Ono, his wife and
creative partner, moved to New York in 1971, none of the Beatles were
in the city in early February 1969. In mid-January, George Harrison
quit the band during the recording and filming sessions for "Let It
Be," a project that was originally to have concluded with a public
performance. He returned only after the others agreed to his terms,
which included a demand that all talk of concerts cease immediately.

Ms. Ono, asked in a e-mail about planned meetings or concerts with
Stockhausen, responded quickly and unequivocally.

"No," Ms. Ono wrote, "there is not an iota of truth to that story.
I'm sorry to disappoint you."

Nevertheless the tale gave "1969" its dramatic heart ­ Stockhausen
and Lennon discuss a meeting, and Stockhausen waits in vain ­ as well
as the start of a set list. Part of "Hymnen" is included. So are
impressively accurate orchestrations, by Matt Marks, of "Revolution
9" and an earlier Beatles foray into electronic sound, "Tomorrow
Never Knows." Luciano Berio, another of Mr. McCartney's avant-garde
heroes, is a central figure too, represented not only by his own
music ­ excerpts from "Sinfonia" and a virtually unknown civil-rights
opera, "Traces" ­ but also by his arrangement of the Beatles'
"Michelle." Leonard Bernstein, who argued in the 1960s that
developments in pop were as important as those in classical music, is
represented by fragments from his genre-crossing "Mass."

In its finished form "1969" is more a giant mash-up than a concert
program. The music is mostly excerpted, sometimes with new scores by
Alarm's resident composers overlaid on vintage electronic works.
Actors play the principal roles (Jon Patrick Walker as Lennon, Robert
Stanton as Stockhausen and David Chandler as Berio), using quotations
from interviews, writings and lectures to develop their characters'
artistic and political positions. Musicians from the ensemble play
about 20 more historical figures, and do some singing as well.

Fitting all this together has taken four years of tweaking.

"When we began discussing this, it was totally different," Alan
Pierson, Alarm Will Sound's artistic director, said in a recent
interview at his apartment in Hell's Kitchen. "Our first impulse was
to do a concert around a year, and 1969 seemed like a good year to
choose because of the music and everything that was happening
politically. And then when I read about this possible meeting, that
was so interesting that I felt, and I think we all felt, that we had
to build our concert around it. Once we had that, it was pretty clear
that we were going to do something that would bring together music,
text and video in some way, but it was a long process of working out
exactly what it would be."

In a way the program's evolution followed broader developments in
Alarm's work. One was its changing approach to programming. The group
began as a student new-music ensemble at the Eastman School of Music
in Rochester and essentially declared its independence with a
performance of Steve Reich's "Desert Music" and "Tehillim" at the
Miller Theater in 2001. For a while Mr. Pierson and company explored
single-composer programs devoted to Ligeti, Varèse, Augusta Read
Thomas, Benedict Mason and others. But they soon hit a wall.

"Part of the issue," Mr. Pierson said, "was that we have a set
instrumentation, and we felt we'd run out of composers who had
written enough music for our instrumentation that we could make into
programs we were really excited about playing."

Commissioning new works was one solution. Another was to have
ensemble members make arrangements of music that fascinated them,
including electronica by Richard D. James, a British composer better
known as Aphex Twin. They also began toying with thematic notions,
exploring clashing rhythms, for example, in "A/rhythmia," a program
that included more electronica orchestrations (by Mochipet and
Autechre) as well as Renaissance works and songs by a 1960s cult
band, the Shaggs.

Staging added another arrow to Alarm's quiver. Early on, Mr. Pierson
teamed up with the director Nigel Maister, who runs the theater
program at the University of Rochester. After staging a performance
of John Cage's "Songbooks" for the group, Mr. Maister began
choreographing other pieces as well. One, a performance of Mr.
Mason's music that had the ensemble running through the Miller
Theater and, at the end, boarding a bus and heading up Broadway,
showed the degree to which these players were willing to move and act
while also playing their instruments.

"Alan had strong feelings, as did I," Mr. Maister said from
Rochester, "that one of the things that can help new music, for the
uninitiated listener, was the element of actually watching the music
being performed. It clarifies it, or makes it more approachable, and
often adds immeasurably to the piece. And the idea was that somehow
heightened performative elements would be one of the things Alarm
Will Sound did."

But by 2006 both Mr. Pierson and Mr. Maister had grown frustrated
with staging individual pieces, and they began discussing, as Mr.
Pierson put it, "developing something from the ground up,"
specifically "1969." Mr. Maister planned to write the script himself,
but he quickly bowed out, handing that task to Andrew Kupfer, a
journalist and playwright who, at 57, was the only one on the
creative team old enough to remember the era.

Mr. Kupfer agreed that the Lennon-Stockhausen meeting was the perfect
peg: "a metaphor for this sort of idealistic genre-pushing ­
sometimes sweet, sometimes loopy ­ way people thought about the world
in the 1960s," he said, "when they believed that the forces of the
establishment would be swept away and new, wonderful things would
come in their place."

His goal, he added, was to write dialogue drawn almost entirely from
actual statements by the composers and other historical figures. And
he wanted to present it in a way that elucidated not only the
interplay between rock and avant-garde musicians but also the ways
composers on both sides were affected by the cultural turmoil of the time.

"In a way," Mr. Kupfer said, "each of these composers found religion
during this period. For Stockhausen it was his utopian 'One World'
ideas, which extended out into the cosmos. For Bernstein it was his
political activism. For Lennon it was being an advocate for peace and
his willingness to make himself, as he said, 'a clown for peace' if
need be. All this fed into their creative output. And for one reason
or another they were all pilloried in public for these things."

Berio, at first, was the odd man out, his musical comments far
outnumbering his documented political ideas. But the team was able to
round out that side of him after Tiffany Kuo, a musicologist at Yale,
pointed Mr. Kupfer to Berio's unperformed opera "Traces," a
confrontational 1963 work about the politics of race.

"In different ways," Mr. Pierson said, "all the composers in the show
were dealing in their music with political issues, with utopianism,
with imagining. They believed that the world would be better, and
that musicians would be a part of making it better.

"That utopian world didn't come about. But at the same time they were
all also envisioning a future for music where boundaries didn't
exist, where you could have a cross-fertilization between the
avant-garde, classical music and pop. That did happen, and because of
the kind of ensemble we are, that really resonates for us. We are now
making music in a world that these composers helped create, and
that's what gives this story a happy ending. But figuring out how to
tell it has taken some time. I hope we got it right."

.

Communal Living But Not Like In The Sixties

Communal Living But Not Like In The Sixties

http://www.stockmarketsreview.com/realestate/2011/02/23/communal-living-but-not-like-in-the-sixties/

February 23, 2011
by Fiona Davies

Communal living in the past has conjured up images of wild excess
where everything is shared. During the 1960's they became quite
popular and then seemed to fade out, but they are making a comeback
but not in the way that you remember. Burgeoning communal housing
projects are taking hold throughout the country and there are now
networks operating which advise people that are interested in how to
go about setting on up.

One such communal housing project which has been hailed as a success
is Threshold in Gillingham in Dorset. It used to be a farm and
before that a Saxon settlement but has been turned into one of these
schemes where like-minded people have chosen to create their own
community. They tend to share the same principles of caring and
sharing but they also enjoy their privacy and autonomy.

The main concept of all communal housing schemes is an antidote to
the isolation and alienation that many people feel in modern day
society, some people do not even though their neighbours let alone
their community. Some people like to live that way but for those of
you who do not then communal housing could appeal. You will still be
able to shut your front door and have a private life but share a
sense of community with others also.

There is usually a communal building which everyone can use which
holds classes and activities. The environment is also an important
concern so organic gardens and shared laundry facilities are high on
the agenda. Some of the meals are eaten communally.

Many thought that this was a middle class ideal but in fact they do
accommodate low-income families too. At the Threshold Centre half
off the 14 inhabitants who live there have come through a housing
association. In the future they hope that more and more housing
associations will come on board. Some community housing projects are
working towards accommodating the elderly with health facilities on site.

Those involved known that they have to overcome the suspicion that
comes with communal housing projects. They are not all lentil eating
tree huggers. The governments Localism Bill could allow more of
these projects get off the ground because they would need 80%
approval from the local community to build on land not designated for
housing. It could also speed up the process as the planning process
for them can be quite lengthy especially as opposition can be a
barrier. One such project, Laughton Lodge, was up against a petition
of 200 local people but they won the locals over. They were not
going to be dope smoking hippies and that was the message that they
had to get across. Once they had the support of the locals then they
were granted planning permission and the project was able to go
ahead. Locals even attend different classes and events there and it
shows that these projects do work.

Communal living is not for everyone but they are becoming more
popular and seem to answer what David Cameron means by the Big Society.

http://www.uklandforsale.org

.

OBIT: Suze Rotolo

Suze Rotolo, Bob Dylan's Girlfriend and the Muse Behind Many of His
Greatest Songs, Dead at 67

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/suze-rotolo-bob-dylans-girlfriend-and-the-muse-behind-many-of-his-greatest-songs-dead-at-67-20110227?


Rotolo inspired 'Boots of Spanish Leather,' 'Don't Think Twice, It's
All Right,' 'Tomorrow Is a Long Time' and many more

By Andy Greene
February 27, 2011

Suze Rotolo, Bob Dylan's girlfriend in the early-Sixties, who walked
arm-in-arm with the songwriter on the iconic cover of The
Freehweelin' Bob Dylan, died February 24th after a long illness. She
was 67. Rotolo was the muse behind many of Dylan's early love songs,
including "Don't Think Twice, It's All Right," "Boots of Spanish
Leather" and "Tomorrow Is a Long Time." She was just 17 when they
began dating in 1961, shortly after Dylan arrived in New York City.
"I once loved a woman, a child I'm told," he wrote in "Don't Think
Twice, It's All Right." "I gave her my heart, but she wanted my soul."

Early Bob Dylan Photos

In Bob Dylan's 2004 memoir Chronicles Volume One, he describes
meeting Rotolo backstage at a concert. "Right from the start I
couldn't take my eyes off her," Dylan wrote. "She was the most erotic
thing I'd ever seen. She was fair skinned and golden haired,
full-blooded Italian. The air was suddenly filled with banana leaves.
We started talking and my head started to spin. Cupid's arrow had
whistled past my ears before, but this time it hit me in the heart
and the weight of it dragged me overboard."

Bob Dylan: The Rolling Stone Covers

By early 1962, Dylan and Rotolo were living together in a tiny
apartment on West 4th Street. Suze came from a staunchly left-wing
New York family, and played a huge role in Dylan's political
awakening. When they began dating Dylan was largely apolitical and
his set consisted mostly of decades-old folk songs. Rotolo took him
to CORE (The Congress of Racial Equality) meetings and taught him
much about the civil rights movement. "A lot of what I gave him was a
look at how the other half lived -- left wing things that he
didn't know," Rotolo told writer David Hajdu in his book Positively
4th Street. "He knew about Woody [Guthrie] and Pete Seeger, but I was
working for CORE and went on youth marches for civil rights, and all
that was new to him."

Rotolo told Dylan about the brutal 1955 murder of Emmett Till,
inspiring Dylan to write his early protest classic "The Death of
Emmett Till." "I think it's the best thing I've ever written," Dylan
said at the time. "How many nights I stayed up and wrote songs and
showed them to [Suze] and asked, 'Is this right? Because I knew her
mother was associated with unions, and she was into this
equality-freedom thing long before I was. I checked the songs out
with her. She would like all the songs."

In the summer of 1962 Rotolo took a long trip to Italy, leaving Dylan
alone and heartbroken in New York. During this period he penned
"Don't Think Twice, It's All Right," "Boots of Spanish Leather" and
"Tomorrow Is A Long Time" -- all bittersweet love songs about Rotolo.
She returned in January of 1963, and weeks later Columbia records
send photographer Don Hunstein to shoot the cover of The Freehweelin'
Bob Dylan. The young couple walked up and down Jones Street for a few
minutes while Hunstein snapped shots. "Bob stuck his hands in the
pockets of his jeans and leaned into me," Rotolo wrote in her 2009
book A Freewheelin' Time: A Memoir of Greenwich Village in the
Sixties. "We walked the length of Jones Street facing West Fourth
with Bleecker Street at our backs. In some outtakes it's obvious that
we were freezing; certainly Bob was, in that thin jacket. But image
was all. As for me, I was never asked to sign a release or paid
anything. It never dawned on me to ask."

Photos of Dylan, Johnny Cash and Miles Davis by Don Hunstein

Dylan's growing fame put enormous strain on their relationship, and
she moved into her sister Carla's apartment in August of 1963. "I
could no longer cope with all the pressure, gossip, truth and lies
that living with Bob entailed," she wrote in her memoir. "I was
unable to find solo ground -- I was on quicksand and very
vulnerable." A particularly nasty fight with Suze and her sister
Carla was chronicled in Dylan's 1964 song "Ballad in Plain D." "For
her parasite sister, I had no respect," Dylan wrote in one of the
angriest songs he ever wrote. "Bound by her boredom, her pride had to
protect." In a 1985 interview Dylan said releasing the song was
wrong. "It wasn't very good," he said. "It was a mistake to record it
and I regret it."

By late 1963, Rotolo could no longer ignore the rumors that Joan Baez
and Bob Dylan's relationship had become more than professional. They
split up for good, though remained friends for a short period
afterwards. During Rotolo's trip to Italy in 1962, Rotolo met film
editor Enzo Bartoccioli. They married in 1970 and had a son named
Luca. She lived in downtown New York her entire life, and worked as a
teacher, a painter and a book illustrator.

For years Rotolo refused to discuss Dylan in interviews, but she
agreed to be interviewed in Martin Scorsese's 2005 documentary No
Direction Home. In 2009 she wrote a memoir entitled A Freewheelin'
Time: A Memoir of Greenwich Village in the Sixties.

.

An Unsung Hero in the Battle for Freedom of the Press

Remembering William Schanen:
Printer, Publisher, and Unsung Hero in the Battle for Freedom of the Press

http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframerss.php?linkid=2997

2/14/2011
by BILL BERKOWITZ

William Schanen II was a Wisconsin-based publisher and printer. In
the late 1960s -- when few others would -- he printed several
underground newspapers. An unheralded hero, he was faced with a
conservative-led boycott that severely damaged his business. He died
of a heart attack forty years ago this month.
--

William Schanen II was a publisher and printer in the small town of
Port Washington, Wisconsin. He believed deeply in freedom of the
press and risked his small business in the late 1960s -- when few
others would - by printing several underground newspapers. That
decision incurred the wrath of conservatives who organized a boycott
that severely damaged the business and the livelihood of his family.
He died of a heart attack forty years ago this month at the age of 57.

In 21st century America, a news-junkie - especially one interested in
alternative points of view -- has many options: websites, blogs,
twitter, You Tube videos, podcasts, Facebook posts, some 24/7 news
channel hosts, and even on occasion, local alternative newspapers.
Whatever the medium, cyberspace and more traditional environs pretty
much guarantee information-loaded (or laden) days.

For progressives, it wasn't always so easy to find alternatives to
mainstream news and viewpoints. We celebrate journalists and
reporters like Upton Sinclair, Lincoln Steffens, Ida M. Tarbell,
George Seldes, I. F. Stone that bucked conventional wisdom. They
were the national giants.

And, if you were lucky enough, you ran into a man like William
Schanen, someone who is not nearly as celebrated as the above-named
folks, but who left an indelible mark on his times.

The times were turbulent: the Vietnam War was raging and anti-war
demonstrations were taking place all across the country; the woman's
movement was coming alive; the counter-culture was booming with a new
consciousness and drugs and rock n roll leading the way; political
leaders were assassinated; the Black Panther Party was a force and
the government pushed back against all progressive political
movements -- COINTELPRO (Counter Intelligence Program) for example.
It was against this backdrop that hundreds of alternative/underground
newspapers, with new attitude and contrarian viewpoints - political
activists as citizen journalists -- sprang up across the country.

By the spring of 1970, we had run out of local printers. The "we" in
question was the group that a year earlier founded Lawrence, Kansas'
first underground/alternative newspaper called Reconstruction. Now
called Vortex - after having merged with the Kansas City Screw -- the
last printer willing to print the paper happened to be located in a
cave in a former quarry outside Liberty, Missouri, which
coincidentally was home to a very right-wing outfit called The Minutemen.

The cave company printed one issue of our paper. The front page was
headlined "KC Chief Pig Kelly [sic] Exposed: Insurance Fraud; Deals
Guns To Minutemen." Our story provided affidavits documenting that
the Kansas City, Missouri Police Department, headed by Clarence M.
Kelley -- who was later to become Richard Nixon's Director of the FBI
- was, among other things, involved in selling confiscated guns to
The Minutemen.

When we picked up our thousand copies at the cave, we were told in no
uncertain terms "to hit the road Jack-and don't come back no more, no more..."

Publishing Vortex out of a small office on Massachusetts Street in
Lawrence, we had managed to alienate and/or scare off all the local
print shop owners, and printers in Topeka, Kansas City, Missouri, and
even as far away as Wichita.

While finding a printer may not have been a problem for alt papers on
the Coasts, i.e. The Berkeley Barb, The Los Angeles Free Press, the
East Village Other, or The Rat, in the heartland, finding and keeping
a printer was a major struggle.

And that is where William Schanen came in.

Through the grapevine, we heard about a printer in Port Washington,
Wisconsin, who was willing to print underground newspapers. William
Schanen, owner of Port Publications in Port Washington, printed three
small weekly community newspapers. Schanen also printed a Milwaukee
underground newspaper called Kaleidoscope.

Local conservatives - led by Benjamin Grob, the co-owner, along with
his brother Ted, of a Grafton, Wisconsin machine tool business --
became outraged, accusing him of printing "obscene literature for
profit." Grob told The Milwaukee Journal that Schanen was "smut
peddling." They organized a boycott, urging local retailers,
organizations and individuals not to advertise in any of Schanen's
publications.

Facing massive financial losses, Schanen took on more underground
newspapers including the Chicago Seed, the Indianapolis Free Press,
and Omaha Nebraska's Buffalo Chip. He also agreed to print our newspaper.

A Vortexian voyage

Port Washington, we were soon to discover, is a small New
England-esque fishing village located about 30 miles north of
Milwaukee, on the banks of Lake Michigan.

Here's how it worked.

We put the paper to bed on a Monday afternoon. Three of us were
assigned to drive the layout sheets, and a check, to Port Washington
-- 600-650 miles north of Lawrence. We drove a not-so-new dark red
and gray Volkswagen bus. It was a ten to twelve hour trip, often
fraught with car problems. If we left at seven or eight on Monday
evening, we'd usually pull into Port Washington by five or six the
next morning.

We'd wait in the parking lot for the shop to open, deliver the layout
sheets, and wait for the job to be finished, which would be around
five that evening. On a nice day, we would crash on park benches by
the water. I doubt our bench crashing did anything to help Schanen's
reputation in town, although as I remember it, the locals were always
friendly. If it were cold and yucky, we 'd try to get some sleep in the bus.

When Schanen's printers finished, we'd load up the bus and head back
to Lawrence, arriving at five or six in the morning. By eight o'clock
we were on the KU campus hawking papers for 25 cents a copy to the
thousands of students passing by the Student Union.

Schanen sets up shop in Port Washington

More than seventy years ago, William Schanen II set up shop to
publish a newspaper on main street in Port Washington - in the same
building his father had built for his law practice. In his 1994 book,
"Hometown Wisconsin," Marshall J. Cook called Schanen "a pioneer" in
that he was "the first to apply a new technology called offset
printing to newspapering." The Schanen Press which was what he and
his wife Marie called it "put out a free eight-page shopper called
Ozaukee Ads," soon to be changed to Ozaukee Press. (Port Washington
is the county seat for Ozaukee County.)

Cook noted that it didn't take long for the paper to overtake its
competition and become the only one in town. His son, William
Schanen III, who currently runs the paper, told Cook that growing up
he "'was a fly on the wall ... just absorbing the whole scene' while
a 'parade of characters' passed through."

Schanen's business suffered tremendously from the boycott. In his new
book "Smoking Typewriters: The Sixties Underground Press and the Rise
of Alternative Media in America" (Oxford University Press), John
McMillian writes "in the tradition of Benjamin Franklin, [Schanen]
believed that printers were obligated to print even those things they
found objectionable."

"I don't agree with a lot of it," Schanen said of Kaleidoscope, "but
what are we supposed to do, get rid of everything we don't agree
with? There's an issue here that is much larger than Bill
Schanen." He later issued a statement that read: "My family and I
are dedicated to fighting the boycott. All we can hope for is that
fair minded people who understand our position, who respect the right
to the constitutional guarantee of the freedom of the press, and the
right of Kaleidoscope to this same freedom will come to our support. "

In a story
(http://www.reocities.com/enchantedforest/field/8106/TEXTS/KscopeStory.html)
about the history of Milwaukee's Kaleidoscope, Mike Zetteler wrote:
"The boycott of Schanen's newspapers was crushing, with a revenue
loss of up to 90%, forcing a cutback to one paper, the Ozaukee Press.
He sadly remarked during the course of the boycott that only 2% of
the weekly papers in Wisconsin supported him. And at the same time,
some industrial leaders were pressuring others to block job printing
orders as well as advertising in his weeklies."

Zetteler pointed out that both "before and after his death Schanen
was recognized for his dedication to a free press " through a number
of awards including the 1970 Elijah Lovejoy Award for courage in
journalism and Wisconsin Newsman of the Year in 1971.

McMillian reported in "Smoking Typewriters" that: "Although Schanen
won financial, moral, and editorial support from an alliance of
neighbors, the National Newspaper Association, the ACLU, the
University of Wisconsin's journalism department, and the neighboring
Milwaukee Journal, he was eventually forced to sell off two of his
three newspapers."

Forty years ago, in February 1971, at the age of 57, Schanen died of
a heart attack.

The story of Vortex, and the many other underground newspapers that
were printed in Port Washington, and their relationship with Bill
Schanen is the story of the courage of an extraordinary "ordinary
citizen," who not only believed in the freedom of the press, but also
acted decisively on it.

.

Black and White and Married in the Deep South

Race Remixed

Black and White and Married in the Deep South:
A Shifting Image

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/us/20race.html

By SUSAN SAULNY
Published: March 19, 2011

HATTIESBURG, Miss. ­ For generations here in the deepest South, there
had been a great taboo: publicly crossing the color line for love.
Less than 45 years ago, marriage between blacks and whites was
illegal, and it has been frowned upon for much of the time since.

So when a great job beckoned about an hour's drive north of the Gulf
Coast, Jeffrey Norwood, a black college basketball coach, had
reservations. He was in a serious relationship with a woman who was
white and Asian.

"You're thinking about a life in South Mississippi?" his father said
in a skeptical voice, recalling days when a black man could face
mortal danger just being seen with a woman of another race,
regardless of intentions. "Are you sure?"

But on visits to Hattiesburg, the younger Mr. Norwood said he liked
what he saw: growing diversity. So he moved, married, and, with his
wife, had a baby girl who was counted on the last census as black,
white and Asian. Taylor Rae Norwood, 3, is one of thousands of
mixed-race children who have made this state home to one of the
country's most rapidly expanding multiracial populations, up 70
percent between 2000 and 2010, according to new data from the Census Bureau.

In the first comprehensive accounting of multiracial Americans since
statistics were first collected about them in 2000, reporting from
the 2010 census, made public in recent days, shows that the nation's
mixed-race population is growing far more quickly than many
demographers had estimated, particularly in the South and parts of
the Midwest. That conclusion is based on the bureau's analysis of 42
states; the data from the remaining eight states will be released this week.

In North Carolina, the mixed-race population doubled. In Georgia, it
expanded by more than 80 percent, and by nearly as much in Kentucky
and Tennessee. In Indiana, Iowa and South Dakota, the multiracial
population increased by about 70 percent.

"Anything over 50 percent is impressive," said William H. Frey, a
sociologist and demographer at the Brookings Institution. "The fact
that even states like Mississippi were able to see a large explosion
of residents identifying as both black and white tells us something
that people would not have predicted 10 or 20 years ago."

Census officials were expecting a national multiracial growth rate of
about 35 percent since 2000, when seven million people ­ 2.4 percent
of the population ­ chose more than one race. Officials have not yet
announced a national growth rate, but it seems sure to be closer to
50 percent.

The contour and the shade of the change are not uniform. In states
like California, Hawaii and Oklahoma, where people of mixed race
already made up a significant percentage of the total, the increases
were smaller than in places like Mississippi, where there were far
fewer mixed-race people to start with. In Hawaii, for instance ­
where the multiracial group accounts for 23 percent of the
population, highest of any state ­ the growth since 2000 was 23.6 percent.

Also, in Hawaii, the predominant mix is Asian and white and native
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, while in Oklahoma, it is American Indian
and white. In Mississippi, the most common mix is black and white ­
historically and today the two groups least likely to intermarry,
sociologists say, because of the enduring social and economic
distance between them. (It was also against the law until 1967.)

Mississippi led the nation in the growth of mixed marriages for most
of the last decade, according to Mr. Frey's analysis of the American
Community Survey. Still, multiracial people are a tiny percentage of
the state's population: 34,000, about 1.1 percent. And many here
complain of enduring racial inequities.

There was an uproar last year over comments by Gov. Haley Barbour
suggesting that the civil rights era in Mississippi, with its
sometimes fatal strife, was not that bad. And some are rankled that
the state flag still contains a miniature version of the Confederate
battle standard.

Nonetheless, many here also see progress, something akin to "a door
opening," in the words of one resident.

"Racial attitudes are changing," said Marvin King, a professor of
political science at the University of Mississippi who is black,
married to a white woman, and the father of a 2-year-old biracial
daughter. "Day in, day out, there is certainly not the hostility
there was years ago, and I think you see that in that there are more
interracial relationships, and people don't fear those relationships.
They don't have to hide those relationships anymore."

Mr. Norwood and his wife, Patty Norwood, agreed. "It's been really
smooth here," said Mr. Norwood, 48, a Hattiesburg resident for 11
years and a men's basketball coach at William Carey University. He
had been most recently coaching at a college in the culturally
diverse area of Cajun Louisiana. "I think some people who may not
have been comfortable with this in the past have no choice now. I
mean, people always told me, the farther south you go, the more
racism you'll feel. But that has not been true."

Mrs. Norwood, 39, a photographer who is Thai and Chinese on her
mother's side and white on her father's, added: "I think if people
see that you are genuine and in love, and that you are comfortable
with yourselves, they are put at ease."
And unlike in many states, Mississippi's population has not grown
much over the last decade, suggesting to researchers that any change
in culture is happening not primarily as a result of newcomers.
(Mississippi's population grew by 3.8 percent since 2000. In
contrast, North Carolina's grew 18.46 percent.)

"North Carolina grew rapidly with Hispanics and blacks and people
coming in from out of state and changing things," Mr. Frey said. "In
Mississippi, I think it's changed from within."

Changing Identities

The share of the multiracial population under the age of 18 in
Mississippi is higher than its share of youth in the general
population, suggesting that much of the growth in the mixed-race
group can be explained by recent births. But in Mississippi and in
other states, some growth may also be a result of older Americans who
once identified themselves as black or some other single race
expanding the way they think about their identity.

"The reality is that there has been a long history of black and white
relationships ­ they just weren't public," said Prof. Matthew Snipp,
a demographer in the sociology department at Stanford University.
Speaking about the mixed-race offspring of some of those
relationships, he added: "People have had an entire decade to think
about this since it was first a choice in 2000. Some of these figures
are not so much changes as corrections. In a sense, they're rendering
a more accurate portrait of their racial heritage that in the past
would have been suppressed."

Experts say there are some elements, like military service or time
spent on a college campus, that lay the groundwork for interracial
relationships. With the Camp Shelby military base on its southern
side and the University of Southern Mississippi as an anchor, perhaps
it is not a surprise that Hattiesburg, a city of about 50,000
residents, and its surrounding counties would show rapid mixed-race growth.

They are also part of Mississippi's coastal culture, which has
historically been more liberal and outward looking ­ given the port
towns ­ than the rest of the state. (Harrison County, south of
Hattiesburg and home to the Gulf Coast cities of Gulfport and Biloxi,
has the highest share of mixed-race residents in the state, according
to the 2010 census.)

Sonia Cherail Peeples, who is black, met her husband, Michael
Peeples, who is white, in the science building at the University of
Southern Mississippi in 2003, when they were both students.
Friendship ensued, then a crush. "I never dated a black girl before,"
Mr. Peeples confided. His family was "old Mississippi," living mostly
around Jackson. At one time, they ran a luggage company.

Sonia Peeples's ancestors were longtime Mississippians, too, but they
were sharecropping cotton.

The differences in the past did not matter in the present, they both agreed.

"I really never thought twice about it," Mrs. Peeples, 29, said of
dating Michael, 30. "Everyone was open to it and I thought: 'He has
potential. I could marry this guy!' "

And she did. Now they have two boys: Riley, 3, and Gannon, 5, who
Mrs. Peeples likes to say are "black, white and just right!"

"It's a generational thing," Mr. Peeples added, noting that his
mother has been hot and cold about the relationship over the years,
accepting his new family, then sometimes pulling away for a while,
only to return, drawn by her grandsons. "I think many older people
are set in their ways, but 40 years old or younger, you'll never get
the sense that something's wrong," he said.

After college, the couple moved to Denver, but eventually decided to
return to Hattiesburg, where Mr. Peeples works at a local dairy.

"I told the Realtor, 'Don't put us in a predominantly white or black
neighborhood,' " Mrs. Peeples recalled. "And sure enough, we have a
biracial kid next door."

According to the census, multiracial people are more likely to live
in neighborhoods that have a broad mix of races with a higher share
of whites than those who identify as black alone. This suggests they
enjoy higher socioeconomic status, Mr. Frey, the demographer, said.

Lingering Tensions

Still, for the Peeples family, there have been some testy moments.
There was the time when another parent at Gannon's school asked if
his terrible allergies had something to do with "race mixing." And
there was the hospital worker who treated Mrs. Peeples as though she
was trying to snatch a white baby when she took Riley, who had blond
curls, out of his crib in the nursery. "This is my baby! He just
looks like his dad," Mrs. Peeples, who has deep brown skin,
remembered scolding the woman.

But both Sonia and Michael Peeples are mindful that those few
incidents are insignificant in comparison to what previous
generations endured.

"I would not have wanted to live in my parents' or grandparents'
time," said Mrs. Peeples, a full-time homemaker. "We're teaching our
kids all of it, all their history. My 5-year-old asks, 'People who
looked like you, why did they treat them so bad?' It's hard to
explain to a biracial child in 2011. In a perfect world, race
wouldn't matter, but that day's a while off."

The Norwoods have also experienced minor tensions. A waitress at a
restaurant might abruptly decide that she cannot serve their table.
Even when they are locked arm in arm, someone might ask
incredulously, "Are you together?" Clerks at the supermarket want to
ring up their groceries separately.

But there is one place where they know that old thinking patterns are
being challenged: at their church.

The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. called Sunday morning church
service the most segregated hour in America, but one would not know
that at Grace Temple Ministries, the neighborhood church where the
Norwoods worship and socialize with other mixed-race families. The
pastor is white and the assistant pastor is black, and the creative
arts pastor is Latino. During a recent sermon, the congregation's
guiding ethos on social issues was clear: "Let us not be guilty of
thinking as the culture and society decides," said the pastor, Dwayne
Higgason.

Unlike the Peepleses, Jeffrey and Patty Norwood did not seek a
diverse neighborhood, but found themselves in one anyway. In 2001,
they bought the first home built on a developing street before any
neighbors had even purchased lots. As houses sprang up, their
neighbors turned out to be black families, white families and mixes
of the two.

"Between our church and the neighborhood, this is the most diverse
place I've been," said Mr. Norwood, a native of Tupelo, Miss. "I've
never experienced anything quite like this."

Growing up in Victoria, Tex., Mrs. Norwood said she was never quite
sure what race to mark on forms, and she hardly ever saw people like herself

"I usually went with Asian because I could only check one box," Mrs.
Norwood said. "Our daughter's life will not be like that. She knows
what she is and she's exposed to a little bit of everything. The
times have certainly changed."

.

The Rise and Fall of Progressive Dissent

The Rise and Fall of Progressive Dissent

http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=9011

by Randy Shaw
Mar. 22‚ 2011

The remarkable new documentary on 1960's folksinger and activist Phil
Ochs offers a striking contrast between 1960's activists and those of
2011. The former engaged in massive anti-war protests against
Democratic President Lyndon Johnson – despite his historic enactment
of federal civil rights laws, Medicare, and the War on Poverty. Yet
Barack Obama's endless, $2 billion a week war in Afghanistan, and his
capitulation to Wall Street proceeds without a peep. Even well-known
musicians involved with social justice causes have avoided playing at
protests against Obama's policies. For all of their sometimes naïve
idealism, 1960's activists understood that "liberals" also wage
unnecessary wars and weaken social and economic justice. But today's
activists are so fearful of empowering the right wing that they give
Democrat Obama a pass on almost every issue, and then complain that
he ignores progressive concerns.

I never heard of Phil Ochs when growing up, and only learned of his
songs when my wife purchased a box set of his recordings about a
decade ago. But even if you have never heard an Ochs song, the new
film about him is a powerful testament to the change in social change
activism since the 1960's.

Fear of the Right Wing

It could be said that activists felt comfortable bashing Democrat
Johnson, because the only Republican President they had lived under
was moderate Dwight Eisenhower. Yet progressives protested Jimmy
Carter after experiencing Richard Nixon's presidency, and also
engaged in massive resistance – recall the Battle of Seattle in 1999
– against many of Democrat Bill Clinton's policies.

But either due to the legacy of George W. Bush or increased political
conformity, fears of the right wing has stifled progressive dissent
in the United States. Activists ignore Barack Obama's actions in
boosting Wall Street and the military industrial complex, when they
would have been out in the streets protesting similar actions under
previous Democratic Presidents.

One key difference between then and now is that few 1960's activists
were concerned about maintaining friendly relations with Democratic
Party politicians. The Ochs film reminds that 1960's activist leaders
were trying to change the system, not find a job or place for them in
the Establishment.

Today, one-time political activist outsiders like MoveOn.org and
Democracy for America operate like left branches of the Democratic
Party, not as independent progressive forces. Nearly all of their
daily emails attack Republicans, with no major protests or actions
against Obama for an endless war in Afghanistan whose cost comes at
the expense of teacher layoffs and the slashing of state and federal
human services spending.

"Clarifying" Activism

Tom Hayden, who has provided brilliant and visionary social analysis
of the American left for nearly fifty years, is among those
interviewed in the Ochs film. He makes the point that the 60's
anti-war movement began with a rush of idealism, which then spun off
in two directions as the protesters felt they were having little
impact (a mistaken conclusion, as shown by Tom Wells in his classic,
The War Within: America's Battle Over Vietnam).

One direction led activists to the militant self-destructiveness
embodied by the Weather Underground. But others moved toward what
Hayden describes as a "clarification" about the nature of United
States society, and its susceptibility to meaningful change.

This clarification left many concluding that overthrowing the status
quo was actually a pipe dream, and that greater opportunities to
improve people's lives could be achieved either through local
activism and/or other less "national" causes.

Today's progressive activists and groups understand Obama's
betrayals, but by limiting protests to Republicans they confuse –
rather than clarify – the dynamics of national power. The
Oscar-winning documentary, Inside Job, provided such clarification,
but its message has not altered the "only bash Republicans" strategy.

"Phil Ochs: There But For Fortune" is less a story about a singer and
more a tale of the changing fortunes of United States activism. It is
hard for me to recall a more thought provoking film.

.