Have A Pleasant Thanksgiving (You Jerks)

[Editor’s Note: This was written a year ago. I was Thankful I could run it again instead of being original]

{Author’s Note: This should run tomorrow, the day before Thanksgiving, but I know you guys aren’t going to work tomorrow, and won’t see it. Happy Thanksgiving. And there is no editor}

There are lots of news stories available –the majority of them, I think– expounding on the horrors of Thanksgiving. “Send us your dysfunctional family Thanksgiving disaster stories” is the lede on every radio program I can find, that hasn’t jumped the gun entirely and started with “Tell us your Christmas horror stories.”

I’m not having it. Thanksgiving is lovely. Or it should be.

Thanksgiving doesn’t beat around the bush; right in the name it tells you it’s a day to be grateful. Complaining about it seems to me to be like going to the art museum and complaining that the paintings are obscuring your view of the walls.

Hmm. Perhaps that’s a bad simile. I’ve been to many museums where the dropcloth daubs they hang on the walls aren’t as interesting as the off-white paint, now that I consider it. So please insert “Uffizi Gallery in Florence, Italy” in the preceding paragraph where “art museum” appears. Thanks.

Anyway, it’s not about you. For one day, at least, I don’t want to hear about your crabby attitude towards your assembled family and your overcooked turkey. I don’t want to hear about the lousy TV you’ve got to watch the football game on. I don’t care if you don’t like the floats that drift by Macy’s like garish barrage balloons. Put a sock in it. It’s not about you.

It’s not about any of us. It’s about remembering that everything we have is a gift, and we could lose it, and we should take time out from our lives for one day a year and acknowledge that.

Have you ever been in a soup kitchen on Thanksgiving? I hate the preening socialites and politicians that visit there on Thanksgiving to get face time on TV. I think much more kindly about the people that feed those poor souls on November 22nd and November 24th, when the cameras aren’t interested.

There’s a look on a person’s face, when someone gives them something they need that they might not have otherwise. It’s the look on the face of the man in line at the soup kitchen. It’s gratitude.

I’m going to give it a try tomorrow, that look. It looks like Thanksgiving.

I Hate Politics


I refuse to discuss politics or my bathroom habits here. Since the melding of politics and bathroom habits have come to their glorious acme with the activities of a certain Senator from Idaho, I really don’ t know what’s left to say about them, anyway.

It’s impolite to talk about politics in social setting where they are not the reason for the gathering in the first place. Political gatherings should be few, far-between, and decisive. You, know, like pumping out your septic tank. With the same results, generally. Get rid of the old turds to make room for the new ones.

Anyway, I’ve written something vaguely political, but to my credit it’s in a place where people go looking for that sort of trouble. Pajamas Media.

“I don’t want to stay vertically integrated until I’m horizontal, thank you very much.”

It’s not really political, actually. It’s a plea to be recused from politics as much as practicable, which is my usual, misunderstood position. Someone calling themselves “Grumpy” left a comment right away describing it as :

“…a little convoluted but the point being made is crystal clear.”

Grumpy, I pray that will be chiseled on my gravestone someday.

The Modern Marriage Template (Electric Boogaloo)

[Editor’s Note: This was originally offered in November of 2006. The future former Mrs McCartney is still banging her leg on various talk show interview desks, so it hasn’t aged a minute, really.]
{Author’s Note: There is no editor}

A lot of people don’t like Paul McCartney.

That sounds silly, a little, I know. I’ve been alive to see Elvis, and Sinatra, and everybody else who thinks they’re a big deal in music in the last forty years. None of them ever approached the popularity of the Beatles.

No one ever will, either, as the moment for the great mass of people to pay attention to one thing, coupled to the ability to experience it, will never come again. They were the guys standing in the right place at the right time. Attention is atomized now, along with the ability to indulge our atomized tastes. When there was only three TV networks, the Beatles were on all three. I distinctly remember an AM Top Ten List in 1964 with eleven Beatles songs on it, as one slot was a tie. Beat that.

I’m too young for the Beatles, sorta. It was people my older brother’s age that went loopy for them. Fifty something now. I was a kid, watching them on Ed Sullivan in my footie pajamas, after watching grainy video of bandaged, bloody men in fatigues, half a world away, being lifted onto choppers on the news. The yin and yang of the trivial and the life and death washes over a six year old. It gets in, but in a diffuse way. You gain impressions.

Well, here’s an impression: Paul and Linda McCartney are the template for the modern marriage. You heard it here first.

Poor Paul is getting the second wife treatment now. Or his second wife is. Or they both are. At any rate, they’re saying dreadful things in public about one another in an attempt to get the dough or the kids or the kid’s dough or notoriety or something. But it wasn’t always that way for Paul McCartney.

The hipsters hated Paul, if you asked them. It was John Lennon they adored. John Lennon was kind of a nasty guy. They liked that. They couldn’t sing like Paul McCartney, but they could be as antisocial and rude and mindless and addled as John Lennon. Paul was just a music hall musician, lost in a modern time. He sought to entertain. Why settle for that?

But how they aped him. They looked for a handsome spouse — not a golfer’s wife, but a woman like Linda Eastman. They acted bohemian. They didn’t do a bed- in. They indulged their ideas of back to nature living, in a sort of Vermont version of Marie Antoinette’s peasant house, and played farmer. They grew Paul’s beard and gave wildflower immortelles to their beloved, after they married them in a ceremony only official, not official looking. And the women part of the audience went looking for a sloe eyed scruffy rich bohemian guy to sing songs to them and give them handsome children. Their husbands volunteered to change the diapers and wash the dishes as often as they did. Which was never, they had nannies and housekeepers, but the intellectual exercise was performed to everybody’s satisfaction.

They attempted to give the appearance of never soiling their hands by grubbing after money, all the while being quite well off. They had ferocious intermediaries looking after their finances while talking ragtime about socialism. They included their family members in all their affairs, because they could, and ascribed it to being familial, not nepotism. And they were immensely casual about the appearance of all their affairs.

Tell me the vast majority of married people didn’t emulate the family scene shown there accompanying Paul McCartney’s magnificent first effort as a solo artist. Pretty much everything after that was a joke.

They really did love one another, and their children, and seemed happy. That’s the rarest of things in popular entertainers. And then she went and died on him, and left him to the machinations of the world, and it ate him up.

He’s still a Beatle, you know. But he’s not the husband of the woman he loved any more. I wouldn’t trade places with him for anything. There was a time, I assure you, that a great many people would have.

Satuhday Morning Funners

Thankfully only half-full of Queen, but chock-full of hope and insouciance and bonhomie and several other words that are difficult to spell and may or may not require italicization–which is another word like that but rarely is italicized. What’s not to like?

What It Was, (And Is) Was Football

[Editor’s Note: I wrote this a little more than a year ago. My son plays organized football of the flag variety now]
{Author’s Note: There is no editor. Hi Ruth Anne!}

When we went out to vote on November 7th, my wife and I had to drive by our son’s elementary school. We were mildly amused to spy him, out for recess, playing football in the schoolyard with his classmates.

We parked across the street and watched for a few precious minutes. Since we were not a butterfly, or a jet contrail, or a candy wrapper, or a penny, he didn’t notice us there, so we got to see him in that rarest of settings: “somewhere else,” without his parents or guardians present.

The football activity was hilarious. It alternatingly resembled an algae bloom and an ayatollah’s funeral– first a kind of milling around in an amorphous blob, then a kind of wild melee over a leathery old totem. We watched them drift back and forth for a pleasant minute, with the odd missile launch of the forward pass rocketing rudderless out of the scrum and landing any old place but that most rarified of targets: a teammate.

It was wry to consider that playing tag is verboten at his school. I’m not joking.

The school is getting comical in this regard. They were terrified of the food the little ones were eating, so they tinkered endlessly with the school lunch menu to make it so healthy that no one purchased it anymore. Now everybody eats fluffernutters they bring themselves.

They built an elaborate and very expensive handicapped playground. That’s a kind and thoughtful gesture. But it is merely a gesture, as there are no handicapped children to enjoy it. There just aren’t that many children of any kind in a little town like ours.

And no tag. Someone could get hurt. Someone could be left out. Someone could sue is the real reason, and the powers that be always point that out right up front.

Tag isn’t allowed, so one of the kids brings a football, and they play that. And football isn’t banned, because no one thought of it yet. And the absurdity of allowing mobs of pre-teens to chase one another if one is holding a ball, but not if their hands are empty, seems to be lost on the school administration. At least for now. And I, for one, am glad of it.

I’m not as worried about my son being injured playing football as I am in contemplating the little straitjacket world he’s being fitted for. Those children decided on the rules, supplied their equipment –a ball– and played their game without any adult supervision; and I saw a lot less kvetching among them than at any organized sporting event they participate in. I’m leery of them being told that someone will always tell them exactly what to do, and simultaneously unerringly protect them from not only from harm, but hurt feelings. One aspect of that tandem of supervision is repugnant, and the other unlikely.

I’m living in a strange world where people for whom I have no regard draw finely calculated and ultimately meaningless distinctions about everything, down to the scope of activities allowed for pedophiles to roam the earth, while at the same time they ban children playing tag in the schoolyard. Such distinctions are meaningless because anyone who is prepared to commit a great offense is not concerned about the rules governing small ones.

I dread the day, which is on the horizon now, not over it, when I’m forced to tell my children that the only sensible course of action is to ignore the rules, as there are so many of them that they become gibberish. And what the hell, the rules only seem to apply to those who wish to live worthwhile lives anyway –who never needed them in the first place.

Month: November 2007

Find Stuff:

Archives