Tony's/NBA Live Blogging Pt. 4

In a test to see if anyone else besides me cares about both pro-basketball and show tunes, I am live blogging about the Tony Awards and the NBA Finals. We have a close game heading into the 4th and some top awards still to be announced, so it should be an exciting end of an evening here. Let's get back to it . . .

10:00- Another award goes to God of Carnage. This time it's for Marcia Gay Harden's performance. It's nice that she has another award to accompany the Oscar she won and everybody forgot about.

10:03- Kobe makes some free throws to push the Lakers lead to 3. Of course with the way Orlando loves shooting from outside, a 3 point lead is essentially no lead at all.

10:05- Over on Broadway, the cast of Billy Elliot is putting on a dance number so psychedelic it makes me think I have been hitting my gin a little too hard. Either that or this is just some number from Hair that I don't recognize because I repressed the memory of it along with most of my memories of that musical.

10:09- I love that the Magic brought back their injured star point guard, Jameer Nelson, for the Finals after the back up point guard, Rafer Alston, got them this far by performing superbly in the playoffs. Now as Game 2 winds down and they trail L.A., they have neither of those players on the floor. Instead, Stan Van Gundy is playing chronic underperformer J. J. Redick at point. In Broadway terms this would be like if your star had to bow out half way through the show's engagement, then the understudy steps up admirably, then on closing night in the final act you send out some chorus member in the leading role.

10:14- Harvey Fierstein comes out to present an award and creep out Middle America.

10:15- The prize for revival of a play goes to The Norman Conquests, and it looks their producers account for half the people in the audience. I don't think there were that many people on stage for the opening number.

10:19- Sure enough God of Carnage takes the award for Best Play. They promptly ask the writer to say a few words in her humorous foreign accent.

10:20- Oooooh, a tough call goes against the Lakers and Jack Nicholson (The No. 1 celebrity Laker fan) looks like he's going to reenact the last half-hour of The Shining. Maybe the officials were told to make sure this series goes more than 4 games so the NBA can earn back the money they lost by not getting the LeBron v. Kobe match-up they wanted.

10:24- Well the player the Magic were using to defend Kobe Bryant just fouled out with 3 minutes left to play. I think Kobe is about to set a record for most points scored in 180-seconds to end this game. Right now he only has 20 points. How much you want to bet he'll end the game with at least 30?

10:26- Over at the Tonay Award they are presenting a life-time achievement award to Jerry Herman. This is the sort of thing that should come much earlier in the broadcast, but the producers put it off because they didn't what to weird out too many prime time viewers with an effeminate elderly man in an ill-fitting tuxedo.

10:30- As the NBA game hits 2:40 left, Kobe Bryan manage to turn slipping on his own feet into a trip to the free throw line.

10:32- Then the Magic make two good shots to regain the lead with less than 90 second to go. I'm so tense I might have to empty the gin bottle. Not because alcohol clams me down, but because I might need an empty vessel convenient so I don't pee my pants.

10:34 and 40 seconds- I flip back to the Tony's and see that the cast of Hair is putting on their showcase performance.

10:34 and 45 seconds- I flip back to the basketball game, even though I know they're at commercial right now.

10:36- After the Lakers tie the game, the Magic suffer for not having a true point guard on the court as players are forced to create their own shots and one of them winds up forcing up a bad attempt and effectively giving the ball back to the Lakers with the game tied.

10:38- Kobe goes for the game winner. It's blocked from behind! THEN THE MAGIC GRAB THE BALL AND CALL TIME OUT! THE BEST JUMP SHOOTING TEAM IN THE LEAGUE REGAINS POSSESSION WITH 0.6 SECONDS LEFT!!!! Uh, where's that bottle?

10:43- The Magic will try to inbound the ball to make a game winning shot. The ball is in . . . It's up . . . And it just barely rims out. We're going to overtime, but only because the fates have decided this game is too much fun to stop now.

10:45- David Hyde Pierce comes out to give the award for Lead Actress in a Musical and receives some gentle ribbing from Neil Patrick Harris. I imagine things have been tense between them ever since they Pierce stole Harris' whole "I go by my full name" gimmick.

10:46- The award goes to Alice Ripley and she starts bellowing into the mike for no good reason. I really think they should tell the nominees to limit the yelling during acceptance speeches, if only to protect unwary home viewers with powerful sound systems.

10:49- The prize for Actor in a Musical goes to the three kids that play Billy Elliot. Now I'm really confused first one person can get multiple nominations, then three people can share one nomination. This is getting confusing. As you might imagine the acceptance speech involving three boys starts pretty awkwardly then transforms into one of the most touching moments of the evening.

10:52- Now that the NBA game is in overtime, Derek Fisher decides it's about time to start playing like a veteran and makes a steal on a key play. Hey Fish, so nice of you to show up. I though Kobe was the only Laker that cared about winning a championship.

10:53- I check back in with the Tony's and discover that the cast of Jersey Boys is performing for the usual no good reason. I turn back just in time to watch Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol team up for a 3-point play. I'm really not sure why I'm not paying more attention to the basketball game.

10:56- Hedo Turkoglu who took the ball away from the Lakers at the end of regulation pulls another great defensive play. This gives J. J. Redick a chance to make his second field goal of the game. Again this guy is playing in overtime over any of their more experienced better qualified players.

10:59- Great timing! I turn back to the Tony Awards just in time to see Billy Elliot win the award for Best New Musical. It's so nice to see that the American Theater Wing have the courage to give a musical adapted from movie from 9 year ago a prize for being "new". Then again they could have given it to the musical version of Shrek (based on a movie that's 8 years old which was adapted from a kids book from 1990), or the jukebox musical that's pretty much a compilation of rock hits from the 80's. I guess what I'm saying is Next to Normal got robbed

11:00- Great timing part 2! I return to the b-ball in time to see the Magic nail a 3-pointer shot to get the game back to within three, which again for Orlando is pretty much like being tied.

11:03- While the refs endlessly review whether or not that shot was a three pointer I return to the Tony's and watch NPH finally get his chance to sing. He's singing a tribute to the winners to the tune of "Luck Be a Lady Tonight". I figure he demanded a chance to sing, and the producers were so desperate for any host other than Nathan Lane they gave in.

11:05- Free throw shooting down the closing stretch has given the Lakers a lead in the final seconds. The Magic's last second barrage fails to produce any points and the Lakers hold on to win Game 2, and continue their potential sweep. I was pleased to see that the Magic played well enough to at least make a game of it. Let's hope that they can take it up another level in the next couple games, and actually turn this into a competitive series.

11:11- Well the credits have run for the Tony's and the basketball players have given their post-game interviews. I guess that means it's time to go to bed before the local news sucks me in with some human interest story to video of a high-speed chase.

Thank you for reading this. Be you a drama fanatic who harbors a soft-spot for hoops, or a Kobe fan that likes to hum show tunes, I'm glad this blog offers some place where people with diverse passions can come together. If the Super Bowl and the Oscars are ever on the same night, we'll have to do this again.

Tony's/NBA Live Blogging Pt. 3

I am attempting a live blog of both the NBA Finals and the Tony Awards, an unforgiving labor of delusion. Thankfully the Finals are at half-time, unfortunately the Tony's don't have a half-time (unless you count the performances from the revivals). So let's get back to it . . .

9:12- Liza beats out Will Ferrell for yet another award. She then proceeds to give an acceptance speech where she pretends that she wasn't a mortal lock to win any award that she's nominated for. Liza, these are your people they love you way more that Will Ferrell or those crazy kung fu performance artists.

9:16- Wow, the Tony producers do a terrific job of handling some technical problems during a live musical performance. I think the Orlando Magic's coach Stan Van Gundy should learn a thing or two from them, because the Magic aren't doing much to adjust their game plan.

9:21- In fairness to the folks at the NBA, their color commentators do a much better job of faking camaraderie than the people presenting Tony's do when they are forced to banter.

9:30- It looks like it's going to be a big evening for Billy Elliot. I'm pretty sure that if they could they would give a separate award to each of the Billies.

9:32- So far the Tony Awards are loading up on my childhood heroes. We've already had John Stamos (Uncle Jessie) and Carrie Fisher (Princess Leia). If they find some way to incorporate that kid that played Data in The Goonies and Short Round in Temple of Doom, they'll have hit my personal icons trifecta.

9:39- I have been a little distracted by a phone conversation with my parents, but that slam by Kobe would make anybody pay attention.

9:43- Back in Radio City Music Hall, I guess NPH just told an inside joke that I didn't get, then followed it up with a joke about being inside Jessica Lange that she didn't like.

9:44- Dammit! Jeff Daniels loses to Geoffrey Rush. I guess the voters had to give it to him, since, according to the reviews, he's about the only thing making that play worth watching. If only they decided who made the NBA Finals using that criteria, then LeBron James would definitely be in, if only just out of pity for having to carry the Cavaliers, and the entire economy of Cleveland.

9:47- Over in the Staples Center, the Magic have actually been guarding a narrow lead for a little while here. I guess the Lakers decided they shouldn't break up their streak of taking prolonged periods off during each playoff game this year.

9:50- The Tony's are trying one of those in memoriam tributes like they do at the Oscars. The problem here is that every year at least a few people in the Oscar tribute will be legitimately famous. I don't think anyone outside of Radio City Music Hall remembers who any of the people these people were. Sorry theater nerds, but it is a pretty insular community.

9:53- I flip back to the b-ball and find the Lakers took the lead back (despite the fact that the last play I saw was Lamar Odom making a stupid foul). Immediately the Magic hit some jump shots and get back in front. I really don't know what you can do to stop the Magic when their shooters are hot. I mean other than spiking their Gatorade.

9:54- Kobe misses a 3-pointer to end the 3rd quarter. Is there any doubt that if this were the end of the 4th he would make that shot.

This seems like a good time to publish this update and get geared up for the 4th quarter/major awards. I just hope my giant bottle of gin will last.

To be continued . . .

Tony's/NBA Live Blogging Pt. 2

Let's keep this crazy experiment to merge the interests of Harlem and Greenwich Village. . .

8:23- Smart decision by the producers to front load the Shrek material before its target demographic's bedtime.

8:27- I get tossing in a jab at Wicked in the Shrek musical number, since Shrek is all about parodying fairy tales. I am just worried that might date the musical a little. It's going to be hard enough to revive the show once America turns on Eddie Murphy after he releases Norbit 2 and they have to completely rewrite all of Donkey's lines.

8:29- I know live bloggers aren't supposed to take sides, but I will go ahead and admit that I am rooting for Jeff Daniels over James Gandolfini tonight.

8:31- WOW! The legend Angela Lansbury wins it! I don't care what Tim Burton says; Ms. Lansbury will always be Mrs. Lovett to me.

8:34- The producers are obviously making an effort to cram as much popular material into the top of the broadcast as possible. I can't think of any other reason to include a performance from Mama Mia!, the musical that just had a hit movie spun out of it, when most of tonight's nominees haven't gotten much screen time yet.

8:38- Wait! I forgot I was also supposed to be watching the finals. Ack! I missed the first quarter already.

8:40- Okay I may not know everything about the Orland Magic's offensive game plan, but I am pretty sure that being tied at 15 after 12 minutes is not how they were hoping things would go, considering they need to seriously score a ton of points in a hurry to outpace the Lakers.

8:41- Checking back in with the Tony Awards, I notice Harris crediting Samantha Mathis as his first on-screen kiss. Does that also imply that mean she was responsible for his first thought of "Hmmm, something about this doesn't seem quite right."?

8:43- I have to say I am seriously disappointed that Will Ferrell didn't come out dressed ad President Bush in a flight suit.

8:45- America Theater Wing, you really want to nominate both Elton John and Dolly Parton for the same award then give it neither of them.

8:46- Since the NBA Finals are at commercia,l I will stick with the theater nerds and join my Mom in cheering the dude from In The Heights.

8:48- Back in the world of hoops, I just saw L.A.'s Andrew Bynum benefit from a foul that apparently was committed by someone on the grassy knoll. I would rate my surprise that the Lakers are getting favorable calls from the officials in L.A. as around a 0.00001 on a scale of 1 to 100.

8:51- Does it really benefit Orlando to try pushing the tempo at this point? It seems to me that just means they miss 3-pointers faster.

8:52- Well the NBA is taking a TV timeout with the score tied at 26. Something makes me think David Stern has sent in the order to keep this game close until at least 7pm Pacific so they can get all the west coast voters expecting a Laker's blowout to actually tune in.

8:55- Over on CBS, Susan Sarandon is giving Bernadette Peters a run as the leading lady in Broadway's "Over 50 and Looking Foxy" rankings.

8:57- Multiple nominations in one category for one person always leaves me confused. It seems to me that it is theoretically possible for one person to wrap up the win just by claiming every nomination. This is why I am going to write 5 brilliant plays then release them all in one year.

9:01- Sorry Tony's, but I am just not ready to put up with hair metal coming immediately after West Side Story. Note that I have no problem with it cleansing my musical palate after a sampling from Hair though. Draw your own conclusions from that.

9:05- Switching over to basketball again, I see the Magic have gone away from rapidly jacking up 3's pushing the temp and are now taking about two minutes to set up their bad shots.

9:08- After Rashard Lewis gets out the d-fib panels and revives Orlando's offense we go to the half Lakers- 40 magic- 35.

9:10- Since both channels are at commercial, I will use this time to publish this update and try calling my Mom (the person responsible for my enjoyment of live theater, so I guess she's partly to blame for this bizarre blogging experience).

To be continued . . .

Bold Live Blogging Event- Tony's/NBA

Well, I finally got my computer out of the shop. I can't think of a better way to celebrate than to try a little live blogging. Since I am always trying to expand the demographic reach of this blog - my current audience is principally white men, ages 18-35, who are blood relatives of me- I decided to make a bold attempt to ensnare as many people as possible. Tonight I will be simultaneously blogging about the Tony Awards and the NBA Finals. Since I may be the only person on Earth highly interested in both events I am hoping this event might bring together people from some pretty diverse backgrounds. At the very least I expect to create one of the most confusing combination of stream of consciousness notes ever created on Internet. So let's make it happen . . .

7:52- My Totino's pizza is in the oven. I have my buffalo wings on the way, and a giant bottle of gin ready to go. I can't think of a better way to watch "A Few Minutes with Andy Rooney".

7:54- The proceedings are interrupted by a phone call from my wife, who is out of town for the evening and thus spared the awkward experience of watching me give myself the first blogging related hernia in medical history.

8:00- The Tony telecast opens with what I guess are the three Billy Elliots, on stage together. Soon we're cross-cutting into the various musicals up for awards. And half of the audience that was watching 60 Minutes just felt a little queasy.

8:04- And my stupid digital TV tuner just lost the signal. Does anyone else find the digital "skipping" that comes with DTV much more annoying than plane old static?

8:08- So far we've had Elton John, Stockard Channing, Bret Michaels, Dolly Parton, and Liza Minnelli have all crossed the same stage within the span of a few minutes. Yet somehow I imagine the most excited home audiences got was when the small children who are watching this with their mothers saw Shrek.

8:11- Neil Patrick Harris everybody! You have to give it up to a guy with a generation of girls crushing on him to take the risk of becoming the most prominent openly gay American actor. Doogie, you'll never know how many girls would have let you play doctor with them.

8:15- We have our first award of the night. I like to try guessing which nominees are most likely to win based on the level of applause in the audience when their name is announced. This doesn't work at the BET awards where a large posse can throw you off.

8:17- Someone just thanked their mother. Everybody take a shot!

8:18- First commercial. Seems like a good time to post the first update and snag a little chow.

To be continued . . .

History with the Cap'n- Doctor Assisted Assassination

History has more rich and interesting stories than any one class can do justice. In your typical high school level U.S. History class, you have so many facts to digest in only a year of study that you have no hope of learning anything that might actually interest you. History class fails to engage most students because their teachers don't have the time to explore any thing of meaning or relevance to the students in any degree of depth. Just to demonstrate how intriguing and informative history can become when studied in detail, I like breaking down particular items down to the most obscure and surprising facets. Almost always I find we can learn something from nearly anything recorded in the annals of history.

For today's entry we will take a deeper look at the assassination of a U.S. President. Before I start bulleting out my points, I'd like you to reflect on how much you can actually recall about presidential assassinations in American history. If you find yourself drawing mostly a blank, don't feel bad because you are far from alone. With many surveys revealing how little Americans know about their history, I wouldn't be surprised if a majority of Americans couldn't name all four presidents who were assassinated. Yet when you consider that we are talking about the leader of the nation being violently murdered, it seems odd that we don't discuss them more beyond all those crazed JFK conspiracy theories. So let's leave behind the well remembered and often mourned Presidents Lincoln and Kennedy, and instead turn our attention to President James A. Garfield and his untimely death.

• I'll get the basic facts out of the way first. James A. Garfield had won a close election on a platform of reforming government. In his first 119 days in office he took bold steps to strengthen the national government and end corrupt practices, such as filling high government offices with unqualified political supporters. Unfortunately on his 120th day as POTUS a mentally unstable man named Charles Guiteau shot Garfield at a railway station in Washington D.C, as the president was about to leave town on vacation. Guiteau had repeatedly requested, but never received, a diplomatic position from Garfield -possibly because Guiteau had no diplomatic or political experience to speak of- and he felt wronged by the president. After the shooting doctors rushed to aid the president, and that's where the story starts to get really interesting . . .

• The first doctor to tend to the president tried to give him some on the spot medication, a combination of brandy and liquid ammonia. Garfield, as you might expect, vomited. I can't say for sure whether the doctor took that as a good sign or a bad sign. I only knew that it did nothing to discourage the rest of the president's caretakers from continuing to perform some very bad medicine.

• Doctors focused their efforts on trying to locate and remove the bullet lodged into the president's body. Surgeon D. Willard Bliss offered the services of his "Nelaton Probe" to trace the path of the missile through Garfield's flesh. When jabbing the probe into the president's innards and wriggling it around for a few minutes failed to produce the slug, Dr. Bliss resorted to sticking his finger into the wound. Another doctor would later try inserting his hand into the wound up to his wrist, apparently working under the belief that Bliss just hadn't done enough damage. Eventually the area where the doctors had probed and fingered and fisted would become infected. Naturally they took this as evidence that the bullet must still be in that area.

• Eventually scientific expert Alexander Graham Bell offered the services of his new invention, a rudimentary metal detector (The Cap'n told you he'd come back to this). The device used Bell's telephone technology in combination with a simple electrical system that caused a hum when pointed near metal. When Bell scanned Garfield with the metal detector they heard a hum where the doctors thought the bullet lie. So the medical men launched into a new series of surgeries by the end transforming a three-inch bullet wound into a twenty-inch tunnel of infected tissue.

• In the end Garfield succumbed 80 days after being shot. Medical historians believe infections caused his death (and caused him a lot of pain along the way). Ultimately the bullet Guiteau had fired into the president failed in its intended purpose to kill the leader of the nation. An autopsy would find the bullet lodged ten inches away from the doctors' invasive tinkering, sealed by Garfield's body in a protective cyst. Fittingly the doctors became the subject of public scorn and ridicule for their apparent malpractice. Dr. Bliss would later apologize, but the damage had been done.

• When the assassin faced trial, Guiteau tried to defend himself by claiming that he was not responsible for killing the president. "The doctors did that," he said "I simply shot at him." Not surprisingly the jury saw things otherwise, and he was hanged for his crimes. He may have been better off letting his attorney use the insanity defense (still a new concept at the time), instead of trying to defend himself by saying he had "divine authority" to shoot the country's leader.
  

• Dr. Bliss holds the unenviable distinction of being the only doctor involved with two presidential assassinations (he was also on hand, as the head of a Washington D.C. area, hospital after Booth shot Lincoln). However one person has been involved with three of the four presidential assassination: Robert Todd Lincoln. Robert Lincoln was the son of Abraham Lincoln and the president's wife Mary Todd. He was invited to join Abe and Mary at Ford's Theater but declined as he was too tired. He went on to serve as Garfield's Secretary of War, and accepted Garfield's invitation to meet at the train station when Guiteau attacked. Year later President William McKinley would invite Robert Lincoln to the Pan-American Exposition of 1901. Lincoln came, and yet again a president was shot and killed. Though Robert Lincoln would live another 25 years after McKinley's assassination he apparently was never invited to another presidential event (perhaps wisely so).

• The untimely death of Garfield did have some unexpectedly pleasant consequences. His vice-president, Chester A. Arthur, had to take on the presidency. Political bosses had put Arthur on the ticket to sooth concerns among corrupt party members that Garfield would reform them all out of a job. They thought Arthur, as an old-line party member in good standing, would make sure the political toadies still got their piece of the pie. When he took office, many feared Arthur would undo Garfield's reforms and go about politics as usual. However Arthur would defy those pessimistic expectations, and take great steps to change long standing political processes. He pushed legislation that would ensure government positions wouldn't go to political lackeys unless they could prove they at least met the minimum qualifications- a standard America still proudly holds its appointed officials to today.

If we look over the details of just this one incident from American history we can find plenty of important lessons. From the failings of the doctors we can see that even well-meaning experts can make grave mistakes when not armed with the right information. From the examples of Alexander Graham Bell and Chester A. Arthur we can support the old adage that past performance is no indicator of future success. From the story of Guiteau we can learn that no matter what heinous acts people do they can almost always defend their actions, if only to themselves. Overall we can tell that there are plenty of dangerous things out there besides the bullets of an assassin, a thought-provoking lesson as many worry about assassination today. Even Garfield himself said that "Assassination can no more be guarded against than death by lightning; and it is best not to worry about either." These may not necessarily be lessons unique to this moment in history, but the evidence they present toward any lesson has value. Certainly at least enough value to warrant more than just a passing mention in an over-stuffed history class.

History with the Cap'n- Ring my Bell

Historians love studying the unique individual. The unusual and complex person who stands out from the crowd and lives an exceptional life certainly helps keep the history books interesting. In fact some have argued that unique individuals are the only thing worth studying in history. Unfortunately the more outstanding the individual the more likely he or she is to be a little to complex to easily categorize. One person who nicely exemplifies this was born 162 years ago tomorrow on March 3rd, 1847 CE, Alexander Graham Bell. Undoubtedly Bell had an incredible mind and he certainly did some amazing work in his life. Unfortunately, most people know Bell as the inventor of the telephone, an accomplishment for which he almost certainly received too much credit. Like his friend Thomas Edison, history should probably celebrate Alexander Graham Bell as a multifaceted genius who significantly helped advance the fields of technology in several ways. Yet, again like Edison, the popular imagination remembers him only as an inventor of a modern convenience. So, once again, the Cap'n will help out all you history buffs, by debunking some myths and revealing some truths about Alexander Graham Bell.

• First, let's address the whole issue of who invented the telephone and when. According to a resolution of the U.S. Congress, the U.S. House of Representatives acknowledges Antonio Meucci for his work in the invention of the telephone. Meucci has a strong claim to fathering the telephone. He was a poor, struggling Italian immigrant who could have legally prevented Bell from patenting his telephone if he only had enough money to cover the proper fees. Meucci sued Bell over who had the proper legal claim to the invention. Attempting to prove his complaint Meucci sent his working models to the labs at Western Union. In what can only be described as the opposite of serendipity for Meucci, he sent his models to the very same lab where Bell worked. The models would later mysteriously disappear, sort of in the same way that the grass would mysteriously stay green. Critics of Meucci have derided his claims. They argue his design would not function if tested and appeared to defy the basic physics involved with telecommunications. Even if you dismiss Meucci, Elisha Gray can challenge Bell as father of the telephone. Gray had designed an apparatus which appears to have been technologically superior to Bell's. He went to the patent office to legally stake his claim the field of telephone technology, but would actually miss out because Bell had patented his telephone mere hours before. Gray sued Bell, who probably spent as much time litigating as he did inventing. The courts would name Bell the inventor of the telephone, but who wants to win like that.
  

• Truthfully, the question of who invented the telephone is at best a nebulous issue with only debatable answers. Many people had worked on devices similar to Bell's invention. Bell simply had the luck to land the legal rights, the dedication to make the phone a practical tool, and the business sense to envision the telephone as a commercially viable item. In fact Bell was so confident in the telephone's chances of success, he boldly predicted that in the future there would be at least one telephone in every city in the U.S.

• Bell had a life long interest in communication, which probably led him to experiment with telephone technology in the first place. He devised a very rudimentary telecommunications system as a child. He trained his dog to say the words (or at least a close approximation) "How are you, grandmama?" so he could greet his grandmother from a different room in the house. I haven't found any record of how his grandmother reacted to having a dog bound up and talk to her, but I just hope both she and the dog survived the first incident.
  

• As I mentioned above, Bell was what you could call a polymath. He had a brilliant mind and he took an interest in a great variety of intellectual and scientific pursuits. He had an interest in aeronautics, so he designed a kite that could carry a person. He wanted to tinker with mechanical propulsion and he helped invent a hydrofoil that would set the world-water speed record at the time. He valued geography education and as president of the National Geographic Society, he encouraged the creation of the National Geographic Magazine. His constant improvements to the telephone established the basis for the phonograph and communicating with light rays. As an amateur geneticist, he tried to breed an especially prolific line of sheep and succeeding in producing sheep with superfluous nipples (okay, so that one didn't work out so well). He even created an early metal detector that completely failed to save the life of . . . actually, I'll save that item for a later entry.
  

• Of all the things Bell did with his life beyond the phone, he took the most pride in the work he did for the deaf. Both his wife and mother were deaf. Even before he patented his telephone he opened a school for the deaf. Eventually he founded a society for the deaf that still exists today and now bears his name. He worked closely with Helen Keller and she even dedicated her autobiography to him. Bell dedicated a large part of his life to an segment of his population that at the time had no use for his most famous creation. Now almost no one hears about this side of him. Maybe that sad irony is just the karmic scales balancing out the good fortune he had in his work on the telephone.
  

• The fame and accolades lauded onto Bell for supposedly inventing the telephone put him in a special class of hero. Though few people would ever learn of his other work he stands alone as the only person to be named one of the 100 greatest Britons, Americans, and Canadians of all time. Few other people rose to such a level of success that multiple nations would compete for the right to claim them as natives.

The Era of Big Nicknames is Over

As your standard news junkie, I have kept checking into all the various presidential firsts that we've experienced since Barack Obama assumed the office. We all could have a lively debate about the merits of any of our new president's actions, or the efficacy of any of his varied public appearances and televised speeches. Thankfully, for our comment moderator (the Cap'n) we don't have to worry about that here. In part, because plenty of other sites already exist for exactly that purpose. Mostly though because I won't even mention anything political in this post.

With most of the reaction to President Obama's remarks focusing quite rightly on what effects his plans will have on the ongoing economic crisis, a minor point that signaled the President's efforts to shift the culture of Washington went by unnoticed. Given that Obama's promises to bring a new attitude to national politics made up the heart of his campaign before the recession really hit this fall, I thought someone ought to mention how the tone coming out of the White House changed in a subtle but possibly significant way. President Obama has established a business-like and solemn tone he uses when speaking with the press, when interacting with them from behind the Seal of the President for the first time, he made the choice -rather pointedly in my opinion- to address everyone by their full and proper names. With this he put an end to the George W. Bush Era of Nicknames.

During Bush-43's tenure in office theories abounded about why the Commander-in-Chief seemed to treat everyone with the casual familiarity of a fraternity brother. Some seemed to believe that it only represented the natural inclination of people to show friendliness and camaraderie. In a way, President Bush only wanted to invite the press corps into his circle of friends. It certainly seemed as though he would have appreciated more chums in the media toward the end of his term. Other looked for deeper psychological meanings to the President's practice. Some thought he wanted to rename people and things (like the "Axis of Evil") as a way of demonstrating his power and dominion over them. Keep in mind that many cultures believe that renaming anything changes it on a spiritual level, a power usually reserved to gods. Drawing from that interpretation some even implied that Bush issued his new designations not just to assure himself of his own authority, but to see who would acquiesce to the new titles he bestowed. In a smartly written essay playwright/screenwriter David Mamet, describes the sorrowful consequences for any who surrender to a nickname:

The assignment of nicknames, the application of jargon is an understood tool for the manipulation of behavior. We know the quote "charismatic" boss who is making up "cute" and idiosyncratic names for his or her employees. "I alone know and I alone will assign you your name." This is a powerful (and impolite) tool. It is an arrogation of power and a useful diagnostic. For those who grin and tilt their heads to have their ears rubbed at the new name have surrendered their personality to the oppressor; they have given up their soul.

While I greatly doubt that every member of George W. Bush's cabinet felt as though a nickname cost them their soul, Mamet does illuminate the fact that nicknaming is a social act, meant to include those knowledgeable of the appellation and exclude those ignorant of its meaning. Regardless of his motivations, President Bush drew attention to his habit of gregariously distributing nicknames by jumping right into them from the very beginning of his presidency.

Conversely Obam began his presidency in a much more formal manner. If you check the transcript, you won't find any instances of Obama referring to anyone with a jovial moniker. At only one point does he even come close when he refers to Vice-President Biden, as Joe. To me this nicely demonstrates how Obama's attitude differs from his predecessor. He doesn't feel opposed to having nicknames; he just feels they should result from a relationship that's had time to define itself, more cognomens than nicknames really. President Obama has only begun his time in office and he seems willing to let the relationship he has with the press mature before labeling the reporters that will make up a major part of his life. I think he does this in the hopes that they will grant him sometime to define his presidency before branding him in the press.

So far Obama's tactic appears effective. His approval ratings remain high as the government continues to wrestle with the enormous problems of the day. Moreover he does seem set on changing the culture of Washington and continuing to do things differently than his predecessor, with the use of proper names only a small part of this strategy. What's next? Ending controversial practices? Taking questions from opponents? Attending an NBA game? With President Obama, all we can say for certain is that it is a new era.

History with the Cap'n- An Eruption of Trivia

For some people if they hear one catchy tune on the radio, they spend the rest of the day annoying people with their repetitious humming. Others find themselves at work getting all the itches and twitches of a rehab patient when they know they have a new gadget to tinker with at home. We all have our tiny obsessions that can dominate our thoughts when the right stimulus triggers them. For the Cap'n, I often find my mind picking up a stray reference to an unusual topic, and suddenly my brain starts craving arcane or trivial knowledge about that subject like a 5 year old craves the taste of paste.

The other day I listened to President Obama address Congress about some silly thing, then tuned in for the response from the Republican representative on behalf of the opposition party. Much to my later vexation, my ears picked up Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana mention something in his best "Kenneth the Page"-voice about "something called volcano monitoring". While others went on to bicker about the comparisons between the two speeches and the two yokels, I started to ponder whether history could provide any interesting stories of when volcanic activity was either monitored too little or too much. Well the historical record did not disappoint in the area of volcano related anecdotes. I share the results of my search below, along with some other intriguing factoids related to volcanoes.

• If the general populace already knows about any volcanic eruption in history, they know that Mount Vesuvius unexpectedly blanketed Pompeii with volcanic ash and debris on August 24th in the year 79 CE (or as the Pompeians would have said LXXIX). Every school child gets to look at pictures of the bodies sealed in place by the volcano's spew and enjoy a macabre thrill. No wonder we all grow up so desensitized to violence and fascinated with the morbid. A few things the general populace may not now include the fact that Vesuvius wiped out two cities, famously Pompeii, which has petrified corpses, and the less well-known Herculaneum, which got slowly buried under fifty feet of mud. Actually, considering that, I can understand why Pompeii gets better publicity.
  

• Pompeii actually stands out as a very strong example of people not paying enough attention to the local neighborhood volcano. Even before Vesuvius gradually built up to its main explosion over the course of a few days -shooting steam, causing tremors, and the like- the city of Pompeii had been evacuated just a few year earlier because of massive earthquake. In fact archaeologists found evidence that many people where still in the process of repairing and redecorating their homes when the volcano finally burst. That just proves that truisms of home ownership were as true during the Ancient Roman empire as they are today. As any homeowner knows, once you finally bring a contractor in to start fixing one problem, some new and completely unrelated thing goes wrong.
  

• Excavation of Pompeii revealed more secrets than just buckets of plaster and stacks of tile. Apparently archaeologist uncovered so much erotic art in the remains of the city that they were able to open a special museum focusing on the pornography of Pompeii. If we included that in the history books half the high schoolers would graduate wanting to become archaeologists. I would take this as fairly convincing evidence that the Pompeians did not expect the eruption to strike so quickly. If I thought I was about to be buried in place by a cloud of super-heated pumice, I would not want to be caught holding a dirty magazine.
  

• Pompeii also provided an excellent opportunity for someone to try investigating an eruption far too closely. Legendary Roman scholar Pliny the Elder heard about the eruption and felt overcome by his own curiosity and compassion. As the first natural historian, Pliny decided to inspect the volcano more closely and lead a rescue mission to go right into the middle of the outburst. Apparently feeling no reason to fear the ongoing flare up, Pliny spent the night with a friend who lived near Vesuvius. He ate, bathed and slept as fire rained from the sky, and the mountain spewed ash, rocks, and lava all around. Pliny seems to have developed a sense for the danger he faced, as history records that he had the members of his rescue crew strap pillows to their heads to protect them from falling rock. Unsurprisingly, Pliny died during his ill-planned mission, seemingly from a combination of the volcano's deadly fumes and his own underlying asthma. History would remember Pliny as one of the great minds of his age, all available evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. (I can safely mock Pliny the Elder without having to worry about appearing insensitive or offending anyone, right? It's not too soon is it?)
  

• Now before you go thinking volcanoes are all bad. I should let you know that we get all our diamonds from volcanoes. I know you think of diamonds coming from mines dug into the Earth's crust. In truth, diamonds form several hundred miles beneath the surface of the Earth. It takes volcanic eruptions to drag them to where we can reach them. This is why most rich diamond mines are usually near sites of volcanic activity. Before you start filling your head with get-rich-quick schemes, go reread the section on Pliny the Elder, then reconsider messing around with anything volcanic.

• You might look down on the case of Pompeii as an example of the ignorant people of the ancient world suffering because they lacked sophisticated scientific knowledge. You should know that humans have shown the same propensity to ignore the warning signs of an imminent eruption in modern times. In 1902, the island of Martinique began experiencing some early symptoms of an impending eruption of the island's Mount Pelee. Unfortunately for the residents of Martinique the local governor was more concerned about politics than safety. With his party facing a major election soon, he didn't want the voters getting all anxious and hung up on some minor thing like an impending eruption. If they overreacted to hearing the news that their lives were in grave danger, they might take it out on their elected officials. So instead of evacuating the island the governor suppressed any warnings of the danger, prevented people from leaving and assured people that the city at the foot of Mt. Pelee, Saint-Pierre, was the safest place to be. This led to thousands of people crowding into St. Pierre in the hopes of protecting themselves. When the eruption came in killed more than 28,000 people, including the governor, in about two minutes. One of the few survivors was a prisoner who lived because he had been sealed in the underground holding cell awaiting execution. The prisoner would be pardoned and later travel with the Barnum & Bailey Circus, because any rube would gladly part with two-bits just to see irony of that magnitude.
  

• The nation of Iceland has actually found a way to turn volcanoes to their benefit in an unusual way. Since this nigh-Arctic island rests on a volcanic hotbed as overactive as Philip the Hyper-Hypo, it has found all sorts of uses for geothermic energy. In surely the most unexpected example of this, Iceland uses the geothermal heat to grow bananas. Botanists build greenhouses around hot springs which when controlled can provide ideal conditions for cultivating the tropical fruit. For a time Iceland produced more bananas than any other European nation and even grew enough to begin exporting them. Iceland made so much money from the banana trade, that even Greenland has tried to get into the act. If proper volcano monitoring can allow two nations known for their frigid conditions to become major producers of tropical fruit, then maybe it does merit more attention.

• In all of this I should note that at times people have gotten carried away when watching volcanoes. Once in 1976 some scientists became very concerned about the signals they observed from the volcano on the island of Guadalupe, La Grande Soufrière. (That's French for "big sulfur outlet". Wait, really? C'mon France I thought you were supposed to be more poetic than that.) While some scientists thought any volcanic eruption would do little damage and didn't warrant alarm others suggested evacuating Guadalupe for fear of a Martinique level disaster. Caution won out and thousands of people had to relocate, except for those few individuals who resigned themselves to whatever fate the volcano dispensed. Famed German filmmaker Werner Herzog became fascinated with the idea of an impending catastrophe and took a crew to document the desolated island and the terrible detonation whenever it occurred. In the end La Grande Soufrière barely erupted at all, the geothermal equivalent of a burp. After all that trouble and worry, the ultimate result was a host of inconvenienced people from Guadalope and a very weird documentary. So it just may be the case that some people do take their volcano monitoring too seriously. Then again, maybe we should all read that passage about Pliny the Elder again.
  

History with the Cap'n- Buffalo!

Happy Buffalo Bill Day everybody!

I'm not entirely clear on when or how William F. Cody a.k.a "Buffalo Bill" climbed high enough up the pantheon of American heroes to merit his own day. Seemingly indifferent to my questions, someone somewhere has declared that Americans should spend February 26th remembering and celebrating the life and works of Buffalo Bill. Since the man headed a traveling frontier themed show -dubbed Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show, in a fit of humility- that popularized the romantic idea of the Wild West, and permanently etched a place of Cowboys and Indians into our popular culture, I cannot begrudge the man a little memorialization. So I will use today's blog post as an opportunity to regale you with historical trivia related to Buffalo the man and Buffalo the animal (though not Buffalo the city in New York, because I feel they have enough problems without some snarky blog taking cheap shots at them).

• Buffalo Bill got his start riding for the Pony Express. He answered an ad that read "WANTED young skinny wiry fellows . . .Must be expert riders willing to risk death daily. Orphans preferred."
  

• Since the Pony Express didn't even last two years as a long distance communication enterprise (and I bet you thought it was a long running institution of the Old West), Cody had to land a new job. He found work hunting food for railroad construction crews. Thus he began hunting American buffaloes, since they were the most plentiful source of good food (re: meat) around. Thus the moniker.

• Actually, I must note for accuracy that Buffalo Bill never had any real contact with buffalo, because there are no wild buffaloes native to North America. Cody hunted and killed bison. You can find buffalo in Africa and Asia, just not the American west. Some might explain this mislabeling of bison as an honest mistake of identification on the part of some early settler. After all they sort of have a similar appearance and some similar attributes. I don't really agree with that -do you even know what a proper buffalo looks like?- and I would equate that kind of error to mistaking an opossum for a koala.
  

• In fairness to Buffalo Bill, he was very successful at hunting and killing bison. Historians estimate that he killed about 4,280 bison in about a year and a half. Hunters had a variety of methods they employed in hunting bison. In fact the hunters has so much success rate that the bison population in North America has fallen from an estimated 60 million when Europeans began settling her to now only 50,000 bison roaming free today. That's actually improvement from the nineteenth century when the bison were down to a few hundred.

• My younger brother once told me that you can make a complete gramatically correct sentence using only the word "buffalo". As in "Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo." Some have claimed this is the longest English language sentence you can create with just one word. I cannot be certain this is true, but I would love to watch people try to top it. (NOTE: The link does not lead to anything my younger brother wrote, just an article on the same topic.)

• Buffalo Bill would later go into acting alongside another famous Bill of the Old West, Wild Bill Hickok.
  

• The only natural predator of an adult bison, or buffalo if you prefer, is a wolf pack. Just to clarify, I am not talking about a pack of wolves taking on a herd of bison. I mean to say that it takes several wolfs at once to have any shot of killing an adult bison.

• When Buffalo Bill died he was honored by heads of state and then not buried where he had specified in his will. His wife claimed that he had changed his wishes on his death bed. A dispute arose between his proposed burial site (a town he founded) and his actual burial site (a place with a nice view), over who had the more legitimate claim to serve as Cody's eternal resting place. The feud would go on to involve a bounty for grave robbing and it would be settled when the two towns exchanged smoke signals. To give you the proper context for that I should mention that they were proposing grave robbery in 1948, and exchanging smoke signals in 1968.
  

So in case you have any social events planned for today and want to demonstrate your affinity for all things buffalo, I have hopefully left you well prepared to perpetuate the legends of Buffalo Bill and the Wild West.

History with the Cap'n- The unpredictable Edison

As I rummage around the annals of history, my mind will occasionally collect a few odd tidbits of trivia that might suddenly alter my perspective on someone or something. This is an important lesson for any historian to learn. What may seem to be only an interesting factoid alone, may really be a piece of a puzzle describing some weird and wonderful pattern hidden just under the surface. A historian must have the ability to notice these patterns amongst all the clutter of the historical record. I recently had a moment like this when a few details about the life of Thomas Edison stood out from the rest of my research.

Most historians agree that Edison had one of the most brilliant minds of the last 200 years. He had a naturally prolific gift for invention and tenacious work ethic that kept him at the forefront of science for decades. Yet when looking at the man's life putting his missteps besides his successes, I can't help but notice some intriguing contradictions in his work and his personality.

• Edison became known for his constant tinkering, working to improve on his inventions even after he patented and released them. He famously tested thousands of possible filaments for his light bulb until finding one that satisfied him. Of course if Edison wanted to sell everyone light bulbs, he first had to build an electrical grid to power them. Edison crafted a system around direct current. When Edison's rival in the power business George Westinghouse put up his own electrical system run on the superior alternating current, Edison obstinately stuck to his original system. Rather than adapting to the new technology, Edison tried to put his competitor out of business. Granted Edison made some pretty inspired attempts to ruin Westinghouse's reputation. He publicized and marketed an electric chair that utilized alternating current, declaring that anyone exposed to AC would suffer instantaneous death.
  

• Because Edison worried that the telephone was too expensive for the average person to buy, he wanted to create a way that everyone could use the service affordably. He proposed a network of telephone stations where people could go to drop off and pick up messages, sort of like telegrams. Of course to take advantage of the telephone's main feature -the ability to hear a live human voice from a great distance- Edison tried inventing a "telephone repeater". His device would allow people to record the sound of their voice and then play it back later. He also called it a phonograph. Since no one else was trying to create a "telephone repeater", Edison had the only patent on a sound recording device. He had incredible foresight and a unique creation, but he apparently never gave the idea of recording and distributing music a moment's thought. Edison had a reputation as a shrewd business man, yet it took years before he believed that the phonograph had a commercial future. Of course he was mostly deaf, so maybe he just didn't have any musical appreciation.
  

• In a similar episode, Edison directed the creation of an early motion picture device. He released the kinetoscope which could capture and display brief movies, and from which most modern filmmaking technology descends. Yet he thought it would only appeal to small children, a toy that would provide visual accompaniment to his phonograph (by this time he had learned that people liked music). His assistant Laurie Dickson had to convince him that people would watch movies that told a story. Edison eventually conceded that people might like educational films, though he insisted that creating a film projection device would kill public interest in motion pictures. Once again, Edison had a genius for identifying gaps in existing technology and developing gadgets to fill those gaps, but no sense of what people would find most useful about his apparatuses.
  

• In a truly unexpected twist, Edison never earned a cent from his most frequently used invention. This creation he did intend for wide spread use and people used it in exactly the way he predicted, as well as in several other contexts. Almost no one who uses it daily in modern times has any idea Edison invented it. In fact if you asked most people where it came from, they probably wouldn't even think that at some point someone had invented it. It has become so common place its existence is take for granted. Edison invented the word "hello". He proposed it as the word people should use when answering the phone. The man we know of a s the inventor of the telephone, Alexander Graham Bell used "Ahoy-hoy" (a nautical expression I personally use when answering the phone). True there were other similar words to "hello", but they all had different meanings and never would have fit into the context in which Edison used "hello". Edison actually tried his hand at creating other words too. Reportedly it was Edison who first called for a word to describe death by electricity - a term he undoubtedly would have applied to alternating current. Edison's suggestions included "ampermort" and "dynamort". An assistant would land a little closer to the mark with "electrocide".

When you survey all those strange stories of Thomas Edison's life, you cannot resist the urge to label him a strange person. Certainly, his mind worked in a unique and wonderful fashion. His thinking process and occasionally odd behavior have led some to theorize that he had some kind of mental disability or disorder. I don't think any of Edison's oddities amount to a mental defect. In fact I think Edison nicely demonstrates that no individual can truly be all things. Edison may have had one of the most inventive minds humanity has ever seen. Despite that he lacked the imagination to fully realize the potential of some of his inventions or the insight to know what people wanted out of their technology. To put it simply, just because someone is a genius doesn't mean they're always going to be all that bright.

History with the Cap'n- Supreme Beginnings

For any American who complains about activist judges or courts that interpret the U.S. Constitution as a "living document", today marks a dark anniversary. On the other side of the coin, anyone who feels the judicial branch should have a prominent role in the checks and balances of the U.S. government, today give cause to celebrate. On February 24th, 1803 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the case of Marbury v. Madison, the first Supreme Court case important enough to merit inclusion in a high school textbook. With this opinion, the high court actually proved they had a role to play in the national government by using their power to screw around with another branch of government and create a complicated mess. And they haven't stopped since.

For a summary of the actual legal case you can follow this link. Though for our purposes you don't need to know much more than you read in your high school text book. The case involved a complaint by civil servant, Marbury, against the U.S. Secretary of State James Madison, for not granting Marbury the commission previous president John Adams had promised him. He went to the Supreme Court -which up to this point hadn't really done much worth talking about- because Congress had passed a law giving the Supreme Court the power to issue a special kind of court orders. The Supreme Court ruled that Marbury had a right to the commission, but the Supreme Court would not be issuing the order forcing Madison's hands. At which point I imagine Marbury said "Ummmm . . . Thanks?". Chief Justice, John Marshall made clear it was not simply to uphold the Court's tradition of being useless, but because the law that Congress passed establishing the special court orders was illegitimate. The Court's opinion states that under the rules of the U.S. Constitution Congress does not have the authority to create special powers for the Supreme Court. This was an amazing bit of legal maneuvering, especially when you consider that no one had ever declared a law unconstitutional before. Faced with a court case that demanded the Supreme Court act as a referee for an intra-governmental squabble, Marshall found a way to elevate the Court to the level of the other branches. Rather than let Court become caught up in political bickering, Marshall used this case to declare that the Supreme Court was above messing with this sort of nonsense, that the ultimate standard for what was right and legal was the Constitution, and that the Court was the only body empowered with say whether or not something met the Constitutional standard. If you are a legal scholar, this case represents the kind of legal judo move that you dream about.

Everyone can find a very entertaining collection of backstories connected to this case, especially for the man in the middle of it all Chief Justice John Marshall.

• A lot of strange twists to this story arise from the fact that during the early years of the United States the federal government was composed of a pretty small collection of people. For instance, when John Marshall joined the Supreme Court, all the Justices lived in the same house by themselves (none of them brought their wives). Apparently they didn't have much to do except discuss the cases and drink heavily. I think this sounds like the basis for a great reality TV series.

• In one of those touches so ironic it has to be true, John Marshall likely had only himself to blame for creating this mess. Before he was Chief Justice John Marshall he was Secretary of State John Marshall. That means when John Adams ordered for Marbury to receive the commission it was supposed to be John Marshall's responsibility to issue it. However, Marshall was busy at the time, and when he was appointed by Adams to become Chief Justice he passed along the responsibility for Marbury's commission to his successor. We can only guess if he would have done anything differently had he known what was coming.

• Marshall was the cousin of Thomas Jefferson, yet repeatedly found himself angering his blood relative. President Jefferson did not care for the Court's ruling in Marbury v. Madison. Not only was his administration chastised in the Court's opinion for mistreating Marbury, who got the commission because he was a supporter of Jefferson's longtime rival John Adams, but Jefferson was also opposed to the federal courts gaining any power. With this case the Supreme Court put itself in a position of power strong enough to directly challenge the actions of the president himself. Jefferson held such a grudge about this decision that he would try to appoint Supreme Court Justices loyal to him to undermine Marshall. Yet Marshall was such a persuasive legal debater that the other Justices kept backing Marshall's arguments in the Court's rulings. Apparently the relationship between these cousins got so bad that Jefferson later declared he would never agree with any position Marshall took, even if he was just saying it was daytime.

• It had been widely believed that the last time the Liberty Bell rang before it irreparably cracked was to mark the death of John Marshall, after he had become the longest serving Chief Justice in the history of the Supreme Court. However current historical scholarship suggests that it rang at least a few more times before it was cracked sounding a celebratory chime in honor of George Washington's birthday.

History with the Cap'n- Thinkin' bout Lincoln

While I run a blog under the name Cap'n History, I haven't actually written much about historical topics or the study of history itself. Well that changes starting with this post.

This year in the United States, many historians, professional and amateur alike, have taken up the legacy of Abraham Lincoln. The topic has risen in the public conscience mostly because 2009 marks the Lincoln Bicentennial, and many have caught Honest Abe Fever (which sounds like a mild, but persistently annoying disease). I also attribute some of this phenomenon to the recent election of the second president from Illinois, and all the legacies that represents. Since we are still in the month of Lincoln's birth, I thought some genuflection on my part to our tallest president might be in order.

Recently, I have become fascinated with one of Lincoln's central justifications for engaging in the U.S. Civil War. He spoke and wrote often an passionately about the absolute necessity of preserving "The Union". He held that the Union did not exist merely as a corporate entity composed of sovereign states. He argued instead that the concept of the Union stood beyond questions of politics, border, or sovereignty as an eternal ideal. Further he regarded an attempt at secession as a direct affront to the Union ideal, as grave a sin as any American could perpetrate. It seems he believed in the Union so fiercely that he would use the pursuit of its preservation as a justification for any number of transgressions. Clearly he felt the Union's continuation warranted the largest war the United States had yet seen and a staggering amount of bloodshed. He even went so far as to claim that he would not care if none of the slaves went free so long as the Union prevailed. Yet it remains a little unclear exactly what Lincoln meant when he spoke of "The Union".

Lincoln must have had very powerful vision in his own mind of what "The Union" was when he thought of it. Yet he had a hard time communicating exactly what he envisioned to others. Famed historical essayist and author of a novel about Lincoln, Gore Vidal described Lincoln's thinking as "mystical", suggesting an ephemeral or esoteric element to Lincoln's thinking. From this point of view Lincoln could never properly explain his position because his thoughts lacked a substantive core that others could grasp. We even have a hard time tracing what inspired Lincoln's concept of the Union. Many American conservatives point out that Lincoln apparently ignored the principles of the founders in arguing for a Union that existed independent of the states' consent. Some have even accused him of taking a revolutionary position -such as in the comments seen here- and replacing the union describes by the Constitution with his own ideal of the Union. So that leaves modern historians trying to comprehend an ideal without origin and without accurate description. Lincoln's Union remains the unique product of a unique mind.

Though there is a hole in the historical record, I feel we have just enough hints from Lincoln's own words to try to estimate some of Lincoln's thoughts. In his First Inaugural Address he claimed that the founders had designed the Union to exist perpetually regardless of the shifting relation between states. He held that since all states had entered into the Union together by ratifying the Constitution no one state, nor any group of states could leave it unilaterally. Taken along with later statements this attitude places the Union on the level of a sacred bond or covenant, a promise made to and overseen by a higher authority. In his famous Gettysburg Address, Lincoln would push the beginnings of the Union back beyond the Constitution, dating the origin of the Union to 1776 with the Declaration of Independence. To some degree he paints the Union as an ideal that will exist until the end of time and had existed since the beginning of time just waiting for the United States to arise and claim it. Also he connects the ideals of the nation to the concept of the Union itself. Lincoln was the first prominent U.S. politician to hold the concept of the Union as equivalent to a core American value.

I believe Lincoln, possessed of a unique minds and a unique perspective, sensed just how unique a nation the Unites State actually is. He knew that other nations had a clear reason for existing. The citizens shared a common ethnicity, or culture, or were all subjects of the same throne, or simply had occupied a particular piece of territory for as long as anyone could tell. The U.S. had none of those things. We were the only nation that tried to frame its sovereignty and right to existence on a thesis of political philosophy. Lincoln knew this. He realized that all of the authority the nation had to claim territory, pass laws, and even wage wars derived not from divine right, but from the social contract all citizens agreed to -if only implicitly- to belong to the Union. Once citizens abandoned the Union, the power of the Union diminished. Essentially if any state successfully seceded from the Union, the entire Union's authority and right to exist would be permanently undermined. My impression would be that Lincoln held "The Union" as sort of a Platonic ideal for the nation. It was both the primordial source of its power and the standard by which it was judged. For Lincoln the Union apparently stood for everything the nation had been and would be, and if any part of it were lost then the United States as the world knew it would never truly exist again. That could have been what drove Lincoln to do the unthinkable, to war against his fellow Americans. He had to uphold a sacred bond he had entered into -if only implicitly- to preserve the nation and its values for all of his fellow citizens and all of those who would come after.

Rolling out the Red Carpet- Completing your Oscar Ballot

Let anyone who reads this blog know, The Cap'n is nothing if not helpful. I want those silly few who read this blog to gave the chance to reap some kind of benefit from it. Since, Oscar-watching is one of the few topic I can routinely focus on and have any form of expertise in I thought I should provide you with the best prediction advise about the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences I could muster to help you win your Oscar pools. Earlier this month, The Cap'n gave you a complete breakdown of the major categories with detailed explanations about who was favored and who could pull an upset in each one. In this entry I will provide you with information to help you predict the rest of the categories.

Often called the minor categories or the technical awards these prizes go to the people who actually do the bulk of the movie making. The nominees in these categories may not be as visible or tabloid-worthy as the actors. They may not be as identifiable and self-aggrandizing as the writers and directors. If they do their jobs well we never even think about them, but when the screw up the film is irreparably damaged. (Personally I felt Get Smart was ruined by awful lighting. And I seriously mean that.) So I feel that they deserved at least a fraction of the attention of the major categories.

If you want to use these predictions to help fill out your ballot at this Sunday's Oscar party, I suggest you go with the favorites (taken from the consensus of expert opinions available here) unless you have a special reason why you might suspect an upset. Since my previous entry on the Academy Awards took about 8,000 words, and we have about twice as many categories to get through in this round, I will try to address these categories in a more rapid fire manner. So get your pen and paper ready, because here we go . . .

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE
Current Favorite: Andrew Stanton for WALL-E- This is one of the easier picks, as WALL-E is the only nominee to receive support in other categories as well a sure sign that lots of voting members of the Academy loved this movie.

Tremendous Upset Potential: John Stevenson and Mark Osborne for Kung Fu Panda- There is almost no chance that WALL-E doesn't win this award, but if for some crazy reason the voters choose to pick another nominee they will likely pick the more financially successful Panda over Bolt.

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FEATURE FILM
Current Favorite: Ari Folman (Israel) for Waltz with Bashir- This animated feature focusing on some of the attrocities of the Lebanese Civil War and Israel's precarious relations with its neighbors stands out as one of the most original pictures of the year. Critics love it and it has garnered many notable awards already.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Laurent Cantet (France) for The Class- If you fear that the animated movie that's also a pseudo-documentary about violence in the Middle East might be a little too esoteric for the voters, then you might want to consider The Class as an alternative pick. The French film is full of things the Academy traditionally loves, such as social commentary, powerful acting, and actual human people in live action. The Academy can be a conservative group at times, so it might be prudent to select the more traditional option in your prediction pool.

BEST ART DIRECTION
Current Favorite: Donald Graham Burt and Victor J. Zolfo for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- Movies like Benjamin Button tend to have a heavy advantage in the "technical awards", because they cover such a wide scope of material. Films like this give the filmmakers a chance to show off how well they can create a variety of time periods and settings on the screen. The story of Button spans several decades, multiple nations, and visits such visually captivating cities as New Orleans and Paris. The voters eat up that sort of stuff with a spork.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Nathan Crowley and Peter Lando for The Dark Knight- Sometimes AMPAS likes to reward films that create their own world like Sleepy Hollow, Moulin Rouge, or Pan's Labyrinth. Even if the members aren't in love with super-hero movies in the major award the do like their visual splendor enough to give them the occasional craft award. Almost everyone has praised Dark Knight for the originality and grandeur of its vision. A lot of that grandeur comes from the successful forging of Gotham City into a believable and realistic metropolis (no not the Metropolis where Superman lives). Also Mr. Crowley has previously been nominated while folks from the Button team are Oscar newbies, sometimes having a pre-existing group of supporters can help tilt the voters away from a frontrunner.

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
Current Favorite: Anthony Dod Mantle for Slumdog Millionaire- The prize for the best director of photography usually goes to the DoP who draws the most attention to his work. In Slumdog you can't ignore the bright visuals or daring shot selection that gives that film its visual edge. Also this trophy often comes along with the winner of Best Picture or Best Director. Since, Slumdog is the favorite to win each of those major awards, you have to expect that the members respect the film enough to reward the person responsible for its distinctive look.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Wally Pfister for The Dark Knight- When it comes to creating eye-catching shots few this year could come close to the people who made Dark Knight. The film has numerous visual moments and sequences that had people buzzing ever since this summer. The Academy may see fit to acknowledge the person who made to fantastic images a reality. There is certainly a lot of love for The Dark Knight considering its numerous nominations, and this is one of the categories where the members might feel compelled to give it at least one trophy as a token of appreciation. Another advantage Pfister has over most of the other nominees is past nominations. The hive mind of AMPAS may decide that this is his year and leap frog him over first timer Mantle.

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
Current Favorite: Michael O'Connor for The Duchess- You can't do much more to appease the voters in this category than to put on a lavish period film and let your costumers dress up a star as widely ogled as Keira Knightley. As far as most members are concerned this award exists to reward people for putting beautiful actresses in elaborate outfits.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Jacqueline West for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- Working on a movie like Benjamin Button allows the costumer to create a wide variety of different looks. The actors have to be dressed to reflect changing fashions over the extensive course of the story. You can reflect styles befitting everything from scrappy sailors, to elegant ballerinas, to freaked out beatniks. The voters may feel so overwhelmed by the sheer quantity of costumes that went into making Button that they'll feel forced to hand its fashion crew the trophy.

BEST MAKEUP
Current Favorite: Greg Cannom for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- AMPAS has to reward the makeup department for this film. The whole reason Benjamin Button was made was to try and pull off the audacious makeup feat of aging a person in reverse. On top of that Cannom also had to do makeup on the characters befitting changing fashions. On top of that he managed to transform Cate Blanchett into an old woman so convincingly, the star was practically unrecognizable under all that goop. Most importantly of all though Cannom is one of the most respected makeup men in the business and after multiple previous nominations and past wins in this category he has a lot of long standing support among the voters.

Tremendous Upset Potential: John Caglione, Jr. and Conor O'Sullivan for The Dark Knight- While the makeup done creating the character of Benjamin Button may have been the grandest makeup work this year, the re-imagining of classic characters like the Joker and Two-Face, principally though makeup, may have been the most iconic. Both of the makeup men for Dark Knight have their own history with the Academy, so that could give them a foothold against the tide for Cannom. Also, given the luke warm response Button has received from many, I could easily imagine the voters turning against it, especially in the category where it should have been the most impressive.

BEST FILM EDITING
Current Favorite: Chris Dickens for Slumdog Millionaire- I know it will sound really weird to say this, and only absolute cinema nuts like me will have an opinion on the topic, but I thought this was a really great year in film editing. I don't know how to properly convey my sincerity about that through a blog, other than to say that I would be happy if any of these films won. All of them did a wonderful job of pacing the film, blending diverging elements, and keeping the shots coming at you in a engaging but organized manner. Dickens has to be considered the favorite since he's riding on the Slumdog coattails. Sometimes predicting the craft categories only requires you to find the film that has drawn lots of AMPAS love and bet on a sweep.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- A corollary to betting on a sweep kicks in when you watch for an upset. When one film seems destined to win a ton of awards like Slumdog has been, but another film has gobbled up more nominations like Benjamin Button did you can usually expect the top-nom getter to break the grip of the awards darling in at least a few places. Given the way Button's editing kept an epic story moving along briskly -while containing several weird elements, like the backwards moving sequence, and the alternate time lines in Paris- I say it has the best chance of taking home the trophy of any of the other nominees in this category.

BEST SCORE
Current Favorite: A.R. Rahman for Slumdog Millionaire- If you want an easy way to tell which score will attract the voters, find the score that has the most unique sound. The Academy can't always distinguish between two scores that have well-done but traditional music. If a score has some kind of exotic musical flavors mixed in or uses an unusual set of instruments, then you know that will catch the ears of the members. They'll adore the combination of traditional Indian music and modern dance/hip-hop styles Rahman uses in the score. That's the sort of thing the Academy can label as bold or innovative and the feel proud of themselves for giving it an award.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Thomas Newman for WALL-E- Only one film has had as much success giving members of the Academy the warm and fuzzies as Slumdog, WALL-E. Newman may get the hat tip here for having to carry a lot of the emotional wait of the film that has very little proper dialogue in it. Also, Newman has had numerous nominations in the past, yet still hasn't taken home a trophy. If the voters feel Slumdog will receive enough love from other quarters, watch out for them to reward Newman because he's due.

BEST SONG
Current Favorite: "Jai Ho" by A.R. Rahman and Gulzar from Slumdog Millionaire- With two of the three nominees for Best Original Song this year, the songwriters from Slumdog seem to have the odds heavily in their favor to win. The fimmakers have decided to put all their backing behind just one song likely giving it a the support of fans of both songs. Indeed it seems as though most pundits expect the final musical number from Slumdog to win. (What you didn't know it closed on a big musical number? Don't you know anything about India cinema.)

Tremendous Upset Potential: "Down to Earth"byPeter Gabriel and Thomas Newman from WALL-E- In this category I really feel very strongly that the common wisdom has it wrong. The Academy may be the elites of Hollywood, but that doesn't mean their immune from brown-nosing celebrities from outside of the industry. This sycophantic side of AMPAS usually arises in the voters giving the songwriting award to the biggest music star that snags nomination. For Pete's sake Eminem has an Oscar because of this. Also the Academy has shown a strong tendency to associate the Best Original Song prize with animated films. Disney has a whole bunch of them for just this reason. If you think Slumdog is in for anything less than a total sweep of all the categories in which it has nominees, than you should definitely pick this as the one category where it will lose. The members all probably love Peter Gabriel and own lots of his albums. Because my guiding principle is that the members give trophies to the people they wish they could hang out with, I seriously believe Gabriel has good odds to win this award.

BEST SOUND EDITING
Current Favorite: Richard King for The Dark Knight- In recent years the sound awards have basically become consolation prizes for the summer blockbuster movies that are technically accomplished. Clearly Dark Knight best matches that criteria among these nominees. It was a film with a lot of big visuals and a big time audio experience to match.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Ben Burtt and Matthew Wood for WALL-E- The sound wizards behind WALL-E also worked on box office success, and they had to make a lot of characterization happen through only the sound effects. This actually might be a close call.

BEST SOUND MIXING
Current Favorite: Lora Hirschberg, Gary Rizzo and Ed Novick for The Dark Knight- Y'know what I don't know why these are seperate categories. Just copy everything I said above down here.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Tom Myers, Michael Semanick and Ben Burtt for WALL-E- And dittos again (jeez, I sound like a Limbaugh listener).

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
Current Favorite: Eric Barba, Steve Preeg, Burt Dalton and Craig Barron for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- With a film like Button, where the film primarily exists to accomplish a certain task the voters can have a hard time separating which elements of the film to credit for the central gimmick. In the case of Button, the praise ranged from the director, to the makeup, to Brad Pitt as an actor, and to the visual effects team. For as much as the makeup carried the scenes where Benjamin was played by Pitt, the visual effects carried the earlier scenes where child actors where made to look decrepit and Pitt's face was superimposed onto Benjamin's shriveled body. Just as the Academy would have to give Button an award for makeup if nothing else, they may feel compelled to reward the FX if only because they have almost as large a role in the picture. To whatever degree the film overall worked you have to acknowledge that the visual effects played a crucial role.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Nick Davis, Chris Corbould, Tim Webber and Paul Franklin for The Dark Knight- The visual effects category has traditionally served as only Oscar big action movies could hope to win. With two superhero movie vying to upend Button, bet on the voters leaning toward the film with the more sweeping vision and bigger box office. When the Academy deems fit to honor films made primarily for commercial reasons, they want the trophy to go for a film that did really well commercially. Also the wide-spread support Dark Knight has received for its visual wonders may find an outlet in this category where the voters won't feel as obliged to honor the more artistic craftsmen of other films.

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
Current Favorite: James Marsh and Simon Chinn for Man on Wire- One of the sad secrets of AMPAS always comes to the surface when they hand out the documentary awards. Truthfully, Academy members watch documentaries about as often as the average movie goer, which is to say hardly ever. You can usually pick the leader in the feature length documentary feature by think of the only documentary you've heard of this year. Man on Wire has had all the buzz. Critics gobbled it up. The filmmakers even got their subject, a famous high wire artist, out on the TV chat show circuit. Count on most of the voters just checking the box next to the one title they know

Tremendous Upset Potential: Werner Herzog and Henry Kaiser for Encounters at the End of the World- The only other documentary to receive much mainstream attention stand the best chance of pulling the upset. The film has gets neat concept and a lot of stunning visuals out of taking cameras to the Antarctic and recorded the diversity of life human and otherwise that survives in the extreme condition way down south. Also Herzog has long stood as one of the most respected and daring filmmakers around the world for decades, yet this is his first Oscar nomination. The voters may take this chance to recruit him into their elite circle, so they can brag about how they always honor the great filmmakers in some way.

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT
Current Favorite: Adam Pertofsky and Margaret Hyde for The Witness- From the Balcony of Room 306- Now we've delved into the territory where even the Cap'n and the pundits don't have a clear opinion on the categories. Since almost no one who doesn't get the Academy's special screening DVD's ever sees the nominated short films, we have only a vague sense of what might strike a chord with the voters. Members of the Academy like rewarding documentaries that address very serious social issues. With a focus on the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., this film may strike what few members actually cast a vote in this category as the kind of meaningful film approriate for the Year of Obama.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Steven Okazaki for The Conscience of Nhem En- While the history of racial politics in the United States certainly carries a lot of wait with the voters, they also tend to find themselves drawn to films about genocide (see also all of the nominations for The Reader). The story of a servant of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia sounds like the kind of tale that could really grab the members attention. Also the filmmaker has a history of earning Oscar nominations and wins, so he may have an advantage in playing to the Academy's preferences.

BEST SHORT FILM (ANIMATED)
Current Favorite: Doug Sweetland for Presto- Pixar has traditionally placed an animated short before each of their big time animated features. Since the features usually turn into big hits, that typically means most people only ever see their animated shorts -let alone admire another enough to grant it a prestigious award. So the Pixar short this year, Presto, automatically finds itself the heavy favorite.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Emud Mokhberi and Thierry Marchand for Oktapodi- The other animated shorts all seem to have some notable merit that would suggest an ability to sneak into a win. However Oktapodi stands alone as short for which I have heard a little positive buzz. While that may not give it enough ammunition to take on the Pixar powerhouse, it may give it the opening it needs to rise as the rebelious choice, if any anti-Pixar backlash forms among the voters.

BEST SHORT FILM (LIVE ACTION)
Current Favorite: Jochen Alexander Freydank for Spielzeugland (Toyland)- The short films from foreign countries usually seem to have a high success rate. I think that's mostly because they still treat short films seriously in other countries. Plus Toyland deals with the Holocaust. When in doubt count on the Academy to pick the film with most serious topic.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Steph Green and Tamara Anghie for The New Boy- If the voters want a film with a serious topic but feel a little worn out with the Holocaust as a topic, they may select New Boy. It deals with racial tensions in the microcosm of a classroom. With racial politics playing such a huge role in the U.S. over the last year-plus, the members may find this film especially timely and poignant.

Well that should cover all the categories (Wait, did I talk about art direction? Better go back and check . . .), again if you take all of the favorites in the categories for your prediction you should have a pretty good night. Best of luck to everyone in their Oscar pools. Let's all hope for an entertaining ceremony on Sunday. I always look forward to Oscar night so much that its almost like a holiday for me. Since I've written about 14 typed pages of material about it this year alone, you can tell I have some kind of strong feelings about it. I hope you enjoy it as much as I do.