This review of the musical Ragtime at the Cultural Arts Playhouse was written by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens and published in Volume X, Issue 4 (2014) of the online edition of Applause! Applause!
Ragtime
Cultural Arts Playhouse (625 Old Country Road, Plainview, NY)
Reviewed 3/23/14
Ragtime is a musical with a book by Terrence McNally, lyrics by Lynn Ahrens, and music by Stephen Flaherty. Based on the 1975 novel by E.L. Doctorow, it tells the story of three groups living in the early 20th century: African-Americans, represented by Coalhouse Walker Jr., a Harlem musician; upper-class white suburbanites living in New Rochelle, represented by Mother; and Eastern European immigrants, represented by Tateh, a Jewish immigrant from Latvia. Historical figures appearing in the musical include Harry Houdini, Evelyn Nesbit, Booker T. Washington, J.P. Morgan, Henry Ford, Admiral Perry and Emma Goldman. The music includes marches, cakewalks, gospel and ragtime.
The musical opened on Broadway on January 18, 1998 as the first production in the Ford Center for the Performing Arts. It closed on January 16, 2000 after 834 performances. It was nominated for 13 Tony Awards and won for Best Featured Actress, Original Score, Book and Orchestrations. A 2009 Broadway revival opened to critical acclaim at the Neil Simon Theatre on November 15, 2009 but due to high weekly running costs, it closed on January 10, 2010 after only 65 performances. Nevertheless, it received 7 Tony nominations, including Best Revival of a Musical, Best Direction, Best Actress in a Musical and Best Featured Actor in a Musical.
If you haven't seen Ragtime, I highly recommend you catch this production at the Cultural Arts Playhouse. It is exceptionally well-done with fine performances by talented actors. The message of justice and of changing times is universal and the story, set in the first fourteen years of the 20th century is as relevant today as it was then and for every generation in between. The longer you live, the longer you hear "strange new music" and wonder "when they changed the song." Insightful people also realize "you can never go back to before" nor would you want you. As Oliver Wendell Holmes once said, "Man's mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimensions."
Christopher M. Cooley brought substance and gravitas to the character of Harlem ragtime pianist Coalhouse Walker Jr., who risks everything to obtain the justice he feels he deserves as a man. Steffy Jolin puts in a fine performance as Sarah, his girlfriend and the father of his child, whose sad story results in an even more tragic ending. Carmela Newman plays Mother, an upper-class white woman from a traditional family who undergoes the most radical change in perspective as she decides, while her husband is away on a year-long trip, to take in an abandoned black baby, and later, that baby's mother. In a subtle but powerful performance, Ms. Newman seduces and invites you to join Mother on her journey of discovery and enlightenment. Mike Newman more than holds his own as Tateh, a Latvian Jew seeking the American Dream for his daughter. The unexpected "happy family" that forms in the end will surprise you but reflects the norms bound to have resulted out of the "mosaic" culture that is now our own.
Two additional cast members are worthy of note. Jill Wilson Cohen shines as Emma Goldman. I felt as if I had met Emma Goldman personally after seeing Ms. Cohen's portrayal of her. I was also impressed with Ashley Nicastro in the role of Evelyn Nesbit, the "girl on a swing" who became infamous when her husband shot her lover. There are many excellent, songs in this musical including "Goodbye, My Love", "Henry Ford", "New Music", "The Wheels Of A Dream", "The Night That Goldman Spoke At Union Square", "Till We Reach That Day", "What A Game", "Atlantic City", "He Wanted To Say", "Back To Before" and "Make Them Hear You".
Make an effort to see Ragtime at the Cultural Arts Playhouse. You will not be disappointed. While there, if you run into Harry Houdini, don't forget to tell him to WARN THE DUKE!
Sunday, March 23, 2014
Monday, February 17, 2014
Applause! Applause! Review of Her by Andrew P. Clunn
This review of the movie Her was written by Andrew
P. Clunn and published in Volume X, Issue 4 (2014) of the online edition of
Applause! Applause!
Her
Directed & Written by Spike Jonze
Reviewed 2/17/14
Directed & Written by Spike Jonze
Reviewed 2/17/14
It’s hard to say whether Her (directed and written by Spike Jonze) is a romantic comedy, morality play, or science fiction story. While it deals with the complexities of relationships and marriage of today, it does so safely through an imagined future. It speaks to today’s court battles over same sex marriage seeking to legally define love and relationships, but with a premise of the isolated but deeply thoughtful Theodore (Joaquin Phoenix) falling in love with his Artificial Intelligence Operating System Samantha (Scarlett Johansson).
I think anybody who falls in love is a freak. It's a crazy thing to do. It's kind of like a form of socially acceptable insanity. - Amy
For the main character of Theodore, the only real forays into the notion of marriage are a blind date, where a woman presses him for a commitment in a passive aggressive manner that is all too realistic. The other is his clinging to his own failed marriage by constantly delaying signing his divorce papers (much to his ex’s frustration). To him the marriage document is a symbol of their relationship and love, and if he lets it go then he lets her go. Theodore is only able to do so after his relationship with Samantha comes to fill the gap, and though his ex-wife Catherine (Rooney Mara) seems willing to forgive him for delaying their divorce so long, she lashes out at him when she learns that he’s replaced her with a computer program. It’s from this encounter that Theodore comes to question and doubt his relationship and becomes fearful of how others might judge him.
At one point Theodore and his friend Amy (Amy Adams) are discussing their lives since their marriages fell apart (Amy’s somewhat more recently). Both withhold that they’ve found companionship (in Amy’s case platonic friendship) with their OS. Both fear the judgment of their friend, but when they reveal themselves, Amy laments that it took her so long to end her stifling marriage. Fear of others’ judgment, fear of feeling like a failure, had kept her from ending it for so long. When they both come clean about their present relationships, the acceptance and genuine pleasure at each other’s happiness is palpable.
The recently divorced Amy is a video game programmer. In the game she’s working on the player who takes on the role of a traditional mother. The player scores points by doting on her kids, making baked goods for school events, and picking up her children from school on time. The clear contrast within the world of Her between how people actually live their lives and the way that “normal” people are portrayed is one of the many ways in which it feels so real. Of course Amy puts in a hidden glitch where the super mother avatar begins humping the refrigerator, and how Her manages to be both so crude and touching is perhaps its strongest point.
Dear Catherine, I've been sitting here thinking about all the things I wanted to apologize to you for. All the pain we caused each other. Everything I put on you. Everything I needed you to be or needed you to say. I'm sorry for that. I'll always love you 'cause we grew up together and you helped make me who I am. I just wanted you to know there will be a piece of you in me always, and I'm grateful for that. Whatever someone you become, and wherever you are in the world, I'm sending you love. You're my friend to the end. Love, Theodore. - Theodore
While the film’s story is science fiction, the realism makes that a forgettable afterthought. At one point Theodore and Samantha go on a couple’s picnic with a co-worker and his girlfriend. The fact that she isn’t human is incidental, serving as little more than dinner conversation. When a little girl asks why Theodore’s girlfriend is in a computer, Samantha responds, “Because that’s where I live.” No further explanation is needed. The notion that people and relationships come in all forms seems so natural, and the acceptance that how others define love has no bearing on how we define it is made to appear so obvious and intuitive that, by contrast, it’s our dogmatic judgmental society that seems out of place.
Traditional relationships exist in Her, as well as imagined possibilities of relationships that do not yet exist. The new form of relationships don’t mean that the old form go away, and each is left to thrive, fail, or change according to the desires of the participants. It’s so elegant an idea that people should be in relationships with whoever they want to be because they want to be. And best of all, it makes for one hell of a romantic comedy.
You know what, I can over think everything and find a million ways to doubt myself. And since Charles left I've been really thinking about that part of myself and, I've just come to realize that, we're only here briefly. And while I'm here, I wanna allow myself joy. So fuck it. - Amy
Applause! Applause! Review of The Electric Indian at The Invisible Dog Art Center by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens
This review of The Electric Indian at The Invisible Dog Art Center was written by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens and published in Volume X, Issue 4 (2014) of the online edition of Applause! Applause!
The Electric Indian
The Invisible Dog Art Center (51 Bergen Street, Brooklyn, NY)
Reviewed 2/16/14
Conceived & directed by JJ Lind, The Electric Indian successfully combines storytelling, ritual, dance and song with 19th century historical texts, 20th century popular media and 21st century technologies to tell the story of the American Indian (and specifically the Cherokee nation) using the life of Elias Cornelius Boudinot, a controversial Cherokee who served as a Confederate Army colonel during the Civil War, as the linchpin. Also appearing in the production were four other characters, the Sculptress, the Missionary, the Surveyor and the Entertainer, who each represent different aspects of White Society during the 19th century. A main source for the script was The Manners, Customs, Traditions and Present Condition of the Civilized Indians of the Indian Territory, an informational lecture for white audiences by Col. Elias C. Boudinot. The Electric Indian was the name of a studio band created in the 1960s that sought to capitalize on the "native sound" used at the time. The title is a metaphor for the American (and capitalist) impulse to fetishize and commoditize an idealized image of native people. The director, JJ Lind, who identifies as a Cherokee, comes from Vinita, Oklahoma, a town founded and named by Elias Cornelius Boudinot.
I felt the play fairly and objectively depicted the plight of the American Indian during the 19th century as well-intentioned European-Americans and American Indians sought to find policies that would be in the best long-term interests of the Native Nations in an atmosphere where a number of other Whites sought to take every advantage, legal or illegal, of any Indian or Tribe standing in their way.
Elias Cornelius Boudinot was born on August 1, 1835, the son of Elias Boudinot, a Cherokee National leader who was editor of the Cherokee Phoenix, the first Native American newspaper. His mother, Harriet Ruggies Gold, a woman of English decent from Cornwall, Connecticut, died in 1836, several months after her seventh child was stillborn. His father and some other relatives were assassinated in 1839 as retaliation for signing the Treaty of New Echota, ceding the remainder of Cherokee lands in the Southeast in exchange for removal to Indian Territory west of the Mississippi River. For their safety, Boudinot and his siblings were sent back to Connecticut to their mother's family. The Golds ensured the children received good educations. Boudinot studied engineering, became an attorney, and co-founded The Arkansan, a pro-slavery newspaper that favored railroad construction into Indian Territory. In 1860, he was chosen as the chairman of the Arkansas Democratic State Central Committee and in 1861, he served as Secretary of the Secession Convention as the territory determined whether it would leave the Union. In 1863, Boudinot was elected a delegate to the Congress of the Confederate States of America, representing the majority faction of Cherokee who supported the Confederacy. During the Civil War, he served as a Colonel in the Confederate Army and after the war, he was chairman of the Cherokee Delegation to the Southern Treaty Commission, which negotiated treaties with the United States.
The Electric Indian depicts Boudinot struggling to do what is best for his people. Will civilizing the "savage beast" prevent their extinction? Will learning English and becoming American citizens help? Will embracing development and supporting integration through the presence of railroads make a difference? Will abandonment of communal lands and the granting of parcels to individual households of tribal members teach them to be industrious and responsible? Will making Oklahoma a state dominated by Native American politicians help preserve the future of the Native Nations in this country? All of these efforts were supported in one way or another by Boudinot but the results were disappointing to say the least. Was the outcome for the American Indian predictable from the beginning as The Missionary character in the play observes? Was the death of their culture inevitable? Was the American Indian destined to become as the play suggests - a modern day unicorn - magical, mystical and rarely seen? Perhaps.
The Electric Indian tells an important story in an unusual and entertaining manner. It was produced by Immediate Medium and the performers included James Allerdyce, Max Dana, Brady Jenkins, Julie Stainer-Loehr and Siobhan Gandy. The ensemble cast worked well together and pulled off an unconventional piece of theater that educated its audience while taking them on a wild ride. I was particularly impressed with the stage presence and performance of James Allerdyce, who played the Surveyor, and by the charismatic and talented Brady Jenkins, who was the Entertainer. After Boudinot is transformed on stage into a modern day Unicorn, the final scene of the play is a patriotic red, white and blue light display symbolizing the ultimate triumph of the White Man over the Red Man in America - just a matter of fact by this point in the story. I very much enjoyed the production and if the run is extended, I urge you to see this interesting and creative presentation of a slice of our country's history.
The Electric Indian
The Invisible Dog Art Center (51 Bergen Street, Brooklyn, NY)
Reviewed 2/16/14
Conceived & directed by JJ Lind, The Electric Indian successfully combines storytelling, ritual, dance and song with 19th century historical texts, 20th century popular media and 21st century technologies to tell the story of the American Indian (and specifically the Cherokee nation) using the life of Elias Cornelius Boudinot, a controversial Cherokee who served as a Confederate Army colonel during the Civil War, as the linchpin. Also appearing in the production were four other characters, the Sculptress, the Missionary, the Surveyor and the Entertainer, who each represent different aspects of White Society during the 19th century. A main source for the script was The Manners, Customs, Traditions and Present Condition of the Civilized Indians of the Indian Territory, an informational lecture for white audiences by Col. Elias C. Boudinot. The Electric Indian was the name of a studio band created in the 1960s that sought to capitalize on the "native sound" used at the time. The title is a metaphor for the American (and capitalist) impulse to fetishize and commoditize an idealized image of native people. The director, JJ Lind, who identifies as a Cherokee, comes from Vinita, Oklahoma, a town founded and named by Elias Cornelius Boudinot.
I felt the play fairly and objectively depicted the plight of the American Indian during the 19th century as well-intentioned European-Americans and American Indians sought to find policies that would be in the best long-term interests of the Native Nations in an atmosphere where a number of other Whites sought to take every advantage, legal or illegal, of any Indian or Tribe standing in their way.
Elias Cornelius Boudinot was born on August 1, 1835, the son of Elias Boudinot, a Cherokee National leader who was editor of the Cherokee Phoenix, the first Native American newspaper. His mother, Harriet Ruggies Gold, a woman of English decent from Cornwall, Connecticut, died in 1836, several months after her seventh child was stillborn. His father and some other relatives were assassinated in 1839 as retaliation for signing the Treaty of New Echota, ceding the remainder of Cherokee lands in the Southeast in exchange for removal to Indian Territory west of the Mississippi River. For their safety, Boudinot and his siblings were sent back to Connecticut to their mother's family. The Golds ensured the children received good educations. Boudinot studied engineering, became an attorney, and co-founded The Arkansan, a pro-slavery newspaper that favored railroad construction into Indian Territory. In 1860, he was chosen as the chairman of the Arkansas Democratic State Central Committee and in 1861, he served as Secretary of the Secession Convention as the territory determined whether it would leave the Union. In 1863, Boudinot was elected a delegate to the Congress of the Confederate States of America, representing the majority faction of Cherokee who supported the Confederacy. During the Civil War, he served as a Colonel in the Confederate Army and after the war, he was chairman of the Cherokee Delegation to the Southern Treaty Commission, which negotiated treaties with the United States.
The Electric Indian depicts Boudinot struggling to do what is best for his people. Will civilizing the "savage beast" prevent their extinction? Will learning English and becoming American citizens help? Will embracing development and supporting integration through the presence of railroads make a difference? Will abandonment of communal lands and the granting of parcels to individual households of tribal members teach them to be industrious and responsible? Will making Oklahoma a state dominated by Native American politicians help preserve the future of the Native Nations in this country? All of these efforts were supported in one way or another by Boudinot but the results were disappointing to say the least. Was the outcome for the American Indian predictable from the beginning as The Missionary character in the play observes? Was the death of their culture inevitable? Was the American Indian destined to become as the play suggests - a modern day unicorn - magical, mystical and rarely seen? Perhaps.
The Electric Indian tells an important story in an unusual and entertaining manner. It was produced by Immediate Medium and the performers included James Allerdyce, Max Dana, Brady Jenkins, Julie Stainer-Loehr and Siobhan Gandy. The ensemble cast worked well together and pulled off an unconventional piece of theater that educated its audience while taking them on a wild ride. I was particularly impressed with the stage presence and performance of James Allerdyce, who played the Surveyor, and by the charismatic and talented Brady Jenkins, who was the Entertainer. After Boudinot is transformed on stage into a modern day Unicorn, the final scene of the play is a patriotic red, white and blue light display symbolizing the ultimate triumph of the White Man over the Red Man in America - just a matter of fact by this point in the story. I very much enjoyed the production and if the run is extended, I urge you to see this interesting and creative presentation of a slice of our country's history.
Friday, February 7, 2014
Philip Seymour Hoffman's Death Should Not Be Used To Fuel The Failed Drug War, Say Libertarians
Andrew P. Clunn, Chair
of the Saratoga-Capital District Libertarians, a chartered chapter of Empire
State Libertarians, says “the tragic death of Oscar-winning actor Philip
Seymour Hoffman, allegedly as a result of a heroin overdose, should not be exploited
by local law enforcement officials to perpetuate and expand the failed war on
drugs. In the wake of sympathetic news coverage of Hoffman’s substance abuse
issues, New York Police Department investigators have aggressively and
vindictively arrested several parties possibly connected to Hoffman on drug
possession charges. Others have suggested that those who sold illegal drugs to
Hoffman should even be held criminally responsible for his death, the way some bars are
now being held liable if a patron leaves an establishment drunk and then gets
into a car accident. A drug seller should not be responsible for the consequences of
a user’s use or abuse, unless what he or she sold was substandard or
adulterated in some way. No one is to blame for Hoffman’s death other than
himself. I
find it abhorrent that Hoffman’s passing and personal tragedy is being used by
some media outlets, politicians and law enforcement officials as supposed
evidence for staying the course with the increasingly unpopular war on drugs. The
emphasis should be on expanding the number of opportunities available for those
seeking rehabilitation, not on increasing prosecution rates and creating
convicted felons out of those who sell or use drugs.”
“The old authoritarian
formula of ‘more bans, more arrests’ for dealing with the drug problem clearly
hasn't worked,” says New York State Libertarian Party Political Director John
Clifton, a former County Chair of the Libertarian Party of Queens County and a former three-term State Chair of the New York Libertarian Party. “Putting more people in a cage is not the answer. Mr. Hoffman was
clearly a very productive person, yet had he been caught with drugs in his
possession, he without doubt would have been prosecuted, sent to prison, and
labeled a felon. Some people can handle drug use and never get addicted,
stopping on their own when it suits them. Others get addicted and seek help and
a small minority of drug users, unfortunately, die. But one thing is true of
all drug users. They voluntarily chose to engage in that personal
behavior and in ours, the most informed society of all time, there should be no
laws controlling what people choose to ingest at their own risk or benefit.”
Empire State
Libertarians was founded on July 4, 2010 by Thomas Robert Stevens (current
Chair of the Libertarian Party of Queens County) to encourage New York State
residents who share libertarian ideals and principles to become politically
active and to seek out avenues to promote a pro-liberty agenda; to endorse
candidates seeking elective office who support smaller government, lower taxes
and more individual freedom; to encourage patriotism, respect for our Founding
Fathers, and a deep appreciation for the United States Constitution; and to
organize and charter chapters of Empire State Libertarians in order to promote
local activism.
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Queens Libertarians Call For The Legalization Of Mixed Martial Arts In New York State
On February 2, 2014, the Libertarian Party of Queens County voted unanimously to support the legalization of Mixed Martial Arts in New York State.
Natale Corsi, Liberty Outreach Coordinator for the Libertarian Party of Queens County, speaking in support of the position taken by the Queens Libertarians, commented as follows:
"Liberty is defined in the dictionary as the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views. The ban of professional Mixed Martial Arts in New York State is the exact example of taking away liberty from its citizens. New York State feels in its misguided belief that it knows what's best for the citizens of New York and must protect us. New York State is one of only two states in the United States of America that bans professional Mixed Martial Arts. I, as Liberty Outreach Coordinator for the LPQC, feel that this ban is a direct offense against our liberties as citizens and we must support New Yorkers who want to legalize Mixed Martial Arts. The right of two consenting adults to engage in a sport that is less dangerous than already legal sports like Boxing should not be infringed. I am not only a supporter. I am a practitioner of Mixed Martial Arts for 8+ years and have been involved in the fight to legalize Mixed Martial Arts in New York State. I have attended rallies, expos and seminars and participated in the first legally sanctioned Amateur Mixed Martial Arts bout in New York State as a coach. I specifically want to thank Dr. Tom Stevens, the newly elected LPQC Chair, for championing this worthy cause and placing it near the top of his political agenda.
Mixed Martial Arts is the fastest growing sport in the United States of America; it has generated more pay per view sales than any other event. Mixed Martial Arts competitions are hosted nationwide in the country's most iconic arenas. It has even invaded our pop culture with numerous movies, TV shows, and celebrities rising from its ranks. Famous Mixed Martial Artists are staring in movies, visiting troops overseas and headlining as guests on talk shows. You cannot go to a sports bar on Saturday night without seeing crowds of people gathering to watch Mixed Martial Arts. However, despite the overwhelming success and stardom of the sport, New York State is one of only two states in the nation that bans Mixed Martial Arts matches within its borders.
The ban of professional Mixed Martial Arts is a direct attack on the personal liberties of the citizens of New York. The state has deemed the sport too dangerous and prohibits consenting adults from participating in the sport. This ban is another example of a Nanny State deciding for its citizens what is best for them. There is no evidence in support of the allegation that Mixed Martial Arts competitions are dangerous for its participants. Since the first sanctioned Mixed Martial Arts bout in 1993 to the present, there have been only 5 Mixed Martial Arts related deaths with only one being a direct result of injuries sustained during a match. In comparison, Boxing, which is legal in all states including New York, has recorded over 146 deaths since 1990 and over 1,000 since records have been kept. A recent Sienna Poll showed that only 30% of New Yorkers oppose the legalization of Mixed Martial Arts with 45% in favor and 25% without an opinion. Mixed Martial Arts was once illegal in 49 states in 1993 and now is only illegal in two states because of the will of the people. It is time for the New York State legislature to ignore union lobbyists and listen to the will of its citizens and restore one more piece of our freedom that has been taken from us.
Dr. Tom Stevens, LPQC Chair, has made me the point man on this issue. I will continue to fight until millions of participants and fans are restored their freedom to engage in competitions and to watch Professional Mixed Martial Arts bouts in New York State and, specifically, in the most famous arena in the world - Madison Square Garden."
Natale Corsi was appointed Liberty Outreach Coordinator for the Libertarian Party of Queens County on January 21, 2014.
Natale Corsi, Liberty Outreach Coordinator for the Libertarian Party of Queens County, speaking in support of the position taken by the Queens Libertarians, commented as follows:
"Liberty is defined in the dictionary as the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views. The ban of professional Mixed Martial Arts in New York State is the exact example of taking away liberty from its citizens. New York State feels in its misguided belief that it knows what's best for the citizens of New York and must protect us. New York State is one of only two states in the United States of America that bans professional Mixed Martial Arts. I, as Liberty Outreach Coordinator for the LPQC, feel that this ban is a direct offense against our liberties as citizens and we must support New Yorkers who want to legalize Mixed Martial Arts. The right of two consenting adults to engage in a sport that is less dangerous than already legal sports like Boxing should not be infringed. I am not only a supporter. I am a practitioner of Mixed Martial Arts for 8+ years and have been involved in the fight to legalize Mixed Martial Arts in New York State. I have attended rallies, expos and seminars and participated in the first legally sanctioned Amateur Mixed Martial Arts bout in New York State as a coach. I specifically want to thank Dr. Tom Stevens, the newly elected LPQC Chair, for championing this worthy cause and placing it near the top of his political agenda.
Mixed Martial Arts is the fastest growing sport in the United States of America; it has generated more pay per view sales than any other event. Mixed Martial Arts competitions are hosted nationwide in the country's most iconic arenas. It has even invaded our pop culture with numerous movies, TV shows, and celebrities rising from its ranks. Famous Mixed Martial Artists are staring in movies, visiting troops overseas and headlining as guests on talk shows. You cannot go to a sports bar on Saturday night without seeing crowds of people gathering to watch Mixed Martial Arts. However, despite the overwhelming success and stardom of the sport, New York State is one of only two states in the nation that bans Mixed Martial Arts matches within its borders.
The ban of professional Mixed Martial Arts is a direct attack on the personal liberties of the citizens of New York. The state has deemed the sport too dangerous and prohibits consenting adults from participating in the sport. This ban is another example of a Nanny State deciding for its citizens what is best for them. There is no evidence in support of the allegation that Mixed Martial Arts competitions are dangerous for its participants. Since the first sanctioned Mixed Martial Arts bout in 1993 to the present, there have been only 5 Mixed Martial Arts related deaths with only one being a direct result of injuries sustained during a match. In comparison, Boxing, which is legal in all states including New York, has recorded over 146 deaths since 1990 and over 1,000 since records have been kept. A recent Sienna Poll showed that only 30% of New Yorkers oppose the legalization of Mixed Martial Arts with 45% in favor and 25% without an opinion. Mixed Martial Arts was once illegal in 49 states in 1993 and now is only illegal in two states because of the will of the people. It is time for the New York State legislature to ignore union lobbyists and listen to the will of its citizens and restore one more piece of our freedom that has been taken from us.
Dr. Tom Stevens, LPQC Chair, has made me the point man on this issue. I will continue to fight until millions of participants and fans are restored their freedom to engage in competitions and to watch Professional Mixed Martial Arts bouts in New York State and, specifically, in the most famous arena in the world - Madison Square Garden."
Natale Corsi was appointed Liberty Outreach Coordinator for the Libertarian Party of Queens County on January 21, 2014.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
John Clifton Says Using High Profile Individuals As Libertarian Party Candidates Can Be Useful & Effective
John Clifton, former Chair of the New York Libertarian Party and Libertarian Party of Queens County who ran for Governor and for United States Senate against Hillary Clinton, recently commented on the history of using high profile individuals as Libertarian Party Candidates. His statement is as follows:
"The concept of a LP-led 'stunt' candidacy with a high profile
person has been seriously considered by the party in past years, and is
relevant to our attempting to shake things up (in a precision way) to gain
press for the party's agenda. The concept was tried successfully by the New York
Green Party in '98 when running 'Grandpa' Al Lewis for Governor, and in Minnesota
The idea is that instead of starting from a candidate pool that has zero regular resources (no substantial name recognition, no serious money, no organized base) to run in a major race, we make a temporary alliance with someone who does, while living with the imperfections of the deal. Certain celebrities, retired public figures, or 'notorious' personalities may be situationally motivated at a certain point in their lives to act as candidates or endorsers on issues where we are in alignment, and may fit many of the demographics needed for the cause. They can be open to a wooing process we pursue at that time, should we have the foresight to mount an effort, and not insist on a perfect fit.
In 2005, I contacted Monica Lewinsky to run for Senate (at the same time I also contacted Cindy Sheehan, and William Weld for Governor), based on the suspicion they might be interested in running with the Libertarian Party based on their individual circumstances. In the case of Weld, this turned out to be correct. With Lewinsky, the theory was she was young enough to perhaps appeal to the youth vote based on a left-libertarian campaign (e.g., to promote personal freedom issues of strong interest to young voters (18-34) and civil liberties topics that the Libertarian Party uniquely addresses, in a campaign that would be largely college-campus oriented).
I think she was a more moral, more authentic and less scandal-prone woman than the then incumbent United States Senator (Hillary), thus might have had an axe to grind against her, and so could pass as an 'anti-fraud' libertarian candidate. If she had run, the media would have positively ate it up. Alas, she was not interested/did not reply, and suddenly got an all expenses paid gig overseas (as if somebody wanted her out of the way while Hillary was getting re-elected, and preparing to run for President).
Sometimes approaching high profile people does work if there is a purpose and plan behind it, and this strategy could be useful to the LP, past and present."
Monday, January 20, 2014
Was The Father Of The United States Military A Gay Baron, Who Hosted Underwear Parties For His Low-Ranking Male Friends?
The below article on Baron Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben, is a compilation of two columns written by Philadelphia Gay News Publisher Mark Segal, who is the nation's most award-winning commentator in GLBT media.
"After years of studying almost anything
available on Baron Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben, the material suggesting that
von Steuben was gay is so overwhelming that the only thing that can be asked of
anyone who doubts it is, "Prove to me he’s not". There is literally not room in
this article to list all the facts that point to a practice of homosexuality on
the part of von Steuben.
On the other hand, there is only one thing
historians can point to that suggests von Steuben was heterosexual, and it
comes from the first biography on the baron in 1859, The Life of Frederick
William von Steuben by Fredrich Kapp. At the end of the 700-plus-page bio,
Kapp writes, "Steuben was never married. It seems, however, that he met with
disappointment in early life. While preparing to remove to his farm, the
accidental fall of a portrait of a most beautiful young woman from his
cabinet, which was picked up by his companion and shown to him, with the
request to be told from whom it was taken, produced a most obvious emotion of
strong tenderness, and the pathetic exclamation, ‘O, she was a matchless woman!’
He never afterwards alluded to the subject". This flimsy story is one of the
few items in the book with no attribution. It has since been attributed to a
host of the baron’s acquaintances. But most interesting of all is that each
time von Steuben encountered the charge of being “homosexual", he never denied
it or defended himself, he just moved on.
There are few historians today who would doubt
that Baron Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben was gay. That is the notion this
writer has argued for the past two years, and no accredited historian has
refuted its main theme that, without von Steuben, there would be no United
States of America and that von Steuben, in today’s terms, would be considered a
gay man.
To appreciate the contributions von Steuben
(1730-94) made to the American Revolution, consider this: Before his arrival in
Valley Forge in 1778, the Revolutionary Army had lost several battles to
Great Britain and the colonies were on the path to defeat. Without his
leadership, the United States of America might still be the British colonies.
Before von Steuben arrived at Valley Forge, the
Revolutionary Army was a loosely organized, rag-tag band of men with little
military training or discipline. The military fumbled through the beginning of
the war for independence lacking training and organization. Gen. George
Washington and the Continental Congress knew that without help from additional
seasoned military experts, the colonies would clearly lose.
Since Washington himself was the best the
colonies had, they looked to Europe for someone who could train the troops. To that
end, Washington wrote the colonies’ representatives in Paris, among them Benjamin
Franklin, to see what he could come up with. Franklin, a renowned inventor, was
treated as a celebrity in the French court. This would be pivotal in achieving
his two major objectives in France: winning financial support for the American
Revolution and finding military leaders who could bring a semblance of order to
the Revolutionary Army.
Franklin learned of a “brilliant” Prussian
military genius, Lt. Gen. Baron Friedrich von Steuben, who had a string of
successes across Germanic Europe. But there was one problem. He’d been asked to
depart many of those states and countries because of his “affections for
members of his own sex", according to biographer Paul Lockhart’s The Drillmaster
of Valley Forge.
This became urgent in 1777 when he literally
escaped imprisonment in what is now Germany and traveled to Paris. In Paris,
Franklin was interviewing candidates to assist Washington back in the colonies
when his fellow Colonial representative Silas Deane, a former representative to
the first Continental Congress and a friend of Franklin, brought von Steuben to
his residence for an interview in June. Deane is best known for recruiting the
Marquis de Lafayette.
During the interview process, Franklin
discovered von Steuben’s reputation for having “affections” with males and the
issue became pressing, as members of the French clergy demanded the French
court, as in other countries, take action against this sodomite, whom they
considered a pedophile. They had decided to make their effort a crusade and run
him out of France.
Lockhart’s biography tells of von Steuben’s
being summoned from Paris to Karlsrube, at the court of the Margrave of Baden,
for a military vacancy. But, Lockhart notes, “what he found waiting for him at
Karlsrube was not an officer’s commission but a rumor, a horrible, vicious
rumor” that the Baron had “taken familiarities with young boys".
Those allegations were fueled by von Steuben’s
close ties to Prince Henry and Frederick the Great, also “widely rumored to be
homosexual".
Von Steuben returned to Paris, and Franklin had
a choice here – and he decided von Steuben’s expertise was more important to the
colonies than his sexuality. While it can be debated how much a part Franklin
played in the recruitment of von Steuben, one cannot doubt that one of the most
informed people at the French court would know of the allegations against the
baron. With that knowledge, and with von Steuben about to be jailed, Franklin,
along with Deane, wrote what must be the nation’s first example of “Don’t Ask,
Don’t Tell” as they mutually signed a recommendation letter to General
Washington that embellished von Steuben’s military expertise and titles and
suggested he had been recommended by various princes and “other great
personages". Most surprisingly, it remarked that “his distinguished character
and known abilities were attested to by two judges of military merit in this
country".
The judges of character that Franklin referred
to were two of the four involved in the plot to bring von Steuben to America,
along with Franklin and Deane, and personal friends of the baron: Pierre
Beaumarchais, author of the Figaro plays and an arms dealer who supplied arms
for the ship von Steuben eventually sailed on, and Claude Louis, Comte de
Saint-Germain, the minister of war under Louis XVI.
What the letter didn’t mention was that he was
about to be arrested and appear before judges in France.
Franklin, working with Deane, decided von
Steuben’s “affections” were less important than what he, Washington and the
colonies needed to win the war with England. Deane learned of von Steuben’s
indiscretions — and that the French clergy was investigating — as evidenced from a letter to
the Prince of Hechingen, his former employer, which read in part:
It has come to me from different sources that
M. de Steuben is accused of having taken familiarities with young boys,
which the laws forbid and punish severely. I have even been informed that that is
the reason why M. de Steuben was obliged to leave Hechingen and that the
clergy of your country intend to prosecute him by law as soon as he may establish
himself anywhere.
Deane, along with Franklin, acted quickly before
the clergy could deport or imprison von Steuben and plotted to send him to
the colonies to serve with Washington. The proof of Franklin and Deane’s
knowledge lies in the letter to Washington recommending von Steuben and their
quick action to secure the baron from France. So, in September 1777, von
Steuben boarded a 24-gun ship named Heureux – but, for this voyage, the ship’s
name was changed to Le Flamand, and the baron’s name was entered onto the
captain’s log as “Frank.” And he was on his way to the colonies. Von Steuben
was given an advance for passage to America and began as a volunteer, without
pay.
Once the general had arrived in Valley Forge,
Washington was concerned about von Steuben’s inability to speak English, so he
appointed two of his officers who spoke French to work as his translators. One
of those officers was Alexander Hamilton and the other, his close friend John
Laurens. Within months, von Steuben gained Washington’s confidence and began to
transform the colonial army.
Washington and Franklin’s trust in von Steuben
was rewarded. He whipped the rag-tag army of the colonies into a professional
fighting force, able to take on the most powerful superpower of the time,
England. Some of his accomplishments include instituting a “model company” for
training, establishing sanitary standards and organization for the camp, and
training soldiers in drills and tactics such as bayonet fighting and musket
loading. According to “The Papers of Von Steuben,” the following is a timeline
of his achievements.
February 1778: Arrives at Valley Forge to serve
under Washington, having informed Congress of his desire for paid service
after an initial volunteer trial period, with which request Washington
concurs.
March 1778: Begins tenure as inspector general,
drilling troops according to established European military precepts.
1778-79: Writes “Regulations for the Order and
Discipline of the Troops of the United States,” which becomes a fundamental
guide for the Continental Army and remains in active use through the War of
1812, being published in over 70 editions.
1780-81: Senior military officer in charge of
troop and supply mobilization in Virginia.
1781: Replaced by Marquis de Lafayette as
commander in Virginia.
1781-83: Continues to serve as Washington’s
inspector general, and is active in improving discipline and streamlining
administration in the army.
Spring 1783: Assists in formulating plans for
the postwar American military.
Washington rewarded Von Steuben with a house at
Valley Forge, which he shared with his aide-de-camps Capt. William North and
Gen. Benjamin Walker. Walker lived with him through the remainder of his
life, and von Steuben, who neither married nor denied any of the allegations of
homosexuality, left his estate to North and Walker. There wasn’t much else to
claim, as the baron was in debt at the time of his death, according to both
Kapp and Lockhart. His last will and testament has been described as a love
letter to Walker and has been purported to describe their “extraordinarily
intense emotional relationship", yet that line was not in the Kapp biography of
1859. Both North and Walker are featured in the statue of von Steuben in
Lafayette Park across from the White House.
Speculation over who von Steuben slept with
abounded from Prussia to France to the United States. Yet he never once denied
it. The closest he came to the topic was to ask Washington to speak on behalf
of his morals in a letter to Congress so they would authorize the disbursement
of his pension. And why did he ask Washington?
Since his arrival in Philadelphia to assist the
Revolution, von Steuben had financial issues caused by a Continental
Congress that often didn’t keep its funding promises, a challenge compounded by his
own personality: Von Steuben at times could be cold and aloof, which was
problematic when diplomacy was needed with an important member of Congress. He
also had a tendency to live and spend extravagantly, especially on his
uniforms, which were often emblazoned with epaulets and medals of his own
design.
Due to his financial picture — and
misconceptions about his association with Deane, who, along with Franklin, brought him to
the Revolution, but who was later disgraced as traitor to the United States
— von Steuben had to fight for his pension.
Adding to that were the constant rumors about
his sexuality, which by 1790 had reached one of the revolution’s first
families, the Adamses of Massachusetts.
Charles, the son of John and Abigail Adams — the
second president and First Lady of the new union — was what today would be called
the black sheep of the family. Early on, Abigail considered him “not at peace
within himself". His biggest problem was alcoholism but, as revealed in letters
among the various members of the family, the Adamses had other concerns.
As John Ferling wrote in the biography John
Adams: A Life, “There are references to [Charles’] alleged proclivity for
consorting with men whom his parents regarded as unsavory". One of these men
was von Steuben, who, as Ferling writes, many at the time considered
homosexual. Charles had become infatuated with and adored Von Steuben. It is
clear in the family letters that the Adamses were concerned about a
relationship between Charles and the baron. Von Steuben’s sexuality was an open
secret, one that he himself never challenged, other than to ask Washington to
defend his moral character.
Washington, always the diplomat, wrote of the
general and friend rather than of von Steuben’s personal life, practicing
today’s notion of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
It’s hard to question von Steuben’s importance –
especially as Washington’s last official act as commander-in-chief of the
Continental Army was to write a letter to the baron. Sent from Annapolis and
dated Dec. 23, 1783, Washington wrote:
My dear Baron: Altho’ I have taken frequent
opportunities, both in public and private, of acknowledging your great zeal, attention
and abilities in performing the duties of your office; yet I wish to make use
of this last moment of my public life, to signifie (sic) in the strongest terms
my entire approbation of your conduct, and to express my sense of the
obligations the public is under to you, for your faithful and meritorious
services.
I beg you will be convinced, my dear sir, that I
should rejoice if it could ever be in my power to serve you more essentially
than by expression of regard and affection; but in the meantime, I am persuaded
you will not be displeased with this farewell token of my sincere friendship
and esteem for you.
This is the last letter I shall ever write while
I continue in the service of my country; the hour of my resignation is fixed at
12 this day, after which I shall become a private citizen on the banks of the
Potomack, where I shall be glad to embrace you, and to testify the great esteem
and consideration with which I am, etc.
The Baron is a puzzle. At first, I really didn’t like him: The man himself was pompous, cold and theatrical, and his uniforms and title were stage props for an officer who didn’t even speak English when he got to Valley Forge. But I respected him for what he did to help Washington’s rag-tag army to defeat the British, eventually leading to the creation of our country. His knowledge created the first sense of military discipline in the colonies. My appreciation for him came from his most recent biographer, Paul Lockhart, whose book The Drillmaster of Valley Forge offers a complete look at von Steuben’s work.
There is one story in the book that could be considered rather scandalous in today’s terms: Von Steuben most likely threw the first underwear party in the United States military, at his house in Valley Forge.
As Lockhart writes, “The Baron hosted a party exclusively for their lower-ranking friends. He insisted, though, that ‘none should be admitted that had on a whole pair of breeches', making light of the shortages that affected the junior officers as they did the enlisted men".
The nation that von Steuben helped found has
memorialized him with numerous statues, including those at Lafayette Square
near the White House and at Valley Forge and Utica, N.Y. (where he is buried),
and German Americans celebrate his birthday each year on Sept. 17, hosting parades
in New York City, Philadelphia and Chicago.
It was von Steuben who played a giant role in
not only the creation of our military, but the idea of military academies, a
standing army and even veterans organizations. If George Washington was the
father of the nation, then von Steuben, a gay man, was the father of the United
States military."
Friday, January 17, 2014
Donald Silberger Says Eliminating Unjust Laws Is The Only Protection Against An Increasingly Empowered Surveillance State
Dr. Donald Silberger, the current Chair of the Hudson Valley Libertarian Party who twice ran as the Libertarian Party's candidate for New York State Lt. Governor and once ran as the Libertarian Party's candidate for United States Senate, is certain that improvements in technology will only empower and expand the reach of the surveillance state. In the below article, he proposes that the only solution is to repeal unjust laws.
"Edward J. Snowden, the whistleblower who exposed the excesses and has shown us the extent of the surveillance state, has allowed us a look into an open Pandora's Box, and has reminded us how little privacy we have left in this modern age. Surveillance by government and its corporate cronies will not diminish and will only get worse. The constant improvements in technology will empower and expand its reach. Our every action is observable and recordable. We have become fish in a barrel.
The law books are so fat that every citizen routinely breaks absurd laws that have been enacted by legislatures over the decades. It has thus become imperative that our entire criminal law system be reviewed with the plan of repealing many of those laws.
Unjust laws define us as criminals, and police discretion allows each of us to be targeted for arrest and detention at will. We are vulnerable to police whimsy. Our very liberty is at stake.
We free citizens of a democratic constitutional republic must diminish the list of "crimes" on whose basis we are plundered, limited, and imprisoned.
In order to put flesh upon the sometimes nebulous abstractions to which political oratory is given - rights, freedoms, liberty, patriotism, etc. - I offer the following partial list of criminal laws of which we citizens should demand immediate repeal. I emphasize the list is partial. It offers paradigms for the sort of intrusions upon private life that should be obliterated from the law books.
End The Drug War completely. End the imprisonment of drug users. Repeal the drug laws. Offer detoxification aid for addicts requesting it.
Legalize Prostitution. Protect prostitutes and clients from violence. Cease harassing them. Arrange for voluntary medical certification.
Legalize Private Gambling. Protect gamblers from physical assault, but do not "protect" them against their own impulses towards risk taking.
Cease "civil" asset forfeiture at all levels: federal, state, and local.
If an act neither damages the commons, nor violates the person or the property of another individual, then the act is not legitimately criminal. Laws defining such actions as criminal should be repealed.
Everyone currently imprisoned for "victimless crimes" needs to be immediately released. We need to assist them to re-establish themselves in society as citizens with all their individual rights, including the freedom to vote, hold public office, travel without restriction, work, own property, and to keep and bear arms. Where feasible, those convicted of "victimless crimes" need to be compensated for the losses incurred during their agonizing years of wasted opportunity stolen via morally unjustifiable incarceration.
America's enemies engage in surveillance all the time and they may have been aware that the United States did so also. Snowden enlightened America's citizenry regarding the extent of the existing surveillance state. He did not tell our foes something they did not know, or did not already suspect.
Edward Joseph Snowden brought us knowledge. Such knowledge empowers us."
"Edward J. Snowden, the whistleblower who exposed the excesses and has shown us the extent of the surveillance state, has allowed us a look into an open Pandora's Box, and has reminded us how little privacy we have left in this modern age. Surveillance by government and its corporate cronies will not diminish and will only get worse. The constant improvements in technology will empower and expand its reach. Our every action is observable and recordable. We have become fish in a barrel.
The law books are so fat that every citizen routinely breaks absurd laws that have been enacted by legislatures over the decades. It has thus become imperative that our entire criminal law system be reviewed with the plan of repealing many of those laws.
Unjust laws define us as criminals, and police discretion allows each of us to be targeted for arrest and detention at will. We are vulnerable to police whimsy. Our very liberty is at stake.
We free citizens of a democratic constitutional republic must diminish the list of "crimes" on whose basis we are plundered, limited, and imprisoned.
In order to put flesh upon the sometimes nebulous abstractions to which political oratory is given - rights, freedoms, liberty, patriotism, etc. - I offer the following partial list of criminal laws of which we citizens should demand immediate repeal. I emphasize the list is partial. It offers paradigms for the sort of intrusions upon private life that should be obliterated from the law books.
End The Drug War completely. End the imprisonment of drug users. Repeal the drug laws. Offer detoxification aid for addicts requesting it.
Legalize Prostitution. Protect prostitutes and clients from violence. Cease harassing them. Arrange for voluntary medical certification.
Legalize Private Gambling. Protect gamblers from physical assault, but do not "protect" them against their own impulses towards risk taking.
Cease "civil" asset forfeiture at all levels: federal, state, and local.
If an act neither damages the commons, nor violates the person or the property of another individual, then the act is not legitimately criminal. Laws defining such actions as criminal should be repealed.
Everyone currently imprisoned for "victimless crimes" needs to be immediately released. We need to assist them to re-establish themselves in society as citizens with all their individual rights, including the freedom to vote, hold public office, travel without restriction, work, own property, and to keep and bear arms. Where feasible, those convicted of "victimless crimes" need to be compensated for the losses incurred during their agonizing years of wasted opportunity stolen via morally unjustifiable incarceration.
America's enemies engage in surveillance all the time and they may have been aware that the United States did so also. Snowden enlightened America's citizenry regarding the extent of the existing surveillance state. He did not tell our foes something they did not know, or did not already suspect.
Edward Joseph Snowden brought us knowledge. Such knowledge empowers us."
Donald Silberger Calls On President Obama To Give Edward J. Snowden A Full Pardon
Dr. Donald Silberger, the current Chair of the Hudson Valley Libertarian Party who twice ran as the Libertarian Party's candidate for New York State Lt. Governor and once ran as the Libertarian Party's candidate for United States Senate, has called upon President Obama to give Edward J. Snowden a full pardon for his whistleblowing. Dr. Silberger's statement on the issue follows:
"President Obama should give Edward J. Snowden a full pardon for his whistleblowing, and offer him safe passage either home to the USA or to another destination of his choice, should that be his preference. Snowden should be unrestrained and remain in possession of all the rights and liberties he is entitled to as an American citizen. It does not advance our national interest for Snowden to be beholden to Vladimir Putin, of the presumably retired KGB.
Snowden should be accompanied by, and free to exchange ideas with, media representatives. He should be allowed to tell us his story, interviewed by pundits of both "conservative" and "progressive" bents. He should be able to accept invitations to address the public uncensored. We The People are interested in what he may have to say.
Snowden has informed us, his fellow citizens, that our government secretly spies on us. It is only fair that a prying government itself be subjected to surveillance, by its citizenry. Without such citizen oversight, democracy degenerates into a deceptive joke upon a deluded and manipulated people.
Officialdom has alleged that the actions of whistleblowers "hurt America". The "America" of officials is excessively abstract for "hurt". Persons can be hurt. But revelations to us do us no harm. Officials in Uncle Sam garb who abuse their authority deserve whatever chagrin their exposure brings them.
Our whistleblowers tell us citizens what we must know if we are to exercise our citizenship wisely, e.g. by voting knowledgeably. In a democratic constitutional republic, we citizens choose not only who will perform the proper functions of government as our elected servants; we must be informed also of the specific ends towards which those servants will act, supported as they are by our labor and by the taxes imposed upon us, the governed.
Our public servants, whom we hopefully expect to be acting on our behalf, reflect upon us as a people. They can, if ill-advised, bring down upon us the world's ire. They can violate their duty to us. This duty requires them to function as our servants, and not as our masters."
"President Obama should give Edward J. Snowden a full pardon for his whistleblowing, and offer him safe passage either home to the USA or to another destination of his choice, should that be his preference. Snowden should be unrestrained and remain in possession of all the rights and liberties he is entitled to as an American citizen. It does not advance our national interest for Snowden to be beholden to Vladimir Putin, of the presumably retired KGB.
Snowden should be accompanied by, and free to exchange ideas with, media representatives. He should be allowed to tell us his story, interviewed by pundits of both "conservative" and "progressive" bents. He should be able to accept invitations to address the public uncensored. We The People are interested in what he may have to say.
Snowden has informed us, his fellow citizens, that our government secretly spies on us. It is only fair that a prying government itself be subjected to surveillance, by its citizenry. Without such citizen oversight, democracy degenerates into a deceptive joke upon a deluded and manipulated people.
Officialdom has alleged that the actions of whistleblowers "hurt America". The "America" of officials is excessively abstract for "hurt". Persons can be hurt. But revelations to us do us no harm. Officials in Uncle Sam garb who abuse their authority deserve whatever chagrin their exposure brings them.
Our whistleblowers tell us citizens what we must know if we are to exercise our citizenship wisely, e.g. by voting knowledgeably. In a democratic constitutional republic, we citizens choose not only who will perform the proper functions of government as our elected servants; we must be informed also of the specific ends towards which those servants will act, supported as they are by our labor and by the taxes imposed upon us, the governed.
Our public servants, whom we hopefully expect to be acting on our behalf, reflect upon us as a people. They can, if ill-advised, bring down upon us the world's ire. They can violate their duty to us. This duty requires them to function as our servants, and not as our masters."
Sunday, January 12, 2014
LPQC Elects New Officers At 2014 Annual Convention
The Annual Convention of the Libertarian Party of Queens County was held on Saturday, January 11, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. in the Queens Pride House located at 76-11 37th Avenue, Suite 206 in Jackson Heights, New York.
The following officers were unanimously elected by the membership to serve during the remainder of 2014 and until the next Annual Convention is held.
Chair - Dr. Tom Stevens
Vice-Chair - Thomas Adair Rossman
Secretary - Alden Link
Treasurer - Anthony J. Kraljic
Membership Director - Dr. Tom Stevens
State Representative - John Clifton
Congratulations to all who were elected!
The following officers were unanimously elected by the membership to serve during the remainder of 2014 and until the next Annual Convention is held.
Chair - Dr. Tom Stevens
Vice-Chair - Thomas Adair Rossman
Secretary - Alden Link
Treasurer - Anthony J. Kraljic
Membership Director - Dr. Tom Stevens
State Representative - John Clifton
Congratulations to all who were elected!
Dr. Stephen Finger Says The Rich Won't Make You Poor...Really
Dr. Stephen Finger, an
Otolaryngologist practicing medicine in Brooklyn ,
says that in these modern times, the rich won’t make you poor. In a recent
article published on December 30, 2013 entitled The Rich Won’t Make You Poor...Really,
Dr. Finger wrote the following:
“Why all the fuss about 'income
inequality? Is that really the 'biggest problem we're facing today'? Is it, in
fact, really a 'problem' at all?
Microsoft, Google, Facebook, speaking of
'income inequality, suppose they had never come along and created
all their stuff, would one poor person, or even one not-so-poor person,
be the slightest bit more prosperous and happy? We got some good
stuff and they got really rich. So? It's only 'fair' if we got the stuff and
their money too? Where did that come from?
Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Cornelius
Vanderbilt, Andrew Carnegie, the Wright brothers…same thing. Would the
'poor' have been better off without electric lights and cars and railroads
and steel and airplanes? Pre-industrial America
This is not agrarian Europe
in the 1700's where you got rich by getting a bunch of peasants to
work your land and then taking as much of the crop as you could get
away with, until they decided to chop your head off. In an industrial
society, you don't divide the pie. You grow it.
Don't get snookered by the progressive,
social justice, 'we love you more than we love ourselves' bunch. Inequality is
not the problem even though it sort of sounds like it should be. And taking
from the rich is not an 'economic plan'.
You can't raise the floor by lowering the
ceiling. It's an illusion. The only thing you get that way is a country full of
people who've forgotten how to stand up straight.”
Dr. Stephen Finger ran for Congress in 2006 on the
Libertarian and Republican Party lines. You can visit his blog at:
www.ThePointingFinger.blogspot.com
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
Applause! Applause! Review of Boschetti, Scudder & Martin at The Duplex by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens
This review of Boschetti, Scudder & Martin
at The Duplex was written by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens and appeared in Volume
III, Issue 1 (April, 1998) of Applause! Applause!
Boschetti, Scudder &
Martin - Mike Boschetti, Ken Scudder & Andrew Martin
The Duplex (61 Christopher
Street, NYC)
Reviewed 4/23/98 at 10:00
p.m.
"Boschetti, Scudder
& Martin (not a law firm or an acid rock band)" was promoted as
offering Stand-Up Comedy (And Some Special Surprises) which it provided
in abundance. The show featured Janice Messitte as a Special Guest Star who
turned out to be the M.C. of the show. Back in the early days of television,
products were often sold in the stores with the notice "as seen on
TV" because television was such a magical new product that everything seen
on it was considered good. Quentin Crisp often speaks of this phenomenon in his
book "How To Become A Virgin" which addresses how people can
re-create themselves and do away with their past by spending only 10 minutes on
a television show. Ms. Messitte, not quite yet a household name, is promoted
using the same "if it was on TV, it must be good" philosophy since
under her name on the flyer promoting the show is the following announcement:
"(Late Night With Conan O'Brien, Rolanda, etc.)".
As it turned out, Janice
Messitte was good and, in one of the first surprises of the evening, she sang a
song. Ms. Messitte has an excellent voice, but she also happens to be a comic
with a powerful stage presence and some good material which suits her chosen
personality which she describes as being that of a "broad". She is
likable, honest and endearing and more than competently fulfilled her duties as
M.C. by warming up the audience with her "in your face" style of
humor. The only problem was that some of her material was not well developed.
For example, after making an excellent suggestion that fat people hold their
own parade, she could think of no other follow-ups to that great opening line
other than that the people at the parade could engage in the activity of
"bobbing for pound cake." Then there were times when her crude
comments crossed the funny-not funny line. An example is when she told a man in
the front row "You want to fuck me so bad, I can tell." Not exactly a
funny line! Overall, I enjoyed Janice Messitte and expect that with a little
fine tuning, she will have an excellent career as a stand-up comic and, if she
chooses, as a singer.
The first "stand-up
comic" of the evening was Mike Boschetti, who is the worst stand-up comic
I have ever seen in my life. This man would come in last place in every amateur
comedy contest in the world. He would lose in this country because he has no
comic timing and because of the monotony of his act. He would lose in foreign
countries, where his audience did not understand English, because of his
annoying pacing and lack of any stage presence. If I were a liberal and
believed in passing laws to protect and shelter people, I would not give Mike
Boschetti a license to be a stand-up comic. After all, if licenses were given
to pianists, would you give one to someone who had only 5 fingers and played
only half the notes of every song. Similarly, you couldn't give a license to
Mike Boschetti who rarely tells a funny joke and always says "OK, Thank
You." after the audience fails to laugh at the many bad jokes he does
tell. I say "tells" instead of "delivers" because it
appears that Mike Boschetti, who may very well be mentally impaired, went to
Barnes & Noble and wrote down a number of bad jokes which he memorized and
repeated on stage. His best line was "This girl said we have a lot in
common, which I found out when we were in the nude." But even that line
was poorly delivered. The audience rarely laughed during his act and the worst
part of it is that he didn't seem to care.
Where is Audrey II when you
need her?
The ever surprising Andrew
Martin was up next and for the first time, I was able to catch a glimpse of the
talent which enabled him to obtain a M.A.C. nomination a few years back. After
explaining that he is from Rego Park, he goes on to sing a wonderful rendition
of "Queens", written by Francesca Blumenthal and the late Addy
Fieger. Although I have heard others sing this song, none can compare to
Martin's unique style which had me enjoying this song all over again as if for
the first time. Andrew Martin has a powerful
and pleasing voice which flatters the songs he selects and delivers them
to his audience with love. It left me wanting to hear more. As for the stand-up
portion of his act, I was pleased to see Mr. Martin adding new material to his
already excellent act. My favorite was the story he tells about a "fat,
ugly woman", who he corrects to call a "metabolically challenged
beauty impaired person" who sat across from him in a subway car
"looking at me like I was a dessert she wasn't going to finish" who
finally said to him "What are you, a h-o-m-o-s-e-x-u-a-l?" to which
he responded "What are you, an o-p-t-i-o-n?" Andrew Martin is getting
better every day. He is brighter, more energetic and more on the mark every time
I see him. He is superbly talented and has a great future!
The final comic up was Ken
Scudder. He is a brilliant writer and a very funny man. He said that the state
of modern protest is jaywalking. While people in old age homes boast that they
protested to stop the war or fight for civil rights, today's activists ignore
the edict "Cross At The Green, Not In-Between" and say "Fuck
That Man, Fuck The Man!". Mr. Scudder also doubts the new research results
which report that the average man masturbates 7 times a month. He says you can
draw a number of different conclusions from those results. The first is that
the average man can't count beyond seven. The second is that the average man is
a lying sack of shit and the third is that somewhere in Montana, there is a guy
who hasn't touched himself in 27 years to make up for what he did in January.
Ken Scudder does a very
funny bit about Clinton and why people like him despite the sexual scandals
that seem to haunt him. Scudder's view is that the American people want a
President who can get head from a 21 year old, especially since he is the last
President since Kennedy who could. He says "good god" to the thought
of giving head to Johnson. He says "Nixon was "Tricky Dick" in
name only, Carter didn't have a dick if you look at his policies, Reagan's dick
was in Nancy's pocketbook and who in this room would go down on Bush."
This bit was so funny, you could almost forgive him for forgetting that Ford
was also President. I say that he forgot since a talented writer like Ken
Scudder certainly couldn't fail to come up with a sex joke about a man named
after an automobile, where many sex acts often take place.
The surprise of the act was
when Ken Scudder sang a song putting new lyrics to "Candle In The
Wind" criticizing Elton John for re-cycling that song, a tribute to
Marilyn Monroe, for Princess Diana instead of writing a new song for her. Mr.
Scudder has a lot going for him. However, if I were his manager, I would tell
him to always dress up when performing on stage. Performers who dress in jeans,
sneakers and teashirts insult their audience by not taking their performance
seriously. Ken Scudder has the talent to succeed. All he needs is better
packaging.
Overall, I enjoyed the show
and when you see "Scudder & Martin" return, I encourage you to
catch the show. You won't be disappointed!!
Applause! Applause! Review of The Fantasticks at The Amateur Comedy Club by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens
This review of “The Fantasticks” at The Amateur
Comedy Club was written by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens and appeared in Volume
III, Issue 1 (April, 1998) of Applause! Applause!
"The Fantasticks"
The Amateur Comedy Club (150
East 36th Street, NYC)
Reviewed 4/22/98 at 8:00
p.m.
The Amateur Comedy Club was
founded in 1884 and is currently in its one hundred and fourteenth season, a
record of consecutive annual performances among American dramatic clubs. This
particular production of "The Fantasticks" will be the Three Thousand
One Hundred Eighty Ninth Performance through the Three Thousand Two Hundred
First Performance of the Club. The Clubhouse of the Amateur Comedy Club is a
converted stable and yet it is a very attractive, intimate space. I was a guest
of one of the members and found the evening to be a very pleasant experience.
During the intermission, everyone was invited upstairs to a room where the
walls are lined with photographs from previous productions. Complimentary wine
and coffee were also served and everyone was very friendly and courteous
despite the difficulties of maneuvering in the very small space. While any
small inconveniences can all be forgiven, the only thing I think the Club
should do something about are the seats in the theatre which were clearly not
made with larger posteriors in mind. These particular chairs, with a metal bar
on either side, were especially uncomfortable. Even if it means cutting down on
the number of individuals squeezed into the theatre, I really think these
chairs should be replaced with something a little larger so that full-figured
patrons can enjoy the show as much as smaller patrons do.
This particular production
of "The Fantasticks" was quite enjoyable to watch and was very loyal
to the original. More than competent performances were put in by Maria Aggabao
who played The Mute, R. Keith Martin who played Hucklebee, Stuart Chamberlain
who played Bellomy, Marisa Mickel who played Luisa and Roderic L. Suter who
played Mortimer.
Superior performances were
delivered by Reed Forrester who played Matt and Edward J. Gallagher who stole
the show playing The Actor. Mr. Forrester is a very good looking talented actor
with a very powerful singing voice and a great stage presence. I look forward
to seeing more of this up-and-coming star. Mr. Gallagher has acting abilities
that reflect a lifetime of experience. He should be working full time on
Broadway in any number of possible roles which I am certain that he could
easily master. Mr. Gallagher's humorous biographical note in the program states
that "Ed is all but positive that being cast in The Fantasticks as
a bumbling, decrepit, has-been old ham in no way reflects the way his fellow
Club members perceive him."
The only cast member I could
have done without and who nearly ruined the entire production was David Scharf
who played El Gallo. Scharf's voice and stage presence were not strong enough
for him to successfully carry off playing El Gallo. Perhaps his acting skills
would be better showcased in some other production. His voice is too weak and
he is too much of a pretty-boy to have been cast as the powerful, manly, worldly
El Gallo. He never should have been offered, nor should he have accepted, this
part.
The members of the Amateur
Comedy Club appeared to be some very fine, distinguished, cultured individuals.
I encourage you to call them to inquire about membership.
Applause! Applause! Review of Eric Michael Gillett & Melanie Vaughan's "It Takes Two: The Duets Of Stephen Sondheim" at Don't Tell Mama by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens
This review of Eric Michael Gillett and Melanie
Vaughan’s “It Takes Two: The Duets Of Stephen Sondheim” at Don’t Tell Mama was
written by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens and appeared in Volume III, Issue 1
(April, 1998) of Applause! Applause!
"It Takes Two: The
Duets Of Stephen Sondheim" - Eric Michael Gillett & Melanie Vaughan
Don't Tell Mama (343 West
46th Street, NYC)
Reviewed 4/7/98 at 7:00
p.m.
This is a perfect show,
period!! Catch it without delay on a Wednesday in May at 7:00 p.m. and be sure
to make advance reservations!! Some of the raw comments I wrote down during the
show are the following: "as good as it gets", "excellent",
"great rapport", "best show anywhere", "lovely",
"beautiful", "what talent!", "superb
showmanship", "delightful". The opening medley alone consisted
of "Two By Two" (Music by Richard Rodgers) cut from Do I Hear A
Waltz?, "It Takes Two" from Into The Woods, "Small
World" (Music by Jule Styne) from Gypsy, "One Hand, One
Heart" (Music by Leonard Bernstein) from West Side Story,
"Barcelona" from Company, "Poems" from Pacific
Overtures, "Together Wherever We Go" (Music by Jule Styne) from Gypsy,
"Send In The Clowns" from A Little Night Music, "Kiss
Me" from Sweeney Todd, "One More Kiss" from Follies,
and "A Boy Like That" and "I Have A Love" (Music by Leonard
Bernstein) from West Side Story. Do you really need to
read any more before making your reservation?
Eric Michael Gillet and
Melanie Vaughan are a dynamic duo who sing with the voices of proverbial
angels. It is one of the most entertaining cabaret shows I have ever seen.
Whatever your cares or woe, this show will transport you on a wonderful journey
into the woods and then out again, cleansing your spirit along the way. One
song that had that effect on me was "Move On" from Sunday In The
Park With George. I also especially enjoyed the powerful and emotionally
moving "Take Me To The World" from Evening Primrose, the only
musical written by Stephen Sondheim for television.
The bulk of the show
consists of 3 collaborations, 3 love songs and a suite of Ben & Sally duets
from Follies. The collaborations included "Tonight" (Music by
Leonard Bernstein) from West Side Story,
"Let Me Entertain You/If Momma Was Married" (Music by Jule
Styne) from Gypsy, and "We're Gonna Be All Right" (Music by
Richard Rodgers) from Do I Hear A Waltz?. The love songs included
"Unworthy Of Your Love" from Assassins, "Happiness"
from Passion, and "You're Gonna Love Tomorrow" from Follies.
The suite of Ben & Sally duets from Follies included "Don't
Look At Me", "Pleasant Little Kingdom" cut from Follies,
"Too Many Mornings" from Follies and "All Things Bright
And Beautiful" cut from Follies, and "It Wasn't Meant To Happen"
cut from Follies. I hope you now see what I have been trying to tell
you! Do Not Miss This Show! If you do, you should never forgive yourself!!
Applause! Applause! Review of "A Man And His Dream: The Lyrics Of Johnny Burke" at Danny's Skylight Room by Dr. Thomas Robert Stevens
This review of “A Man And His Dream: The Lyrics
Of Johnny Burke” at Danny’s Skylight Room was written by Dr. Thomas Robert
Stevens and appeared in Volume III, Issue 1 (April, 1998) of Applause!
Applause!
"A Man And His Dream:
The Lyrics Of Johnny Burke" - Berk, Durham & Murphy
Danny's Skylight Room (246
West 46th Street, NYC)
Reviewed 4/6/98 at 9:15
p.m.
David Berk, Caroline Durham
and Michael Murphy star in this show which is a tribute to the lyrics of Johnny
Burke. "A Man And His Dream" is chock full of songs, the lyrics for
which were written by Johnny Burke; 31 in all of which 17 were introduced by
Bing Crosby who required lyrics that were not too sentimental or romantic.
Michael Holmes was musical director, Jan Wallman directed and most of the
arrangements were by David Berk, who conceived of this production.
For the first three years of
Johnny Burke's songwriting career, he wrote only music. Then in 1933, when he
teamed up with composer Harold Spina and veteran lyricist Joe Young, he began
writing only lyrics. Their big hit "Annie Doesn't Live Here Anymore"
was voted best song of 1933 by ASCAP. The subsequent popularity of Burke's
songs landed him a contract at Paramount Studio in the mid-thirties, and unlike
most of Hollywood's great songwriters who worked for several studios, Burke
spent his entire career at Paramount. Of the forty-two films on which Johnny
Burke worked, twenty-five starred Bing Crosby. Johnny Burke had three major
collaborators at Paramount: Arthur Johnston with whom he wrote Academy Award
nominee "Pennies From Heaven" (1936), Jimmy Monaco with whom he wrote
the also nominated "Only Forever" (1940), and Jimmy Van Heusen with
whom he won an Oscar for "Swinging On A Star" (1944). Burke also
wrote three Broadway shows, two with Van Heusen: "Nelly Bly" (1946),
"Carnival In Flanders" (1953), and "Donnybrook!", for which
he provided both words and music. Of the three, "Donnybrook!" (1961),
ran the longest which was for only sixty eight performances. Burke is the only
writer to have had five of the top ten songs at the same time on the popular
radio show, "Your Hit Parade" and he did achieve posthumous success
on Broadway when in 1995, a highly entertaining revue of his songs,
"Swinging On A Star", received a coveted Tony Award nomination for
best musical.
"A Man And His
Dream" was well-directed, well-staged and well-performed. David Berk,
Caroline Durham and Michael Murphy all have wonderful stage personalities and
are talented performers. Dressed to the nines, they executed the entertaining
arrangements with aplomb. My favorite solo numbers were "Annie Doesn't
Live Here Anymore" (Music by Spina, Lyrics by Burke & Young) performed
by Michael Murphy; "Personality" (Music by Van Heusen) and
"Sentimental Side" (Music by Monaco) performed by Caroline Durham;
and "When Stanislaus Got Married" (Music by Van Heusen) performed by
David Berk. My favorite duo was "Put It There" with the numbers
"Apalachicola Fla" and "Road To Morocco" (Music to both by
Van Heusen) which was expertly acted and performed by Michael Murphy and David
Berk.
Although you will come away
from the show singing Johnny Burke lyrics, what you will remember are the
beautiful medleys interwoven into the fabric of this show. "Moonbeam
Medley" performed by Michael Murphy contains "Polka Dots &
Moonbeams" and "Moonlight Becomes You" (Music to both by Van
Heusen); "Beautiful Medley" performed by David Berk and Caroline
Durham contains "Isn't That Just Like Love", "But
Beautiful", "Devil May Care" and "Humpty Dumpty Heart"
(Music to all by Van Heusen except "Devil May Care" by Harry Warren);
and "Too Romantic Medley" performed by Michael Murphy and Caroline
Durham contains "It Could Happen To You", "Moonlight Becomes
You", "Like Someone In Love" (Music to all three by Van Heusen),
"Too Romantic" (Music by Monaco), "Misty" (Music by Errol
Garner) and "You're Not The Only Oyster In The Stew" (Music by
Spina).
I urge you not to miss this
unique and enjoyable experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)