Yes, the Omicrons are here among us. Hopefully not among you or me, just the collective Us.
Omicron (apparently because Media talkingheads constantly repeating B.1.1.529 would be a marketing and evangelizing nightmare) is just the latest and greatest in the corona series of social and behavioral controls promulgated by perpetually perplexed, constantly behind-the-curve “experts” and politicians.
As bewildering as this has become, perhaps we have reached the point where we must come to this rather obvious conclusion:
MegaDeath Corona virus(es) are FOREVER out of The Genie’s Bottle,and no level of Human Social Torture is going to get that cork back on!
Maybe it’s time we realize this is not going to end anytime soon. That’s “soon” as in years, likely a decade or more. Maybe it’s time to accept the consequences of stupid China human tricks, even if none of The Civilized Nations are brave enough to confront the responsible criminals.
Maybe it’s time to get along with Life in all its normal freedoms and glory. Maybe we should refuse to be shackled to the Dread of Infection. Maybe those “at risk” individuals will always and forever be at risk.
Maybe it’s time for Individuals to make Personal and Responsible decisions as to how their Future will play out in the shadow of this heinous insult inflicted by Others. Maybe the “experts” will confess they will never have all the answers, leave us their advice and the Choice to follow along … or not – at our own peril, and get off our backs!
Maybe …But either way, The Genie ain’t getting back in the damn bottle!
When weather and My World permits, there’s nothing I enjoy more than lazing about on the backyard deck, maybe with a cigar and/or an adult beverage. The presence of a variety of birds is part of this suburban outdoor atmosphere.
Not exactly an Audubon collection … the usual regional 3Fs (fine feathered friends) … nothing more exotic than a red-headed woodpecker and the occasional hawk. And I am inclined to promote my particular patch of backyard as a avian attraction … via a copious amount of birdseed.
But no more … not for little while anyway. Maybe not at all this winter.
The current price of birdseed has ruined this for me, since I try to take care of the 3Fs through the coldest months after enjoying them during the warm ones. Then Biden-flation struck!
Black oil sunflower seeds sold at Lowe’s Home Center sold for $21 for a 40 pound bag earlier this year. An 18 pound bag of crushed corn bird seed (also a fav of a local doe and her fawn) sold for $8 just a few weeks ago.
Made my regular trek to Lowe’s two weeks ago. Black oil sunflower in 40 pound bag: $39! The cheap ground corn feed: $10 for 18 pounds!
That’s for the birds! Or more accurately, no longer for the birds.
Just another thing Biden has ruined with his Party’s “Pay to Stay Home” plan, flooding the economy with money to buy things no one is working to make, ship, or stock!
Maybe I’ll go back to feeding my 3F beneficiaries in the Spring, when I can enjoy their company. But until then …
Question: If we – The American Public – reach consensus in acknowledging that Corporate America is a). “In this together …” with us; b). Are doing everything they can to recognize our “Heroes on the Home Front“; and c) Are willing to do “whatever is necessary” to serve our needs during the COVID-19 crisis, can we dispense with the endless commercials “celebrating” our “shared experiences” in being incredibly annoyed and monumentally bored?!?
At this point, what Corona America needs right now is relief from the endless Corporate Corona Imaging efforts!
On-line image searches suggest the COVID-19 virus comes in an assortment of color patterns. Personally, I like this one best!
So how do I really feel about the COVID-19 crisis?
Like a lot of us, I am pretty fed up with the restrictions, the draconian measures and – as you can tell from the above – flat out getting annoyed with the perpetual message that “Golly gee … Ain’t this a wonderful Community-building opportunity?!?”
As for the crisis itself, I do not presume to know more than scientists and medical experts. However, based on 64 years experience on this planet, I can offer several rational checks on the emotional responses and the measures taken to protect us Everyone.
My biggest issue here is the premise that ALL people need protecting. That could be either a pragmatic, experience-based point-of-view or a cynical, sick-of-this-crap response. You decide.
The following might help …
Never in my life has anything even remotely similar occurred, where everyday normal life functions have been curtailed by quarantining the entire populace.
Swine flu, avian flu, H1N1, Asian flu (Was not considered “racist” at the time.), Hong Kong flu (ditto) never resulted in responses this restrictive and severe.
Is it really statistically possible that there has not been a similarly threatening flu or virus flying around the globe since the 1918 Spanish flu. (Something I really have a very difficult time accepting!)
People die of flu-type and viral illnesses every year.
“Overall, the CDC estimates that 12,000 and 61,000 deaths annually since 2010 can be blamed on the flu. Globally, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that the flu kills 290,000 to 650,000 people per year.”
In general, it’s the same people, who are most likely to die, regardless of the viral type or its virility. The elderly, the very young, those with preexisting illnesses are always the most susceptible.
There are no proven effective measures at stopping a potent flu or virus from spreading, not locally, nationally, or globally.
Now here’s where my particular brand of cynical pragmatism might get me in trouble with some people.
My salute to dairy farmers on the front line.
Exactly what has been gained by shutting down society; crippling economies; and threatening the very subsistence (e.g. meat packaging) of our healthy population? We still have thousands of the elderly dying from COVID-19, despite the measures taken to protect them. In some cases, the very decisions made by government authorities under the powers bestowed upon them under COVID-19 protocols killed more of the institution-bound elderly!
From the perspective of societal evolution, it’s is always the old, the infirm, the weak, and the very young who are most likely to succumb to such health threats. Does that change in any way by forcing everyone into isolation?
And what of the biology of the healthy? We know that the human immune system works to evolve by creating antibodies when new biological threats present themselves. How is this being affected through attempts to keep everyone from being exposed? How does such an approach help should – as some predict – this virus recycles itself as it circles the globe?
Sweden has taken a very different approach to the corona virus, where the social, economic, and vulnerability issues appear more balanced, based on risk assessments and folkvett, a cultural concept that roughly translates to “good manners”, that – colloquially – can be expressed as “act like an ******* adult”. And although some express caution or even open derision at Sweden’s strategy, their objections are largely based on the lack of sufficient statistical data to support the strategy and emotional responses to the threat to vulnerable populations.
Meanwhile, in Sweden …
In my humble opinion, if you take Emotion out of the risk assessment equation, the Swedish example sounds like a much more pragmatic approach. And let’s recall how often Sweden is elevated as a shining example of sound socialist healthcare management! If such is the case, why do efforts to behave closer to the Swedish model meet so much resistance, particularly in our more liberal states?
Risk, fear and emotion will be the biggest obstacles as we emerge from quarantine. My biggest fear – given how risk-adverse politicians are – is the potential for monumentally slow and tentative decisions on how best to get back to normal (whatever “normal” will look like). Many politicians – in their interests to remain employed as public servants benefactors – may very well approach every COVID-19 decision as a three-sided puzzle (please everyone, risk nothing, minimize emotional responses).
Under such circumstances, a productive and fair balancing act is not impossible. Attempting to avoid any and all losses, which are inevitable, will retard the recovery and accomplish nothing more than prolonging the pain for those for whom normal life means survival (hands-on, in-person workers; small businesses; retail, bar and food employees; personal service providers; etc.)
What the authors neglected to leave out is Perspective, in favor of attempts at triggering Emotion and Fear. As in … If – as this model suggests – Pennsylvania deaths were to increase to 8600, the overall death-per-capita in Pennsylvania (pop. 12.7 million) would be 0.068%.
Those whose health is compromised or threatened we must continue to protect, but frankly, that should have been the primary focus all along, not necessarily a total societal shutdown. It’s always the duty of the healthy to be mindful of the vulnerable with whom they will have contact (family members, friends, coworkers, etc.). COVID-19 did not change what is – should be – a modicum of human decency.
Put another way, we should prudently reopen the country, especially in less dense population areas (e.g. suburban communities) and demand that people act like adults! Now THAT would be an effective use endless Corporate Corona messaging!
And if this proves too difficult a concept for some to grasp, then maybe Society will benefit from their absence on the evolutionary ladder!
It’s been awhile with some very, very long stretches in between. My reasons for – in all practical purposes – abandoning the art of blogging are as varied as the random directions my brain-streamings often led me. The biggest reason, however, is the nagging suspicion that I was – for the most part – talking to myself.
Nothing has really changed … aside from that huge Blanket of Uncertainty now hanging over us and the realization that the Human form is damn fragile!
But it does give me something to write about, even if I’m the only one reading it.
Day 4 is my personal accounting from the first day, Friday – the 13th day of March, when the Most Powerful Navy in the World – semi-officially – told me and those I work with to “Stay the hell home!” (my wording, not theirs)
So here I sit, fretting not so much about the virus, but more so how I might survive another “pre-retirement practice drill” with my loving, private-time-loving spousal unit. As I’m pretty sure, if this lasts more than a few weeks, death by COVID-19 might be the LEAST of my worries!
I am was a corona virus skeptic. Not skeptical that the virus is real, dangerous, potent, and deadly … I have read enough about pandemics and live with a very experienced registered nurse to know better. More skeptical about the way its presence has been made the focus of hyper-caffeinated media hysteria, the ridiculous conspiracy theories about origins and transmissions, and the public panic which ensued.
I have no doubt this is serious or that The Authorities know more they are not sharing to be taking such drastic public measures. But that will be the last I say about it. My posts here will be more about coping with what is simply – at least for now – a personal inconvenience and intrusion.
We are trapped in a “Twilight Zone” of deliberate ineptitude when we are prevented from resolving very fixable problems for reasons having nothing to do with protecting the sanctity and our confidence in reliable institutions such as voting!
Voter fraud does not need to be “rampant” to be a problem requiring correction. We don’t allow occasional financial fraud or identity theft to go unpunished or uncorrected, especially if there are systemic flaws. What’s the difference here?
Does anyone truly believe an example such as the proven and recent occurrence of Dead People voting in Philadelphia cannot or should not be addressed in a systemic way that would make such instances much less – even if not entirely – likely to happen in the future?
Prove to me that such reluctance is not simply an overreaction to Political Objectives callously anchored in false racial sensibilities!
It’s been awhile since last we spoke. Personally, I have been having a hard time finding subjects on which I feel strongly enough to write. My writer’s block has however been finally been broken by a flood of Facebook posts deriding the recent trend of National Football League (NFL) players refusing to stand; kneeling through; or raising black fists in protest of varying social conditions during The National Anthem.
The Facebook pleas encourage me to stop watching the NFL; to boycott league-sponsored merchandise and broadcast sponsors; and demand corrective action, even laws to punish the offenders.
Now most people, who know me, will expect me to come down hard and fast on the side of showing our National Emblem the deference and respect we believe it deserves without fail … ever. And certainly I believe that …
What nags at me however is the thought that Respect for national symbolism – be it The Anthem or The Flag – trumps the Rights of the First Amendment, particularly that of Free Speech. While I do not appreciate disrespectful displays or treatments of The Flag, what I choose to cherish most are the Freedoms that allow such behaviors as an expression of perceived failures or injustices.
Unfortunately for our various sensibilities, Respect for the First Amendment requires a higher level of tolerance for the ways in which our Freedoms are expressed. Accommodating the freedom to express oneself requires an Advanced Degree in American Citizenship, particularly when its display encroaches on the symbols, institutions, and rituals for which we wear our Hearts on our sleeves.
This is not easy. But then again, it was never intended to be easy.
Certainly we can express our scorn and anger at what we interpret to be unconscionable violations of national heritage and symbolism. That freedom to express one’s disdain is covered in the same protections that allow the type of demonstrations that annoy the bejesus out of us.
We can publicly judge those who burn The Flag or choose not to stand for The National Anthem is the best – or only way – they can express their own anger and frustration. But punishment and retribution?!?
No, those reactions are the purview of authoritarians, dictators, and oppressors who look to preserve their own peculiar claim to rule by denying Voice to the People! This is not what Americans do. It is not how we roll!
No matter how maddening the behavior …
Allow me please to reiterate, since I am sure some will take this message as endorsement of the practices. I do NOT agree with flagrant displays of disrespect for my Country, its cherished symbols, or the Principles for which it stands. What I do recognize is that there are degrees of disrespect I can live with, in the knowledge that our Founding Fathers no doubt intended for The Bill of Rights to be a challenge to both the Government and its citizens!
And I have had my moments in celebrating the actions inherent in those who Advanced Degrees in Citizenship spurred them to action!
I applauded – wildly, I might add – the Chicago Cubs’ Rick Monday, when on April 25, 1976 he ran from his outfield position to arrest the flag-burning attempts of two supposed war protesters.
Those of us who would appreciate Mondays’ quick actions should also recognize that demonstrations of national disrespect sometimes accomplish nothing more than to illustrate a protestor’s failure of perspective, particularly when they simply draw negative attention to the person or position they claim to support by physically mistreating or burning The Flag. In my opinion, your cause, your candidate – even the people who support them – will suffer in our view. When they fail to recognize or value the Sacrifices made by others, whose sacrifice allows them to express themselves so freely, they cheapen whatever message they are pushing.
There’s the rub really that protesters of this sort fail to appreciate. You might attract limited, short-lived attention for your cause or position ; but that transient recognition will fade faster than the headshakes and mental “F— you!”s tossed your way by those drawn serendipitously into your protest. For those whom your message is intended, you run the greater risk of alienating them rather than changing minds or opening a discussion.
The story is quite different when it comes to the quiet, almost reverential protests we have witnessed recently at football games … at least in my opinion. These passive demonstrations, inspired by a back-up quarterback no less, where sitting or taking a knee as the National Anthem is played or the slightly more active stance of raised black fists is – if nothing else – much easier to manage emotionally.
We may not like such displays. But we should also wonder why they are considered necessary by those protesting.
I may not understand the need to turn one’s back to The Anthem or to embellish one’s seemingly reluctant participation with a raised fist. But many people do understand the need to take such action. If they did not, we would not be having these conversations today.
And that’s really what that pesky, sometimes irritating Freedom of Speech is intended to do … Give voice to those who feel isolated or left behind, whether or not we can appreciate their position!
So no … Do not ask me to boycott the NFL or Pepsi or Hyundai or Papa John’s pizza simply because your sensibilities were offended by a kneel or a clenched fist at an inappropriate time. Because I have news for you …
The emotions you feel, the reactions you have to such displays are exactly what the Founding Fathers were likely hoping might occur when one group or another feels the need to draw attention to their perceived plight in any way that stirs our emotions. The Stars and Stripes is a collection of fabric to which we attach a great deal of pride and symbolism; but it’s the Fabric of our Nation, expressed in the Freedoms passed down to us, that makes all things possible.
I want to be completely open and honest, now that you’re not standing in front of me with that inquisitive look, no doubt thinking to yourself, “Does he use these things?!?”
I don’t … honestly.
I know you saw me perusing the selections and placing the Bulk Economy package (Then again, what else does Sam’s Club sell?) into my cart. I know that you were only looking for a recommendation … from a guy … who MIGHT use them, even if you can’t come right out and ask that question without running the risk of insult or embarrassment (mine, not yours).
I know I shouldn’t feel awkward or uneasy discussing what has become a more frequent, open, and necessary product. Of course I knew that whenever Carol asked me to pick up “feminine needs”.
I know there’s nothing odd, weird, or emasculating about running such a loving errand. Still it made me a bit skittish and self-conscious. Just like our conversation today.
I swear … I really was buying them for another family member. I swear …
Just stop looking at me like that!
Or was that just my skittish, self-conscious imagination? Maybe it was the fact that I had mumbled to myself … right before you walked up to me, “I wonder if anyone who sees me thinks I need these things?”
Sometimes I am my own worst enemy.
By the way, your father seemed like a very nice man when he rejoined you and we exchanged knowing glances. He’s lucky to have someone, who is looking out for him and doing everything they can to maintain his dignity in a difficult, but thoughtful way.
My wife, Carol, could teach a few things on the subject of taking care of our parents.
I hope I helped what little I could.
It’s never easy to confront the ravages of age. Most of us will get there in due time. Let’s hope we have those to take care of us when the time comes.
The 2016 election cycle will bring enough fireworks at the National level for many people to forego down-ticket races that do not directly involve their vote. In a political season where being The Outsider threatening to turn over the Party Table and chase the money-changers from the Temple, it’s the long shot, disruptive dark horse that is drawing attention and excitement … with varying degrees of success.
John Fetterman … an unmistakable physical presence
Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders draw the bulk of attention at the Presidential level. For those not living in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, it might also be interesting to watch the race for U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania … especially if John Fetterman wins the Pennsylvania Democrat primary for the Senate nomination!
How does a U.S. Senator live something like this down?
Fetterman is nothing, if not the most atypical candidate for Senate since Al Franken attempted – unsuccessfully IMHO – to shed his Saturday Night Live persona when he went on to win a Senate seat in Minnesota. The difference between the two is that John Fetterman has been a serious man … always serious. And he has a successful background as a man who has gotten things done politically and socially.
His AmeriCorps gig landed him in Braddock, Pennsylvania, a bedroom community to the long-gone steel mills of Andrew Carnegie in and around Pittsburgh. The town lost most of its jobs with the disappearance of the American steel industry.
In 2005 Fetterman challenged the incumbent mayor and won election by a single vote! The job paid $110/month, barely adding much financially to his $30,ooo/year job directing the Out-of-School-Youth Program. He won re-election in 2009 by an almost 3-1 margin.
He purchased the First Presbyterian Church, slated for demolition, a nearby abandoned warehouse, and numerous house, which he redeveloped and offered with cheap or free rent. Fetterman used the promise of cheap rent and initiated a rebirth of Braddock as an artsy Renaissance town complete with a two-acre organic garden managed by the Braddock Youth Project.
Those accomplishments certainly qualify John Fetterman as a most interesting and active public servant. But it’s his non-conforming physical and vocal presence that really sets him apart from the usual dry, buttoned-down Senate types.
Fetterman is physically imposing at 6’8″ tall, weighing 320 pounds. He has numerous tattoos, an imposing bald head, huge unruly chin beard, and a manner of plain dress that will definitely shake up the sleepy U.S. Senate chamber, if he were to get that far.
So deep is his dedication to Braddock, he has its Zip Code tattooed inside one arm!
Unfortunately, Fetterman trails a lightweight front-runner in Katie McGinty, whose limited claims to fame were serving in various National and State environmental roles and as Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf’s campaign manager …
… And then there’s wacky Liberal re-tread Joe Sestak.
As a Republican sure to vote for incumbent Senator Pat Toomey, I tend to tune out the most liberal Democrats, as I was John Fetterman. That was until I saw the following Fetterman ad. Then I read his resumé …
If one concedes John Fetterman has a hopelessly uphill battle to bring his unorthodox – but productive – style of politics to the Senate, one cannot but hope he finds a way to continue his work in Pennsylvania. His sense of empathy and get-it-done attitude is something from which we all might benefit!
The U.S. Army base in Carlisle, PA is the object of an unusual request from the Rosebud Sioux Indian tribe of South Dakota. Long before the army base existed, the site was home to the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, the flagship of federally-funded, off-reservation boarding schools where the motto was “Kill the Indian, save the Man.”
A photo of the student body of the Carlilsle Indian School from March, 1892, is photographed on the school grounds where it was taken. The Rosebud Sioux in South Dakota have begun efforts to repatriate the remains of the 10 Rosebud students buried on the Carlisle school grounds. CHARLES FOX / Staff Photographer
Within the Army’s current home 186 graves of Indian children from numerous Native American tribes. The children victim of disease, abuse, and inadequate care at the industrial school intended to assimilate Indian populations with white culture and society. The children were largely the offspring of Indian chiefs, who were convinced by the program’s agents that the children would be properly educated and better prepared to lead their scattered tribes to relationships on more equal footing with their white counterparts.
The intent of the program might be looked upon today as simply one of those backward thinking, even “progressive” attempts to help a defeated and exiled people to adapt and even prosper within the dominant society. Maybe even a noble cause to promote better relations with the Europeans, who were spreading westward like ants.
However the abuses, including forced labor, beatings for refusal to speak English, physical and sexual abuse, and inadequate care, exposed the program as an attempt to expunge Indian cultures. These 186 children never made it Home.
The Rosebud children were sent 1400 miles away from home. Some were pried away from parents forced with the choice of giving up their children or their food rations. Many of the children died from diseases and malnutrition, some due to abuse.
Leaders of the Rosebud Sioux tribe had forgotten about the spirits of their dead children buried (some without parents even knowing they were dead) so far from home. The issue was raised after a group of young Rosebud students visited the cemetery after a trip to Washington, D.C. last Summer for the Tribal Youth Gathering.
Now I never understood the motivations and mindset of our earlier American ancestors as they set upon a vanquished Nation, taking advantage of Position and Power to denude Indian cultures and then to exploit them in their imposed poverty. This example seems to be one of the more egregious ones, although the effort does reflect much of the social and cultural thinking of the time.
I hope we have evolved beyond that kind of social engineering think.
As for the Spirits the Rosebud Sioux insist are restless to return home, demonstrated – they say – by the swarm of fireflies that visited the cemetery after a traditional Sioux ceremony, the Army should simply allow the Rosebud Sioux to take their children home.
The Inquirer’s study, based on a review of insurance claim forms, follows another study that found St. Christopher newborn cardiac patients were also much more likely to die than similar patients at CHOP. St. Christopher’s recently stopped all non-emergency heart procedures as it conducts an internal review of its heart surgery program.
Now, I’m no medical professional, but I would presume that in the 21 years since Dr. Moulick attended the University of Bombay, there have been a few changes in the ways thoracic surgery is performed, particularly for infants. When you consider that the Head of Thoracic Surgery also sets the tone for those performing under him, you get the idea that maybe it’s time for Dr. Moulick to break out his “How to …” books and seek an American-style recertification from this particular century!
Finally a story, Bringing Down Blumberg, by Aubrey Whelan on the history and destructive end on the Norman Blumberg Apartments at 22nd and Sharswood Streets in North Philadelphia. Blumberg was built in the late 1960s as a high-rise apartment complex dedicated to low-income residents.
“But within a few short years, the towers came to typify all that had gone wrong with the public-housing policies of the 1960s – a symbol of misguided urban planning, concentrated poverty, and official neglect writ large.”
Two intricately related resident reactions – just seven years apart underscores the kind of hopelessness that permeated mass low-income urban housing in many parts of the country. In 1967, the day Blumberg opened to its brand new residents, one gushes how “Each resident helps out the other.”. Just seven years later after a gang-rape at Blumberg, a resident told The Inquirer, “The amazing thing is that no one helps anybody out.”
For years now, I have had difficulties understanding the attraction of a song we never hear at any time other than the Christmas season. That’s kind of weird really, because whenever you listen to the song you never hear a reference to Christmas or the holidays in general.
Yes … Baby, It’s Cold Outside!
But to be honest, I hadn’t really wondered aloud about why it’s considered a “holiday tune” until I downloaded the song – in one of it’s many, many versions sung by many, many artists – to my iPod. Then, after a few years of hearing it only during the playing of my Christmas playlist, thinking to myself, “What the hell does this have to do with Christmas?”
And in these Days of Enlightenment, the lyrics are simply creepy! At least in Neptune’s Daughter, the movie where the song made it’s premiere wide distribution, the women get a bit of a turn-around in the second part of the song, which featured the comical interpretation by Red Skelton. But it’s the first part of this popular song duet, as sung in the movie by Ricardo Montalban and Esther Williams, that most listeners connect with.
The song obviously is the whimsical version of the classic late-night attempt at seduction. The wily male working his mystical – or mythical – charms to seduce the seemingly attracted, yet uncertain, female. Plying her with compliments, alcohol, and his “worries” she might suffer hypothermia due to the rampant Winter weather.
But in this day and age, when we consider ourselves so much more enlightened, critics point to the female’s repeated desires to leave, although she seems unwilling to “break the spell”, the phrase “Hey, what’s in this drink?!?” (and flashes perhaps of Bill Cosby), and the females pointed, “The answer is ‘No!'” as indications of something more sinister.
Maybe they are right …
Now I have a theory about the hows and whys the song became and remained so popular. It’s my own personal theory, which I do not recall ever hearing discussed, so I’ll lay it out there for you to consider. But first some history on the song itself
Now my theory is wrapped in the biggest event circling the globe in the year Loesser wrote the song, 1944 and World War II.
It’s not hard to understand the attraction “Baby, It’s Cold Outside” may have had for those in our parents’ (and grandparents’, great-grandparent’s) generation. At a time when the song was published (1949), many men had been home just a few years after witnessing and participating the largest, most tragic periods of American history. Many of these men may have witnessed the deaths of friends in the most grisly of manners. Many had killed men themselves in the most grisly of manners.
I envision a mindset that suggested living Life to its fullest; refusing to allow opportunities for Life, Love, or Fun to pass by. Perhaps the song touched that chord that suggests living for Today and being bold enough to pursue such pleasures.
The same chord might have just as easily been struck in the women of the day as well. Many of them fresh off the assembly lines of the war, building tanks, trucks, airplanes, bombs, etc. Some say the female subject of the song was exercising a form of liberation by not conforming to the expectations and standards of a society after shouldering the burden of supplying the Arsenal of Democracy in its destruction of fascist oppression.
She earned many a hefty paycheck and the Independence that goes with financial power. Perhaps she is flaunting social convention as held by her parents, siblings, maiden aunt, and even her neighbors … She simply doesn’t sound so sure that’s a good idea!
Maybe … After all the sexual revolution would be just 15-20 years away in 1949; and certainly some of that rebelliousness would have been felt by both sexes coming off four years of liberating responsibility!
Then again … The fact that the original song score referred to the male role as the “wolf” and the female role as the “mouse” coats the entire subject once again in potential ickiness.
But certainly, it seems the song has outlived its playfulness.
Heck, I still can’t get passed the fact that it’s considered “holiday music”. And for the past few years, every time it came up on the iPod rotation I would mention this to whomever was sitting next to me who might – or might not – care. It has gotten to the point where Carol now will immediately say, “Yes, I know … Why is this a Christmas song?!?”
I can be a bit redundant. Surprise!
Now it’s becoming common to drag the song out into the light and bludgeon it with images of Bill Cosby (as Saturday Night Live did recently) or date rape as “Funny or Die” portrayed the song.
Personally, I think that’s a bit unfair as parodies seem to be sometimes. After all in all versions of the song, we are left to imagine what the outcome was. Can any of us say it was Good or Bad? Who are we to judge?
I do have a healthier respect for the song now that I have read of its origins, the man who created it, and its initial purpose. And frankly, until today I had never seen its basic premise turned around 180 degrees, as it was in the second part of its Neptune’s Daughter version.
One must concede that its imagery and language are dated and present complications for a society firmly ensconced in no-pressure sexuality, where slick talk or chemical gimmicks are rightfully seen as robbing individual choice. Yet I can not ignore that initially it was simply a quaintly mischievous song, written by a renown composer to be sung with his wife to family and friends as a way of saying “Good night, the Party’s over.”
Now, someone needs to explain to me how this duet became associated with the Christmas holidays!