Thursday, September 29, 2005 

What is it they say about truth in any debate?

I took a trip to Texas in early August, as most Toyah readers know (since you were either in Texas also, knew people who were in Texas, or just read about the Texas happenings on Toyah). What most of you don’t know is that the book I took along with me was Summer for the Gods, by Edward Larson. I do not expect anyone to be especially surprised that I took a book along, however.

In any case, I finished it a few weeks ago, but have been slow to get a review posted. I like to review the books I’ve finished, partly because I know that some of my fellow Toyah posters, and probably some readers too, have similar reading tastes; but mostly to remind myself later of what the book was about.

So, Summer for the Gods. It’s not a very long book, just 266 pages. It comes in three parts: the pre-trial, the trial, and the post-trial, which is to say, the myth that the Scopes Trial became. In the pre-trial section, we learn a lot about Dayton, TN: a new town, a town looking for a way to get their name on the map. Several leading men of Dayton decided that testing Tennessee’s new anti-evolution was just the ticket. Surprising to me, the discussion over whether to have a trial and whom to indict was completely cordial. It was understood from the beginning that there would be no punishment for John Scopes if he were convicted. The whole idea was to get some publicity for Dayton, TN---not to be the showdown for evolution vs. creation.

Things got out of hand, though, and the local lawyers who were initially involved proved unable to control the case, leading to the involvement of the young ACLU and Clarence Darrow for the defense, and William Jennings Bryan for the prosecution. Their involvement made the Scopes trial the circus it became. The trial itself is the most gripping part of the story, if a story about a long-ago court case can be called gripping. But certainly the people of the day thought it was. Whenever the rumor went around that Darrow or Bryan were to speak the next day, huge throngs of people showed up. When Darrow called Bryan to the stand, the judge decided to move the court out-of-doors to accommodate the crowd.

The most significant part of the Scopes trial, however, was not the buildup nor the trial itself (which convicted John Scopes but was later dismissed at the appellate level on a technicality). Scopes became important because of the myth. In this myth, the trial was a titanic collision between the forces of evolution and the forces of creation. Or between the forces of evil and the forces of good. Or perhaps it was a battle between the forces of progressivism and the forces of fundamentalism. Or maybe it was science versus ignorance. It was all of those things to everyone. At the time, however, the evolutionists thought they had lost. Tennessee’s anti-evolution law stayed on the books, and several other states in the South also passed anti-evolution laws in the following years. By 1955, when Scopes was remade into a commentary on McCarthyism in the play Inherit the Wind, the memory had changed due to Only Yesterday, a book by a 1920’s journalist named George Allen. He went through the headlines from the ‘20’s and grossly simplified them, concluding that Scopes was a decisive defeat for old-time religion. Inherit the Wind carried Allen’s interpretation on, and has become the standard source of information on the Scopes Trial, despite the fact that neither Allen nor the writers of Inherit the Wind intended to write history, and in fact changed the record to suit their purposes.

From Only Yesterday on, Scopes has endured as "the monkey trial" where evolution won and creation lost. A review of the historical record shows that the truth was hardly so simple: at the time, both sides thought that creationists were victorious. Summer for the Gods thus demonstrates that no fact is more uncertain as the one that everyone assumes to be true.

By the way, here's a lawyer's take on Tennessee v. Scopes, as told by Summer for the Gods.

Monday, September 26, 2005 

Last Week in the State News

An amusing article on Monday...

The editorial board has their say on Tuesday...

More ruffled feathers on Friday.

I didn't think much of the event when I read about it. After hearing the retorts of the offended parties I couldn't help but laugh... a lot! It was just hilarious that these people got so upset. I think they could use a big dose of "get over yourselves." The State News... always entertaining.

Saturday, September 24, 2005 

Mr. Schmuck

Wow...talk about guts!

Read the story about one of the nation's newest Medal of Honor winners.

Tuesday, September 20, 2005 

Pond-jumping

I've just come back from a little jaunt over the pond (Germany, Austria, Hungary and Slovenia) and I thought I'd just post a few observations and thoughts from my trip that may be of some interest to this group.

1. Germany had it's election this past sunday and the results were fascinating. The plurality of votes went to the right parties, with 35 or so percent going middle-right (CDU/SCU) and 10 percent going further-right (FDP). However, with Germany's parliamentary system this is not enough to form a new government. One of 2 of the left parties will have to join in, or the middle right may not be able to form a government at all.
The election was anticipated to go much further right after Schroeder's mixed reviews of the past few years. The middle-right's candidate for chancelor was a women - Andrea Merkel - she apparently failed miserably and much talk is now swirling that one of the big reasons that the election didn't go much further to the right, as anticipated, was because voters in Germany were not yet ready for a women-Kanzler (chancellor). As one commentator put it, the F-word ("frau") played a big role in this election.

This of course gets me thinking about our next presidential election. If Germany, a far more progressive country, cannot elect a women, what does this say for Hillary? Of course the obvious difference is that Hillary is the left candidate, not the right candidate, so it theoretically wouldn't hurt her base as much as it hurt Merkel in Germany. Thoughts?

That's it for now; maybe I'll post some more of my thoughts tommorrow.

Thursday, September 15, 2005 

Presidents and Floodwaters

I just finished watching the President's address to the nation. It bothers me somewhat that conservatives and liberals alike seem to be quick to expect the federal government to shoulder the lion's share of the post-disaster recovery work. On the other hand, despite some unease, it's probably true that the scale of this particular disaster is so large as to be beyond the capability of any one state to handle, especially for Louisiana, which would mean that this is precisely what the federal government is supposed to do.

Although Bush's approach still seems to mostly be concerned with throwing money at it. To be fair, there isn't a lot else that the federal government, per se, can do. I'm not very keen on his suggestion that this calamity shows the need for more federal presence and oversight in local disaster planning. The locals will always be more local and more in touch with local needs than any kind of central authority, no matter how honest or well-meaning or well-run. The catch-22 for Bush is that the local authorities appear to have failed quite badly in Louisiana, and then passed the blame to him.

Very interesting idea, to call for an Urban Homestead Act. I've always believed that the federal government should not own land it doesn't need. It's not clear that this is necessary---was any land actually made uninhabitable by Katrina?---but it's a nice gesture. Although, it doesn't appear that there is all that much federal land available in Louisiana, Mississippi, or Alabama. Most of what there is, is Forest Service land, which probably won't maket he tree-huggers happy at all.

I wonder why Bush doesn't do these more often? I wouldn't classify this as a home-run (to continue the over-used baseball analogies from this week), but it was still a good effort. I've heard he dislikes speaking before the public, but he usually does a good job, and they almost always boost his approval ratings. Plus, he can connect to the public and go on the offensive against his critics.

 

get a job

having failed thus far in my attempt to get a sugar mama to 'be rich, support me, and not nag', and having decided to leave the world of 5/3, i must now search for gainful employment. i don't want to do anything demanding or challenging, and i want lots of money for it. can i be a supreme court justice? i would start by kicking a california federal judge square in the whatnot.

Tuesday, September 13, 2005 

weekend in hillsdale

big thank-you to anthony and debbie for reuniting me with my bed away from bed...the couch from the highlands is still as sleepable as ever. and thank-you, again, to debbie for breakfast on saturday morning.

friday night 3 couples and dallas met for some quality chill time at anthony's. matt and lia survived a night in the wild and saturday was full of football in all its forms, and with all its trappings. there was tecmo, pep band(minus the alumni who pushed for an alumni version), live college football, and televised college football...2 of 4 went well, but the buckeyes failed me, and i managed to lose 3-0 in tecmo's old-timers game.

ray's still has good hamburgers, and hungry howie's is still awesome fast pizza.

mrs. ciofani was greeted with a 9/11 disaster....a birthday dance from o'toole and me. welcome to oldness!

Wednesday, September 07, 2005 

supremely surprised

i am shocked that there has not been new rounds of SCOTUS conversation. not that i would have a lot to add of any weight, but still...7 member court? no chief justice? new nominee as chief justice? these seem like burning toyah questions.

in other news: i got pep band music in the mail yesterday...if my trombone were down here i might be tempted to practice a little before saturday. i wonder if holleman will be jealous of my possible pep band appearance.