The War on "Happy Holidays"

Text © Robert Barry Francos, 2012
Images from the Internet, which can be made larger by clicking on them 

As with many places in the Western Hemisphere, here in Saskatoon there is currently a debate on flashing bus signs, which alternate every couple of seconds between the destination and “Merry Christmas.” Someone is currently bringing the City to the Human Rights Commission, stating that this is discriminatory, and exclusive. He is being lambasted in much of the media and has even had threats to his life. Some are saying he is part of the War on Christmas.

This, of course, is ludicrous. There is no war on Christmas. No one is trying to stop Christmas, but rather also include their own beliefs and holidays into the equation. But the cultural hegemony, as it has been for over a thousand years, is that “my belief is more important than your belief.” Recently, my city counsellor (equivalent to an assemblyperson) stated to me, “Merry Christmas is no longer exclusive to Christianity. The Christmas Season and the greeting ‘Merry Christmas’ have come to mean different things to different people. The celebration/season is as diverse as the cultural composition of our community.” His response to the debate was to say, in a public sphere, “Merry Christmas Everybody.”

Really? Christmas is no longer exclusive to Jesus? Well, let’s look at the word. Christmas = Christ + Mas, or celebration. A celebration of Christ. I found his remark highly insulting. Just what did he mean by everybody? It certainly does not include me, or at least three others I know of his constituency (one Jewish, one semi-Buddhist, one atheist). When I questioned him about this (on Facebook), part of his response was “The Christmas Season and the greeting ‘Merry Christmas’ have come to mean different things to different people. The celebration/season is as diverse as the cultural composition of our community.” Yes, he is correct, to the Christians it means “woo-hoo” but for most of us who are not of the belief, it can also mean oppression. However, for the way he meant it, Bzzzzzz wrong. Just because Christianity is the majority does not make it right.

The year-end season is filled with holidays of a legion of faiths. Those who are not Christian (i.e., not "of Christ"), be it Jewish (Hanukah), Muslim (Ramadan, Eid al-Fitr, Malkh), African/African-American/-Canadian (Kwanzaa), Buddhist (Diwali), Sikh (Gurpurab) Hindi (Diwali, Festival of Lights, Holi, Festival of Colors, and Janmaashtmi), Wiccan or other goddess-based faiths (Yule, solstice), followers of Zarathustra (Zoroastria) and others (and I'm not even going into the beliefs of agnostics or atheists), Christmas can be an assault rather than a pleasure. It is telling us (and yes, I'm aware I am speaking for others) that we are not part of the Saskatoon culture, or wherever else this situation is occurring.

Currently, I work for an organization that helps new arrivals look for jobs and prepare for their new life. Most of those I meet are either non-Christian Asian, or Muslim. With the new flood of immigrants coming to the West, the conservative officials currently in office are feeling the pressure of some older constituents who fear the change, or the narrow minds of the “me-or-them” younger voters, and use their own beliefs to shore up the current condition. But that status quo is shifting, and changing fast. Alienating the new arrivals (something conservatives seem to thrive on, using that fear of change) was done to the Irish in the 1880, the Jews in the early 20th Century, the Italians after that, and so on. Now it’s anyone who does not fit into the paradigm set up by the majority in charge.

I’ve heard it said, “Canada [or the United States] is based on Christianity” or “the teachings of Jesus Christ.” Uh, no, it’s not. For example, let’s look at the last 500 years or so: Jews have been around since the beginning of the New World, and essentially made up most of Columbus’ crew (who were taken from the prisons, during the Spanish Inquisition). Most of the American Revolution was funded by Jews in New York and Boston. Much of the infrastructure of the west was built by non-Christian Chinese laborers. Multi-cultures built North America. But if you want to look back, it was First Nations, Inuit, Aztecs and Mayans (among other indigenous groups) that were here way before any Christian settlers found their way to the New World, each with their own beliefs that were just as valid to them as those who settled on their land.

I have no problem with a citizen wishing me a "Merry Christmas.” It’s a nice sentiment, no doubt. However, when it is stated by a elected government representative in an official capacity, or is on government or common land, I cringe at it. It no longer feels like a government representing me when the insistence is on something that does not include me. I become the "other," which is the first step toward persecution. Underrated comic Bobcat Goldthwait once became upset with an audience member who gave him the Arsenio Hall “woop-woop,” stating it is only one short step between “woop-woop” and “sieg heil.” While this may be a stretch, I understand what he meant, and to me in is echoed in the “Merry Christmas” chant by a governing body.

The solution to this is a simple Happy Holidays or Season's Greetings. Keep Christmas in your heart. Just don't use it as a stake into mine, and others that are not of Christian belief. Saying Happy Holidays is not a War on Christmas, it is a cry asking for equality, for inclusion into the cultural milieu. Besides, it’s not like there aren’t many other reminders of Christmas. For example, people have nativity scenes and both beautiful and occasionally garish lights (and many ugly large blow-up thingies) on their property, stores are filled with Christmas music and signs, the light poles lining the street are filled with Christmas icons (Santa, angels, and the like), and the Salvation Army’s presence is overwhelming. Having a State-stated “Happy Holiday” is not going to change people’s beliefs, nor make a dent in the nearly omnipresence of Christmas ambiance. Season’s Greetings is more of a way of saying “Welcome one and all.” I will remember this intolerance come election time, and I am going to assume so will many of the new large numbers of immigrates.

Merry Christmas is just part of the majority’s colonialism at the forefront. “You Shall Have No Other Gods Before Me” is taken from a non-Christian book, the Old Testament, and yet has been coopted to proselytize and dominate others. So, how is changing the signs on city property to Happy Holidays from Merry Christmas a War on Christmas, when it is all-pervading nearly everywhere else?

DVD Reviews: Nazi Hunters

Text © Robert Barry Francos / FFanzeen, 2011
Images from the Internet

Nazi Hunters
Various directors
Narrated by Fred Napoli
Double DVD set
Cineflix / MVD Visual DVD, 2010
352 minutes, USD $19.95
MVDvisual.com

As a child of the ‘60s, there was always talk of World War II Nazi’s being “out there,” usually somewhere in South America. Even when it wasn’t verbally stated, there was a presence, be it through the grocer and his wife’s arm tattoos, or from seeing those gruesome films of concentration camps - including bodies in mass graves, toothpick thin prisoners, and executions into ditches - while in Hebrew School, which I attended before my bar mitzvah in 1968. It was there I saw the footage of Eichmann, the banality of evil architect of the Final Solution, though I don’t remember the actual event in the early1960s.

In 1998, I went to Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Buchenwald, and have been to a few of the Holocaust museums, such as the ones in Amsterdam and Washington, DC.

For my generation, World War II-era Nazis (as opposed to neo-Nazis or skinheads) have always been a part of the culture, even if it was the cute and cuddly ones of Hogan’s Heroes and those from the mind of Mel Brooks. Sure, they would get scary again with the likes of Eye of the Needle, Marathon Man, The Boys from Brazil , or the more contemporary Apt Pupil.

But those cinematic villains were equal to others molded out of the propagandist cold war with Russia, or its modern equivalent of Muslim terrorists; scary and evil, but you knew they weren’t real. Sure there was a fear based somewhat on historical reality, but none of them could come close to what the bona fide escaped Nazis meant, and especially for those of my parents’ age. These were not fictional creatures of reimagining, but humans who had done horrific things to fellow humans because of ideology. Six million was an unimaginable number, though later we would find out that it was well over 10 million, when one counts in the infirmed, gays, gypsies, politicos, freedom fighters, etc.

That’s just part of why this Canadian-Brazilian documentary series is so fascinating… and chilling. Through the eight 45-minute episodes, we watch as European activists and Israeli secret agents track down those power-mad cowards who escaped from Europe rather than face their own deeds/demons.

Apparently, South America was a haven for these ilk, thanks in large part to Juan Peron (husband of Evita), who was a business partner to the Nazi regime (is that mentioned in the musical?), and consequently welcomed them under his protection. And how did they get there? Many of these criminals were fostered by a right wing branch of the Catholic Church who supported the Nazis (who set out to rid the world of those Christ killers, right?), and then helped pay their way across the Atlantic into the safety of the Andes.

This is a stunningly well done series, with most of the key players giving testimony to the events, including married Nazi Hunters Beate and Serge Klarsfeld, Sam Donaldson of ABC News in New York, and the actual members of the most respected and feared intelligence agency in the world, Israel’s Mossad, who carried out the capture of the likes of Adolf Eichmann and the assassination of others, such as Herbert Cukurs.

This is an important time for stories such as these. As time passes, and both the perpetrators and the persecuted of the Final Solution are passing into whatever waits them, the recording of events that led up to the discrimination, the enforcement, and the after-effects are documents that must be initialized more fervorently. This is especially true in a modern world of denial and reinterpretations (e.g., Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mamoud Abbass, James Keegstra and Mel’s dad, Hutton Gibson).

One side aspect of this collection is the humanization of the Mossad. Always pictured as cold killing machines, a cinematic-type presumption, here we see them as fallible, with leaders taking missteps and causing the non-capture of Mengele, and the nervousness of some of its agents when dealing with Cukurs, for example. All of the Mossad members who are interviewed are “retired” agents, who are quite brave to admit their deeds, even after all these years.

The formulas for the episode are similar, but almost never redundant. We are introduced to the plan of the specific Nazi hunter(s) in the year they began on their crusade (be it 1964, 1971, or 1988, for example), and those who are planning or participating in it. Then there is a flashback segment to explain why, for example, Barbie is known as “The Butcher of Lyon,” Mengele “The Death Angel,” or Cukus “The Hangman of Riga.” The men in this series were each responsible for the death of between 335 and 900,000 (both Jews and Gentiles), some by their design and others by direct action. Sometimes the footage is a bit graphic, such as mass shootings or dead bodies; the Nazis were infamous for keeping filmed records of their actions. Around this point in the story, we meet some Holocaust survivors with direct links to the action, such as one who lived through Mengele’s twins experiment.

To help with the historical aspects are a number of authors whose books are focused on the period, such as Peter Hellman, Gerald Posner, Richard Rashke (Escape From Sobibór), and Guy Walters (Hunting Evil), the latter being the only one who appears in all eight episodes.

The next section is the actions that lead up to capture following into the feat of those steps taken, whether positive or negative. While much of this part is played out by actors in flashback mode, within this portion what I found particularly fascinating is the inclusion of the actual documents, photos and films that were taken at the time, including Sam Donaldson’s pointed questioning of Erich Priebke on the street, or of Kurt Lischka (Gestapo Chief of Paris) as he leaves his house in Germany in 1971. Some of it is quite hard to watch, such as the photo of one of the subjects a couple of weeks after he had been executed by the Mossad.

The Hunters seem to be broken down into three types, and sometimes they overlap in their attempts. First there is the aforementioned Mossad, who seek justice, sometimes in the form of vengeance. Compelling to me are the Paris-based married hunter team of Serge Klarsfeld (Romanian/French Jew) and especially the incredibly brave Beate Klarsfield (Protestant German; Farrah Fawcett played her in a 1986 television movie). Their dedication is admirable to the point of you wanting to say, “They did what?” Gotta love these people; I wish I could be that brave about the Tea Party, but I digress… The final group tends to be mixed bag of journalists, such as Donaldson, and a French police investigator.

A surprising element is the minimal amount of time given to the most famous Nazi hunter, Simon Wiesenthal, at one episode, even if it was two of the biggest escaped Nazis as far as sheer numbers of deaths on their hands as the masters of Polish death camps Bełżec, Sobibór, and Treblinka. Wiesenthal is – and rightfully so – the name that comes to mind first in the topic of Nazi hunters.

One of the surprising villains that come up again and again as collaborators is the Catholic Church, specifically a fanatical right wing branch called the Knights of Notre Dame (especially under the orders of Archbishop Lefebvre), who, as I said, aided and abetted the fugitives (and probably more during the war). That being said, I so admired the Mother Superior of a Monastery that was involved of hiding Paul Trouvier, a French collaborator who was brutal to both Jews and resistance fighters, as she compels matters into her own hands by taking the monastery’s Bishop to task. I should point out that it is not the whole Church that is put under suspicion here, but this particular branch of right-wingers.

Also culpable through the whole series are governments, such as Germany and a number of South American countries, who are hesitant to take any real action (as in that was the past). John Stewart Mill once famously stated that, “A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury.” This is true of ruling bodies, as well (e.g., British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s bowing to Nazi Germany’s demands, or some present countries’ reaction to Iran’s nuclear capabilities).

While nearly 6 hours long, my attention was never taken away, nor did I feel it dragged in any way. The pace is fast, the people interesting, and it’s even jaw-dropping, fingernail-biting exciting at times. One of the more fascinating documentary series I’ve seen in a very long time. It should come as no surprise that it’s a multiple Gemini Awards (television in Canada) winner including Best History Documentary Program. I’m hoping there will be a second season.

Episodes:
1. Herbert Cukurs (Latvia: “The Hangman of Riga”)
2. Adolf Eichmann (Germany: “The Architect of the Final Solution”)
3. Klaus Barbie (France: “The Butcher of Lyon”)
4. Erich Priebke (Italy)
5. Josef Mengele (Germany [Auschwitz]: “The Angel of Death”)
6. Kurt Lischka (France)
7. Paul Touvier (France; only non-German)
8. Gustav Wagner (Poland: “The Beast”) and Franz Stangl (Poland: “The White Death”)

DVD Review: The Electric Chair

Text © Robert Barry Francos/FFanzeen, 2010
Images from the Internet

The Electric Chair
Written, produced and directed by Mark Eisenstein
Wild Eye, 1985 / (rereleased) 2010
105 minutes, USD $16.95
Wildeyereleasing.com
MVDvisual.com

Whether Mark (Marcus) Eisenstein’s work could be put into the transgressive film category is borderline, but he does have an aggressive style that has a large dose of religion (mostly Jewish), confrontation, and imagery.

His The Electric Chair, from 1985, has long (well, for 25 years) been considered a piece of “lost cinema,” directed by this film professor from Jersey City State College. Fortunately, Wild Eye Productions has not only seen fit to release this piece of unorthodox cinema, but has also added in a whole bunch of Eisenstein’s shorter pieces as extras, along with some trailers and a track commentary. But more of that later.

Written originally as a play that was mounted but once, Eisenstein (okay from now on I’m just referring to him as ME…deal with it) decided to make a film out of it, and offered the lead role to Harvey Keitel, who actually wanted to direct it as well. ME was all for it, but due to prior commitments, Keitel backed out and offered up his pal Victor Argo in the lead. Yes, the heavily Jewish role was handed to an actor of Puerto Rican heritage, who just nailed the role perfectly. There is a lot of dialog in long bursts, and being trained as a stage actor, Argo was more than up for the part. After filming for no pay, the film sat in the can in minimally edited form for years, even after Argo’s death in 2004.

Though filmed in the ‘80s, ME finally finished the black and white film by editing in some footage he took of decrepit buildings on Block Island in the Long Island Sound (or would that be considered the Atlantic?) in 1971, in splashes throughout the narrative, effectively adding a layer of mood to the zeitgeist of the story.

The basic premise of the plot is centered around a shoe salesman, Arnie Schwartz, a lonely man whose marriage is grown as tired as he is, and who spends nights doing a stand-up comedy and music show at a local bar in New Jersey (where most of ME’s films are located). An electric chair appears on the stage as he is bombing, and in front of an audience that represents his whole life, he is warned not to achieve several levels of intimacy with the object.

As the gig does on, the comedy act turns into a rant about the philosophy of comedy, and bit by bit focuses in on his life, God, and schtupping, which uses up most of the film. It takes a strong actor to be able to portray this level of anger and still remain somewhat sympathetic (though in the commentary, ME states that he was not going for sympathy, just the anger), if not pathetic. In front of his mother, himself as a young man dominated by her, his kid sister, a sax playing rabbi, a couple engaged in their own intimacy, and others, Arnie rails right to the climax, which comes as no surprise. However, it is the last shot of the film that I found the most effective and unnerving.

The time goes quickly, and Argo is more than up for the task of possibly his only starring role in his long career. Keitel would also have done well, but Argo brings some depth to his emotions, and can punch out the lengthy gunfire dialog, while in close-up, without ever making it redundant or boring. It’s hard to turn away as he gives his all, which is even more impressive considering, as I said, he wasn’t even paid for it. That’s dedication to a craft.

The images of the super 16mm film (except for the Block Island footage, which is a grainy 16mm) is exceptionally sharp, giving a near German Expressionist pastiche, with high contrasts and an occasional glow, with Argo’s white suit against a black background. It’s the facial close-ups where the shadows are the most effective. My only qualm is the editing, sometimes a bit too sharp and jarring, or perhaps that was the meaning (the other Eisenstein filmmaker, Sergei, was famously noted for proclaiming that “editing is motion”).

This is definitely not a date movie, nor is it a backdrop film. It needs special care and attention from the viewer to see the slow build-up to the finale, and all the subtlety in-between as the tone of the film changes.

The commentary was interesting all the way through, though I felt like I wanted a second one. ME is paired up with indie filmmaker Peter Crocker (I may have this name wrong) and Rob Hauschild of Wild Eye Productions; Crocker is an “expert” on the film, and runs off with the conversation a number of times I just wanted to say “shut-up, this isn’t your film” more than once. A lot of technical questions are discussed about the film, the “hardware” as it were (pre-production, production, and post-production), but not enough, I feel, on the “software” (plot, meaning, intentions). I would have like more insight on what ME was trying to “say,” and at key moments, such as the ending, I thought, “why are you talking about that instead of what’s on the screen?” Don’t get me wrong, the commentary is full of fascinating facts, it just left me wanting more than it offered.

The shorts by ME that are included, and there are several of them, run from the “mini-feature” of “The Roach,” which lasts more than 20 minutes, to a couple that are just a few minutes.

“The Roach” is an interesting set piece of a waterbug that suddenly becomes human, but still scuttles about, played well by 20-something hipster type Eric Mednis. He has no dialog, and flops around when he’s on his back. The Roach is as confused about the human world as it is about him. He keeps following a profane exterminator named Mr. Acme, played by Nick Taylor, and is nearly seduced by a lonely woman (Joan Moossy, who is in many of ME’s productions), before the film ends, Nero-and-Poppaea -style. The film is simple and smart, and obviously a reversal of Kafka’s infamous “The Metamorphosis,” and is one of his few works here in color.

Some of the shorts are extremely esoteric, such as “The Smog” (1967; 6.5 min.), where people are filmed talking in a smog while their voices are re-recorded; “Eight Tragedy Term Papers Plus Three by Maggie Murphy” (1967; 15 min.) in which a real-life poetic term paper by a student who passed away is read by ME as a typewriter types out newswire stories; and in “Mark Eisenstein: Inventor of the Frame” (1982, 1.5 min.), the director explains how he “invented” the frame for cinema (before, supposedly no one knew where to look). There are a couple of others of varying success, but interesting to help put The Electric Chair into a larger picture of Eisenstein’s process.

There are also some trailers put out by Wild Eye Productions, though there is also one for an unreleased Eisenstein film called “God Is On Their Side,” an (I am assuming) allegorical tale of trying to get God on one side or another during a war, while all he wants to do is sing, dance, and smoke cigars. Why am I so interested in this? Simply because God is played by (and credited to) Buster Poindexter, also known as New York Dolls’ vocalist and Staten Island’s own David Johansen.


Bonus video:

GOD IS ON THE OTHER SIDE - rare UNRELEASED movie trailer - New York Dolls from Wild Eye Releasing on Vimeo.

Larry Weinstein Film Retrospective: Two Days of Larry

Text and photos (c) Robert Barry Francos

Director Larry Weinstein, born in Toronto from parents who moved there from Brooklyn, NY, has made 25 films so far (his 26th in post-production), so far all but one music related. His works include, in no particular order, Mozartballs, Beethoven's Hair, Ravel's Brain, and The Music of Kurt Weill: September Songs (which he confided he agreed to do specifically so he could work with Lou Reed).

His latest project, and the only non-music one, is Inside Hana's Suitcase, a touching and gripping documentary mystery about how a suitcase lent by the Auschwitz Museum in Poland to an elementary class in Japan learning about the Holocaust, led to a search of its Czech owner, Hana Brady, eventually leading to a member of her family in Toronto. It's a fascinating mix of document, reenactment, and in the end some very touching moments mixing life and death, narrated mostly by the principals involved, and of the students. It's both a cautionary tale and one of redemption and hope.

At the Broadway Theare in Saskatoon on September 21, 2010, Larry Weinstein and Hana's brother, George Brady, talked to the audience after a showing of the film. In fact, this was the start of a three-day retrospective of Larry's films, and others that his company released, such as Blindness and The Red Violin. After the film, both Larry and George were there to answer questions from an enthusiastic audience. Unfortunately I had my smaller camera with me, so the pictures were, well, unusable.

The next day, October 22, at the University of Saskatchewan, Larry gave a Master Class titled Depicting Music on Film: One Filmmaker's Personal Obsession. It was to last for two hours, and it was Weinstein showing clips from a number of his films. George Brady was there in the audience as well.

As I got there early (being the first), I asked Larry and George for a photo together, and we found ourselves next to a sign for the university. We talked briefly about Brooklyn, his films, and life on the road, as he set up the technological aspects of the class.

When the session started, he was introduced by professor Lesley Biggs, and Larry easily kept the audience interested, even through a fair amount of technical glitches with the DVDs. There were a number of clips from of his films (except Inside Hana's Suitcase, as it was screening the next night for a second showing), each lasting about ten minutes (7 of the 10 he brought were shown). At the end was included a few scenes from his upcoming release, a comical opera about former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, tentatively titled Politics is a Cruel Opera (though it may be changed to the more direct Mulroney: The Opera). The class ended up lasting nearly three hours, and everyone there were riveted throughout.

What's clear and interesting is that even if one is either unfamiliar with the musical content or subject of the film, they are imaginative enough to keep the viewer riveted, as he explores what killed Beethoven, Ravel's inner-cranial surgery, and a woman who believes that Mozart's spirit has literally entered her body.
George Brady and Larry Weinstein before the class began.
Lesley Biggs and Larry Weinstein.
Lesley Biggs introduces Larry Weinstein.
Class is in session.
George Brady and Lesley Biggs attentive in the audience.





Special thanks to Larry Weinstein for some corrections!