Wednesday, July 06, 2022

Reproductive Health, Public Health and a Country in Crisis

 

The first wave of reaction to the Supreme Court decision declaring Roe V. Wade null and void--the shock and anger and their articulation in the media as well as on the streets--focused on what seemed to be the central issue of access to medical abortion.  There was also the historical shock of seeing a more broadly granted right taken away--something that hasn't happened in America, and which portends more in the future.  (Other rights have been limited by court decisions, but I don't think any have been just totally taken away before.)

But this week I'm seeing a real health care crisis being described, because of the lengths to which Rabid Right states are taking their anti-abortion lawmaking.  I've heard this abortion debate for decades, but only recently have I heard abortion opponents refuse flexibility and exceptions, such as for rape victims and to safeguard the lives and health of women.  Now ignoring both is standard, and it is leading to an array of nightmarish scenarios, some already being realized, such as the ten year old rape victim who had to transport across state lines for an abortion.  Among those scenarios is criminalizing miscarriage.  There are also medical conditions, some of them fairly common, which threaten the mother's life if she has to seek care that may include an abortion at some distance in time as well as place.

For example, Elizabeth Spiers has detailed some of the medical hazards in her badly titled New York Times opinion piece, "The myth that restricting abortion rights won't affect the rich."  David Hackney, also in the Times, is more direct: "I'm a High Risk Obstetrician, and I'm Terrified For My Patients."  Columnist Jennifer Rubin devoted one of her Washington Post columns to this topic.  I'm not including links because unless you've got a subscription (which I don't, on this computer) you can't access them.  Nor can you access the pertinent if again badly titled Times oped by Pamela Paul: "The Far Right and Far Left agree on one thing: women don't count.")

But accessible to anyone is a rundown of fundamental medical misconceptions that add to the tragedy of these laws in Science News, which ends with a pertinent quote from a doctor, that these laws "place priority of a potential life over the actual life of the person sitting in front of me." It is this prioritizing that completely destroys any semblance of a moral position behind these laws, because they are not only willing but mandating the possible destruction of one life for a potential other life. This is not morality; it is insanity.  Anti-abortion is murder. 

Also: NPR exposes the impact on doctors, and Pew Charitable Trust summarizes threats to health, including public health.  These are direct threats on the lives, health and well-being of pregnant women and women in general, but also real threats to families, especially existing children, as well as fathers and potential fathers, and other elements of society.  And if that doesn't get your attention, also to businesses.

The result of this decision is a marked increase in human suffering, which is also a result of the prior decision on a law limiting guns, and a decision afterwards limiting regulation of climate crisis-causing pollution.  Because of the Court-approved insane limitations on gun laws, a toddler in Highland Park, Illinois, who got separated from his parents at a Fourth of July celebration, will never see them again.  His life is changed forever. They were gunned down by an assault weapon by an unseen shooter at distance.  Who seemingly did it, like the Supreme Court, just because he could.

That in essence is also the outcome of our ongoing failure to fully support a robust public health system in this country, more than symbolized by the ongoing absurdity of simply ignoring the current wave of Covid variant infections, just because we're tired of them, and especially of all the conflict over confronting them.  Now we don't have to worry about people dying of Covid--we're just going to ignore them.

In this case, both parties share blame.  Even here in California, the huge buckets of money sent to the states and then to municipalities because of Covid seem to have been spent on everything except one pertinent place: on public health.  That helps the cowardly process of not dealing with the reality, because if you don't gather the facts, how do you know?  Plausible deniability!  So all the states, red and blue, have turned yellow on Covid.

I always have a focus on the overriding threat of our time, the climate crisis.  And if I were to design a scenario for a society unequipped to address either the causes or effects of globally fatal climate disruption, I would do pretty much everything we are now doing. Within the U.S., I would certainly fracture public health systems so they would be unable to cope with all the challenges--the diseases, the results of excessive heat both physical and mental, etc.--of much hotter summers, of fires, of much more volatile weather--tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, days of downpours, years of drought-- that are already in the cards and in fact happening at this very moment, because for the thirty years we've known about it, we haven't effectively addressed the climate crisis.  And all that is now very likely to get very much worse.

I would further weaken healthcare by giving it impossible yet easily avoidable distractions, like trying to treat pregnant women while staying out of jail.  And of course, impossible if easily avoidable barriers, like the too-often inhuman demands and expense of medical insurance and healthcare for profit. 

I would do all these things and more to create as much societal conflict and chaos as possible, and at the very least force people to devote huge amounts of time, energy, attention and resources on coping with and maybe even fixing these otherwise needless and insanely destructive threats and changes.  Anything to keep everyone's attention away from the single enormous threat to human civilization and planetary life. 

And while a congressional committee lays out the evidence of an insurrection and attempted dictatorship founded upon fraud, I would design an election to put back in power the party that supports that fraud and that insurrection, and happens also to be completely incompetent and uninterested in solving actual problems.  Which is what the polls say is likely to happen.  A lot of this is happening because good people have not done enough, have not voted to maintain the integrity of the Supreme Court, and have not sufficiently valued the future over the conveniences of the present.  But not all of it has happened yet.  There are still votes to be cast this November.      

Monday, July 04, 2022

Wandering At Morn


Wandering at morn,
 Emerging from the night from gloomy thoughts, thee in my thoughts,
 Yearning for thee harmonious Union! Thee, singing bird divine! 
Thee coil’d in evil times my country, with craft and black dismay, with every meanness, treason thrust upon thee, 
This common marvel I beheld—the parent thrush I watch’d feeding its young. 
 The singing thrush whose tones of joy and faith ecstatic,
 Fail not to certify and cheer my soul.

 There ponder’d, felt I,
 If worms, snakes, loathsome grubs, may to sweet spiritual songs be turn’d,
 If vermin so transposed, so used and bless’d may be,
 Then may I trust in you, your fortunes, days, my country; 
Who knows but these may be the lessons fit for you?
 From these your future song may rise with joyous trills,
 Destin’d to fill the world. 

 --Walt Whitman 

 When Whitman wrote these lines in 1855, those evil times were about to result in the Civil War. There have been many evil days in the history of this republic, but even on the eve of the worst rupture of the United States so far, Whitman could look beyond them to a long future. Now at this celebration of the nation, we face another rupture, and other mortal threats to the Republic (when asked what form of government the founders had settled on, Benjamin Franklin reputedly said—“a republic—if you can keep it.”) 

 The many threats to our democratic Republic and to the resilience of our government, our identity as a nation and its place in the world, as well as the rights and welfare of our people, are accompanied by a salient fact: unless we address our climate and environmental crises successfully, the future is likely to be short, and a dysfunctional America will shorten it further. There may not be time for another resurrection.

Whitman's faith in the American future arguably was fulfilled.  But with that Thrush and its world itself threatened, for us to believe in the possibilities sung in the second stanza requires more faith than Whitman’s.  Yet that future may depend on those who have that faith, or at least urgently act as if they did.

Monday, June 27, 2022

The New Song


For some time I thought there was time
 and that there would always be time
 for what I had a mind to do
 and what I could imagine
 going back to and finding it
 as I had found it the first time
 but by this time I do not know
 what I thought when I thought back then

 there is no time yet it grows less
 there is the sound of rain at night
 arriving unknown in the leaves
 once without before or after
 then I hear the thrush waking
 at daybreak singing the new song

--W.S. Merwin
photo by Cartier-Bresson

Wednesday, June 22, 2022

A Golden State of Mind


 Congratulations to Steph Curry and the Golden State Warriors.  They won the 2021-22 NBA championship on the same date as they won their first with Curry, Klay Thompson and Draymond Green, in 2015.  That year they also came back from a 2-1 deficit to win in six games.  In between they won two more championships for a total of 4 in 8 years.  But the road back wasn't easy.  Two years ago, when Thompson and Curry had season-ending injuries, they had the worst record in the NBA.  Even this year, Thompson, Green and Curry were out with injuries at one time or another, so the team was not whole until the very end of the season and in the playoffs. 

 Curry had quite a year: he broke numerous career and playoff records, including the most 3-point baskets in NBA history, and he was named the Most Valuable Player for the All-Star Game, the Western Conference Finals, and the NBA Finals.  In his spare time he finished a thesis to earn his college degree.  The Golden State Warriors under coach Steve Kerr have established an exemplary culture--one of mutual support, social responsibility and mentorship in which players thrive, and one which they don't want to leave.  

Sunday, June 19, 2022

Footholds


Where I dug the logs into the rise
 to make the steps along the valley
 I forget how many years ago
 their wood has dissolved completely now
 disappearing into the curled slope
 gone without my seeing it happen
 while the green clouds of the trees have grown
 above their mingled shadows
 yet I set my feet down in the same
 places I did when the steps were there
 without even thinking about them
 Father and Mother friend upon friend
 what I remember of them now
 footholds on the slope
 in the silent valley this morning
 Wednesday with few clouds and an east wind

--W.S. Merwin

The footholds in the hill that have faded remind the poet of people in his past who provided footholds on the journey--on the landscapes of the past-- that brings him to this present moment.  Though he remembers these people now and perhaps the footholds he knew when they built them, in our lives there are footholds we don't remember and perhaps never realized that were built by others (I think of teachers of various kinds, for instance) but that eventually we came to think were our own ideas.  We just put our feet down there without remembering.

It also may be that we built footholds for others that we remember but they don't (parents for children, for example), but also footholds we built for others that they might remember, but we don't, perhaps because we didn't even know we were building them.  And now we may never know what they were, but perhaps the possibility provides some solace and meaning to the time stretched out behind us, as well as our present moment.  

Monday, June 13, 2022

Early One Summer

 

Years from now
 someone will come upon a layer of birds
 and not know what he is listening for 

 these are days when the beetles hurry through dry grass
 hiding pieces of light they have stolen 

 --W.S. Merwin

Wednesday, June 08, 2022

What Would Climate Leadership Look Like

 

Among the recent climate disruption news that got little attention: an annual UN weather report found that all four key climate disruption indicators rose to record levels in 2021: largest concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, global mean sea level higher than ever, global mean ocean temperature higher than ever and higher ocean acidification higher, leading to Ph levels lower than in 26,000 years. 

 The consequences of atmospheric greenhouse gases and sea level rise are bad enough, but the lesser known effects on the oceans potentially have even greater long-range consequences. The ocean's crippled ability to store CO2 could be only the beginning.  Already there are huge dead ocean zones (one the size of Florida), and massive fish kills. Ocean heat begins consequences which the report authors call "irreversible on centennial to millennial time scales." 

In what qualifies as qualified good news, another report estimated that, left unattended, climate disruption will cost the global economy $178 trillion in the next 50 years.  But that's a fraction of what it is estimated to cost to aggressively address climate disruption.  If that were to happen, the report estimates, the global economy could even be in the black in 50 years.  I tend to view all such economic estimates as exercises in fantasy.  But this does affirm what others have maintained: the cost of doing something seems high, but the cost of not doing it will be much much higher.  And I at least mean more than monetary cost as well.

But in the US we don't hear much if anything about any of this from our political leadership.  Republicans ignore and deny it, and I'm afraid Robinson Meyer makes too good of a case in his Atlantic article that Democrats seem to be "sleepwalking toward climate disaster."  It is likely only weeks before the chance to pass a meaningful climate bill could disappear for a long time, and there is little indication of any sense of urgency.

Instead Republicans steer attention to issues they virtually create out of nothing but political ambition, while Democrats reel from one headline crisis to another.  There's been a global pandemic, there's an awful war in Ukraine with global implications, a previously unthinkable reversion on reproductive rights, and a chilling burst of deadly gun violence, particularly those incidents in which helpless elders and helpless young children are slaughtered as they peacefully live their lives.  There's inflation--especially in high gasoline prices-- causing anxiety and hardship.  And there's always something, something else.

What would climate leadership look like?  Ideally it would have begun in the 2020 elections, in which candidates--including for president and v.p.--ran on the climate issue as their overriding priority.  Once elected, they would ignore the noise and get to work. There would be experts offering solutions in White House meetings, some of them televised. There would be legislation proposed and projects begun. In an appearance every week, the President and Vice-President would present the latest information in context, explaining its importance, explaining the latest research, progress reports on legislation and projects (including what isn't working and why)--in sum, the latest efforts to address the causes and the effects of climate disruption.  This would be like FDR talking about the war, only without any worry about the enemy listening in.

Then every month, the President would talk from the Oval Office with a more general summary, but also in the course of discussing the most attention-getting issues of the moment, would show how they relate to climate disruption. 

Because they all do.  In some ways that are understood and others not, climate disruption is stirring up deadly diseases which find a home in places they aren't usually seen.  Russia may well be responding to both direct climate disruption effects and the prospect of declining revenues from fossil fuels, the primary source of its global income. Climate disruption is certainly at the heart of other wars around the world.  Inflation is an international phenomenon, and is being fed at least partly by the present effects of climate disruption: the higher costs of food due to drought-induced crop failures, for instance, and other higher costs due to other weather-related disruptions to the global supply chains.  Inflation due to all of this will only increase in the future unless both causes and effects of climate disruption are successfully addressed.

Reproductive rights are key to the lives of women, and gender equality is a large factor in reducing poverty and fostering sustainability. Climate disruption may underlie a lot of fear, anxiety and anger, and while it is probably not the primary or proximate cause of extreme violence--including extreme and violent political rhetoric and division--it is probably not a coincidence that it is all happening at the same time.  

Climate leadership would pounce on all opportunities.  The pandemic could have been an educational experience, seen as a possible dress rehearsal for dealing with the sudden spread of diseases made possible by climate disruption.  Inflation and the war in Ukraine could be focal points for arguing that accelerating green energy and dumping fossil fuels are economically and geopolitically as well as environmentally necessary.  A lot of political nonsense could be avoided simply by refocusing on the main issue.

This model of climate leadership obviously is not happening. The President has never given a single Oval Office address on climate disruption--not just the current President, any President.  Few presidential candidates in the primaries, and no presidential candidates in the general election have made addressing the causes and effects of climate disruption the theme of their campaigns.  Though it was mentioned more often as a priority by many Democratic congressional candidates and the national ticket in 2020, few congressional candidates talked about it prominently and in detail.

It could be that as Meyer suggests, they just don't understand the issue fully.  They obviously don't think the electorate cares enough about it to support a candidate who does. But in Stanley Greenberg's most recent polling in the US, UK, France and Germany, he found that next to Ukraine, addressing climate disruption is the top priority of the majority he polled.  It's not clear if it's a majority in the US alone, but he did find majority support for a transition to green energy.

One small indication of how climate leadership could emerge comes from the recent elections in Australia, where recent governments have taken wildly different positions on climate disruption, which is having dire effects there.  A group of independent candidates ran for the legislature with addressing climate disruption as their main issue.  They won, and in an alliance with one of the major parties, have made it a national priority.

In upcoming congressional elections, Democrats are reportedly divided on whether to emphasize the abortion issue or respond to Republican attacks on inflation and other pocketbook issues.  Or whether to attack Republicans as extremists undermining democracy.  All of these are of course valid issues.  But until candidates start talking about climate disruption, and start running on this issue, the kind of consistent leadership and attention necessary doesn't seem likely.  Frankly I don't see candidates out there, especially beyond contending for a few House seats, that sound like leaders on this issue, or perhaps even have the capability to see the big picture.  But I'd love to be surprised. 

Monday, June 06, 2022

Steady, They Say


Clambering up the rocks of a dry wash gully,
 warped sandstone, by the San Juan River, 

 look northward to stony mountains
 shifting clouds and sun

 ---despair at how the human world goes down

 Consult my old advisers


 “steady” they say

 “today” 


 --Gary Snyder


Published with this note:(At Slickhorn Gulch on the San Juan River, 1999)
 This is in Utah, near the Grand Canyon.

Wednesday, June 01, 2022

The War To Remind Us Of All Wars


 We have not been so intimate with war in a long time.  Ukraine is not so far away from America as other recent foreign wars (some of which are happening now unnoticed), and media coverage is more sustained and specific, with real people seen and heard in real time.

 The people involved are more familiar than, say, the people in Iraq or the Democratic Republic of Congo, or even Nicaragua, at least to the majority that defines itself as White.  Generations of Americans have Ukrainian or other Eastern European ancestors or relatives.  Those who do not may know those who do.  Ukraine defines itself as European, and it is only a few hours by plane from London, Paris and Berlin, Rome and Amsterdam, Oslo and Zurich.  And therefore, a few more hours from New York and Washington.

 In some ways our identification with Ukraine demonstrates our weak imaginations.  We expect we know what its cities are like, though we may not imagine Baghdad in the same way.  What we see convinces us that we understand the similarities of modern culture there.  And for Caucasians, it helps very much that their citizens appear Caucasian. 

 But in other ways, the identification is based on real bonds and resemblances.  We can see ourselves in those who are invaded, whose normal lives in apartment blocks and cafes are shattered by bombs and artillery fire.  Emotionally granting them their humanity, we are deeply shocked by what appears to be especially savage and brutal acts by Russian invaders: the murder of random civilians, the rapes, kidnapping, rendition and apparent targeting of hospitals and schools for explosive destruction.  And overlaying it all, the relentless pummeling of artillery shells and missile-borne bombs, seemingly with no other purpose than to utterly demolish entire cities and towns, taking basic aspects of civilization away from the survivors.  If we can’t have it, the Russian bombs say, nobody can. Russia seems set on ruling a smoldering wasteland.

 Apart from the geopolitical ramifications of this Russian invasion, the obvious brutality is said to be driving US and NATO sanctions and the open supply of armaments to Ukraine.  But is the key word here “obvious?”  Cell phone cameras spreading photos on the Internet and camera-laden drones are documenting atrocities, but are they more prevalent and systematic in this war than in others?

 Nobody really knows the full answer.  War and accurate information hardly ever mix.  One side always accuses the other of atrocities (usually baby-killing) that after the war often turn out not to have been true. Of course, the scale of other atrocities kept hidden may be revealed afterwards as well.  The Nazi Holocaust is a prime example, but hardly the only one.

 Sometimes we don’t know also because we don’t want to know.  The Commission of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal calculated the effects of American bombing of Iraq in the first (George H.W. Bush) Gulf War in the early 1991.  Summarizing a preliminary report, author Barbara Kingsolver wrote that the US bombed: “all the country’s major dams and most of its drinking water facilities; enough sewage containment facilities to contaminate the Tigris River with waterbourne killers; virtually all communications systems, leaving civilians unwarned of danger and unable to get help;…100 percent of irrigation systems; wheat and grain fields (with incendiary bombs); 28 civilian hospitals and 52 community health centers…[and] more than 600 schools.”

 Is this true?  Some specific instances are on the public record, as are many more in the G.W. Bush invasion of Iraq, in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Systematic torture and rendition by the US and allies after 9/11 are also well known.  Mass killing of civilians, destroying homes and schools etc., are also among the carnage and possible war crimes carried out by forces the U.S. opposed.  But the public usually finds out about them long after the war these acts were part of— if they ever do, or ever care.

 

More than a century ago, the young British author H.G. Wells saw in the gathering momentum of mechanical invention and energy production the coming of warfare technology capable of destroying civilization.  He wrote books—nonfiction and novels—predicting with great accuracy the ruinous armaments and resulting kinds of warfare that could soon envelope Europe.  His words were noticed but not heeded, and his fictions quickly became the Great War, later known as World War I. 

That war was scarcely over before Wells imagined and predicted huge aircraft bombing entire cities—something that had never been done in a systematic way—with highly destructive weapons including the atomic bomb.  He named the atomic bomb.  He wrote about this prospect in nonfiction and fiction.  He made a movie with scenes that now look like a documentary of the London Blitz, but filmed years before.  And then his fictions became World War II.

 In both cases, he warned that civilization itself was ultimately at stake.  He believed (as philosophical psychologist James Hillman did, and philosopher John Gray does) that war will always be with us. But unless humanity got a handle on the implications of ever more destructive technologies, Wells warned, it would destroy itself. That’s why Wells spent his long public life strongly advocating a single world government.  It perhaps wouldn’t end violent hostilities, but would very likely limit their frequency and destructiveness.

 Once both world wars started, British citizen Wells took sides, seeing that the victory of the other side would itself be catastrophic.  But he mostly promoted and organized a new order after the wars—first the League of Nations, and then the United Nations.  He spearheaded the writing of what would become the UN’s Declaration of Universal Human Rights.  But he wasn’t sanguine about the progress made.  Towards the end of his life (he died in 1946), he told friends that as his epitaph he wanted: “Goddamn it, I told you so.”

 Wells knew the horrible wisdom of Shakespeare’s words: “Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.”  The metaphorical dogs of war can only be unleashed; they cannot really be controlled.  Whatever technology or tactic is available will be used, through strategy, anger, adrenaline and fear.  That’s what havoc is.

 For most of this past century, the greatest threat to human civilization was war. There were strong and principled peace movements for all the 20th century. Not so much in the 21st, it seems.

 Perhaps it’s partly because, for the past 30 years or so, war has seemed increasingly an intractable but local threat.  Now the true global threat is the climate crisis, and the global physical environment generally: nothing less basic to all life than air, land and water.

  But the nature of that climate crisis is that it lets loose the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse and every form of catastrophe known to humanity—among them, famine, disease and tyranny.   Not the least of these are the dogs of war.  There are wars right at this moment being fought because of consequences of the climate crisis, and there have been for decades, even if largely unacknowledged.  

This war in Ukraine may itself be related to implications of the climate crisis, and probably to the politics and economics of fossil fuels and the future.  It certainly has to do with resources.  Just as Hitler’s supposedly inexplicable invasion of Russia was likely about resources Germany needed to defeat the might of America, Russia’s apparently inexplicable and crazy invasion of Ukraine may well be about wheat, fossil fuels and seaports.

 It is in fact one of those Four Horsemen: invasion, conquest.  This war is so deeply startling because it is a throwback to the most ancient wars, as well as a summary of the wars since, being fought with technologies and tactics from World War I on to previews of future warfare.  It turns civilization into savagery.  But all war does that, if not so dramatically and obviously to us.

 Like Wells, we take sides.  We side--I side-- with Ukraine, for all kinds of reasons. But war is only getting more monstrous. Bombing from the air in the 1940s may have been the original sin for self-destructive warfare, but there are other candidates for the normalizing of blanket brutality.  Having failed to address the dangers of war itself, if human civilization doesn’t concentrate on addressing the climate crisis, with full commitment to a decent degree of equity and justice around the world, the end of human civilization will be hastened by wars as well as dislocation, starvation and disease that also follow the havoc of wars. When global supply chains collapse, so does today’s civilization. (For one thing, no country on Earth has the Rare Earth elements sufficient to make its own electronic devices.) And all the guns in the closet won’t protect anyone. 

Sunday, May 29, 2022

Waiting by the Sea



This tidepool day you inhabit contains more than
 you need. It stirs now and then to bring
 faint news of old storms deeper than the earth.
 From caves around you feelers and claws wave
 their greeting, then slowly withdraw
    and wait for tomorrow. 

 Sunlight is alive when it swims down where you are,
 and you stand still, alert to take in the sun.
 You become a stone, then a ghost of a stone,
 then the gone water’s brilliant memory 
    of where a stone was.

 Making the day expand in your heart and return,
 you play a limited part in whatever life is,
 practicing for that great gift when enlightenment
 comes, that long instant when the tide
     calls your name.

 --William Stafford

Tuesday, May 24, 2022

TV and Me: Disney (Part 3) Space, Earth and Books

     
TV and I grew up together.  This is our story.  Ninth in a series.


From its first episode in the fall of 1954, the Disneyland TV hour began with a review of the four "lands" before a story from one of them would then begin.  First that season there was Fantasyland, then Adventureland. They alternated for awhile. By December and the eighth episode, there was Frontierland, and so Davy Crockett was in that mix.  But for weeks and months and-- it seemed like-- years, I waited and waited for the one I most wanted: Tomorrowland.

The waiting was so excruciating for my eight year old self, that even now I am surprised to see that the first Tomorrowland episode wasn't years later, but towards the end of that first season: Episode 20, on March 9, 1955.  But it was worth the wait.  It was called "Man in Space."

Consider that date: early 1955.  The first rocket mission to space, the launch of the Soviet satellite Sputnik that shocked America, didn't happen until the fall of 1957, nearly three years later.  The U.S., which had planned to launch a satellite during the International Geophysical Year of 1957, didn't accomplish this feat until 1958.  The Soviet Union launched the first human into Earth orbit in 1961; later that year, the U.S. sent its first man into space in a sub-orbital flight.  The first American to attain orbit around the Earth was in 1962. The first American mission that landed the first humans on the moon was in 1969.

Well into the 1950s, including that year of 1955, Americans generally just did not take space flight seriously. Though there were development programs ongoing, the predominant American attitude was that space travel was a nutty idea, a juvenile fantasy of no practical value, even if possible. That was also the belief of many in government, and many if not most scientists.  Space travel was science fiction.

But what is accomplished must first be imagined, as William Blake suggested. According to a 2014 book called Marketing the Moon: The Selling of the Apollo Lunar Program by David Meerman Scott and Richard Jerek, science fiction was in fact the origin of what became reality. 
  
This book quotes astronomical artist Ron Miller: "Astronautics is unique among all the sciences because it owes its origins to an art form.  Long before engineers and scientists took the possibility of spaceflight seriously, virtually all of its aspects were explored first in art and literature..." 

"No one had considered the actual technological problems of space flight until Jules Verne," Miller asserted.  Thanks mostly to weapons of war in the 20th century, scientists and engineers became deeply interested in such technological problems.  But the goal of manned space flight for the purpose of exploration was still for dreamers.

This book singles out some of the ways that the public was prepared for space even before the reality began in 1957 with the launch of Sputnik I.  Science fiction, including the movies like Forbidden Planet, and those Saturday morning TV shows in the early 1950s that as a space-happy kid I remember vividly-- Space Patrol,Tom Corbett, Space Cadet; Rocky Jones, Space Ranger--and even earlier, Captain Video.
But the authors emphasize the speculations and artistic rendering in the popular press in the 1950s (notably Collier's Magazine) and particularly the three programs produced by Walt Disney for the Disneyland anthology, beginning with "Man in Space."  They made humans in space dramatic and real.

Walt Disney took space travel seriously, and he was personally involved in the research for these television programs.  The company had a bit of experience in this kind of program, having produced "Victory Through Air Power," a 1942 film based on a book advocating a large role for air power in the Second World War, said to have influenced Winston Churchill, and through him, FDR.  But these first Tomorrowland programs were ahead of their time.  They discussed details of rocketry, space and space travel that most Americans didn't know, let alone children in the audience.

"Man in Space" was first of the series.  The second, "Man on the Moon" was also broadcast before even a human-made satellite reached space. (And even though "man" was used in its general sense as "human," it pretty much was just men in space.  Though the Russians sent the first woman into orbit in 1963, none of the US programs before the shuttle had women astronauts.) Only the third program in the series, "Mars and Beyond," was broadcast after Sputnik, by about two months. 

These were first seen in black and white, but shot in color.  Color illustrations were lifted for books and magazine articles derived from the show.

"Man in Space" is introduced by Walt Disney, who refers to space as "the new frontier" (JFK's campaign slogan in 1960 became The New Frontier.)  The bulk of the program is a history of rocketry and animated illustrations of possible perils of humans in space, introducing the concept of weightlessness.  Rocketry pioneer Willy Ley is among those who explain various concepts.

Some of the rocketry history sacrifices accuracy for the sake of humor, but explanations of how rockets work and what might happen in space were new to most of the audience (and helped govern depictions of space trips in subsequent fiction films.)  I remember in particular that this is where I learned Newton's third law of motion, which as this film put it means "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."  It's still just about all the physics I know.

The history of rocketry leads up to the V-2, the last German rocket built in World War II.  Several blast-offs of this handsome rocket are shown, probably launches of some of the 75 V-2s the US captured and brought back after the war to essentially create the US rocket program.  Many launches of a dazzling array of differently designed rockets follow.

Not once however is it mentioned that the V-2 was used to rain terror and destruction down on England.  V-2 meant "Vengeance Weapon 2" in retaliation for the Allied bombing of Berlin and other population centers.  Over 3,000 were launched against Allied targets, mostly London, killing some 9,000 people.  Some 12,000 people died in forced labor camps making these rockets.

The London Blitz at first consisted of attack by German bombers, and then the V-1 rockets.  Londoners learned to listen for the V-1 and for the silence after the motors cut out--if it sounded close, then the bomb was apt to fall nearby.  The V-2 however was supersonic--the bomb arrived before the sound was heard, making it even more of a terror weapon.  In Thomas Pynchon's famous novel Gravity's Rainbow set in London during the V-2 bombing, one of the characters seems to have precognition of where the bombs will land.

The reason for the Disney film's silence on the uses of the V-2 was simple: Wernher von Braun was one of the chief German scientists who designed the V-2 but by 1955 he was working for the US government on its military rocket programs.  And about a half hour into the 49 minutes of this show, he appeared on camera to explain his design for the rocket that would take Americans into space.

Then comes the animated first launch of man into space.  The style is hyper-realistic, with a dramatic music score.  It's only about ten minutes but for me it was unforgettable. (The illustration at the top is from this segment.)

 In broad outlines, it does predict what the launches were like that I later watched avidly on TV, from the first Explorer satellite launch through Mercury and Apollo manned launches.  But a lot of very big details were off.  Von Braun was way too ambitious--he has a four stage rocket topped by a winged aircraft to return the 6-man crew to this "isolated atoll in the Pacific."  The first Russian and US spaceflights were three stages and had crews of one.  US Gemini had two, and Apollo three. The Disney animation also made it a night launch, which was more dramatic, but there wasn't a US night launch until deep into the Apollo program.

Probably the funniest detail for those who watched the real launches is that the crew on the Disney program wasn't taken to the rocket until 20 minutes before launch.  Watching the real launches I recall those poor astronauts sitting strapped-in for hour after hour, through the long countdowns, through launch holds and scrubbed missions.

"Man in Space" was directed by Disney animator Ward Kimball, who also appeared as a kind of host (as he would at times in the following two programs.)  The voice-over narrator is Dick Tufeld, familiar from lots of Disney productions but also as the voice of the robot in Lost in Space (Danger Will Robinson!) on TV in the 60s (and later reprised on The Simpsons.)

"Man in the Moon" was first broadcast just about midway through the second season, on December 28, 1955.  It starts with animation illustrating the human conception of the moon throughout history, narrated (as is the rest of the film) by Hans Conreid, a famous face as well as voice of the 50s and 60s, frequently in Disney productions.

From a fanciful history of stories the program moves onto the science.  It's unfortunately noticeable now how casually Walt Disney himself mentions that the universe is at least 4 billion years old.  A mention like that (though with a larger number) in the 2014 version of the Cosmos series was loudly attacked by fundamentalists, but in 1955 this caused no controversy.  In a program built on science, it was perfectly natural.

The basic astral mechanics and the then-current knowledge about the solar system is well told with animation of various kinds, though details like the number of moons of the outer planets are now far out of date.

Then von Braun appears again to talk about the process of a human voyage to the moon.  Again he's thinking very big, ultimately about a craft that carries ten.  But a major part of this process is the construction of a space station, as an embarkation point for the huge moon-bound craft.  The space station itself is immense--much larger than today's International Space Station.  And it is in the now classic shape of the wheel.

The circular space station with a hub in the center and spokes to the sides was already becoming a space travel icon, in science fiction novels like Arthur C. Clarke's Islands in the Sky, published in 1952 as part of the Winston series of juvenile s/f novels, or in films and TV shows like Rocky Jones, Space Ranger (1954), culminating in Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968.)

It's not surprising that von Braun would gravitate towards the space wheel, for according to Sam Moskowitz's s/f history Explorers of the Infinite, its first appearance was in a novel by German writer Kurd Lasswitz in 1897, which was republished many times well into the 1940s at least.  Several aspects of von Braun's design are descendants of concepts published by German scientist Hermann Oberth in 1923. An Austrian writer named Noordung and two German scientists named von Pirquet and Gail pioneered other ideas adapted into this design, including how the crew would live on the space station, all decades earlier. It's likely von Braun would have been aware of all of these as he worked on the German rocket program. To these concepts Von Braun added an atomic power plant.

The dramatization of the actual voyage from the station to the moon is the most elaborate of the series.  It involves animation but also models, and live actors and sets.  The models and sets are particularly interesting--the spacecraft are all white, while the interiors favor primary colors.  It's all surprisingly 1960s Trek-like.

The technology however is dated to the point of nostalgia.  The on-board computer for instance gives a new meaning to "dial-up."  There's a little drama aboard when a micro-meteor hits a fuel line and a space walk is necessary.  The craft doesn't attempt to land (as the first Apollo didn't) but does a single orbit.  There's a little s/f involved when it crosses the dark side of the moon and launches flares to reveal unusual surface features at right angles, perhaps suggesting built structures, but nothing is said about it and the moment passes.

Mars and Beyond was first broadcast on December 4, 1957.  It's narrated by Paul Frees, an actor who did a lot of voice-over work for many decades (he was everybody from the unseen millionaire on The Millionaire to Boris Badenov on Rocky and Bullwinkle.)  His most prominent s/f appearance was in the 1953 George Pal version of  The War of the Worlds: he was the first of the narrators, and played a role as a radio announcer.  As this program begins he seems to be trying to sound like Orson Welles, but by the end he's using the portentous voice he employed when talking about Mars in The War of the Worlds.

This show begins with animation about human conceptions of the nature of the stars and the cosmos and life on other planets.  The concepts are often so weird that the animation gets wildly creative.  At times it seems very Cubist, as if Picasso is the strangest thing the animators could think of.  There are also suggestions of such later animations as Yellow Submarine.

To suggest the variety of possibilities for life on other planets, the show tells the story of Earth's own history, from carbon atoms to proteins to organic compounds in the primordial sea.  "Now with time as the main ingredient the evolution of life is inevitable."  Visually arresting enough for children, the script is surprisingly sophisticated and eloquent.  While the accompanying images sometimes go off on playful tangents, the narration is carefully scientific.  Again, it's sad to compare what was uncontroversial for a family audience in 1957 compared to the regressiveness of today.

The program's attention finally turns to Mars, and the question of whether humans could exist there--a question, the narration states, that arises because of human overpopulation and depletion of resources on Earth.  This is 1957!  (Which is getting close to the time that the correlation between fossil fuel burning, higher CO2 in the atmosphere and the warming of the global temperature is being determined.)

There's also the question of what kind of life could exist on Mars.  Some of the forms discussed are silicon based lifeforms, and creatures that eat through rock.   Years later, similar creatures would appear in one of Star Trek's best known stories.

There's talk of fuels and drives for the Mars spaceship. Someone with a firmer grasp of propulsion will have to check me but I think one they describe is the equivalent of the ion drive that also appears in science fiction.  In any case, the von Braun design is atomic-powered.  It has a big circular dish at the top and a kind of airplane-looking landing craft underneath.  

This is a much briefer depiction of a trip of a six ship convoy, beginning at the space station (which we've seen in animation being built) and ending with speculation as to what the craft will find on the surface (though a planet totally devoid of life isn't among the speculated possibilities).

  The "beyond" part is briefer still, as a flying saucer--apparently of advanced electro-magnetic drive to neutralize gravity--zips off towards the infinite, looking like the opening of Forbidden Planet (or perhaps the end of The Day the Earth Stood Still) with small saucers disappearing into the belly of a much larger mothership (This Island Earth to Close Encounters of the Third Kind.)

This is the spaciest of the series, with imagery that suggests some of the wilder parts of 2001 a decade later (which maybe why they didn't surprise me?)  It also has the most eloquent script.  Its description of the possible lifeforms on Mars is the most imaginative I've ever seen illustrated.  Think of what they could have done with the tools of today.

The function of this series at the time was to excite the imagination while showing through scientific explanation that these age-old dreams of exploring outer space, the moon and Mars were within the realm of possibility in the near future.  And as it turned out, with some modifications, some of them were.

Yet something about these programs apparently transcended their time, for they continued to play fairly often on the Disney Channel into the 21st century, long after most of their speculations became obsolete.  I was certainly thrilled by them when they first appeared.  Then I got to see the real thing--the first years of the U.S. space program, broadcast live on the commercial networks.

Adventureland

 Many of the early episodes of the Disneyland series were under the heading of Adventureland: “Nature’s own realm.”  Once again, Disney made liberal use of prior motion picture footage.  Along with his first forays into scripted live action in his company’s lean years after World War II, Disney experimented with a series of seven half-hour “True-Life Adventures” nature films, beginning in 1948.  He later ran these on Disneyland, accompanied by newer (and not always related) material.

 The first of these (“Seal Island”) comprised half of the third episode of Disneyland in 1954.  The 1950 “Beaver Valley” was half of episode 10, and 1951’s “Nature’s Half Acre” was half of episode 16 in February 1955.  The last short feature in 1953, on the Everglades, was seen in the second episode of the second season.

 After that, between 1953 and 1960, Disney made seven full-length nature films, and pieces of them appeared in the TV anthology—in later years, before they were released to theatres.

 On the plus side, Disney pioneered the use of time-lapse photography, which could show the entire lifecycle of plants or insects, and slow motion photography, which isolated delicate moments in the flight of bees and hummingbirds, for instance.

 But the Disney business was narrative, and the emphasis was often on conflict. Predators and prey, or male animals clashing in the mating season, had the action to keep viewers watching.  While it’s true that a lot of activity in the wild is along the theme of eating and being eaten, emphasis on predator/prey scenes also unfortunately supported the standard metaphor of nature as constant warfare, “survival of the fittest” in the grossest sense.  The more subtle elements of survival, such as cooperation, learning, sharing and negotiation, aren't fast enough to be considered watchable, although these films sometimes did patch together narratives out of less violent behaviors. Also unfortunately, like other nature films of the time, events were sometimes staged, using trained animals in artificial circumstances. 

I grew up climbing trees.  We weren't out in the country, but there was plenty of life around us--especially small creatures, from rabbits and squirrels on down. So even though these were far from my favorite episodes, I was sometimes fascinated, for the camera captured a lot of what I could not otherwise witness.  I don't recall specifics, but these probably contributed to my later interest in ecology.  For me, futuristic technology and space travel, and the importance of environment and the agency of all life on earth, were not contradictory interests or concerns. Tomorrowland and Adventureland coexisted, along with history (Frontierland) and Fantasyland. In these early days for me, they were all part of the world, as they remain. Perhaps in at least a partial way I have the Disneyland anthology to thank for that point of view.

  Disney, TV and Reading

 The rise of television in the lives of my Baby Boomer generation was accompanied by outcries from parental and religious groups, and decried by educators.  Congressional hearings were held on violence in programs with young audiences, and supposed vision experts were seriously concerned about the fate of our eyes.  Educators worried about addictive and mindless content seducing us from our homework, and were afraid the constant parade of imagery was ruining our capacity to read.

 They weren’t entirely wrong about some of that, especially about reading.  It would be another decade before Marshall McLuhan became famous for detailing how different television is from print. 

 Did TV images themselves discourage reading?  Probably to some extent. It was easier to be stimulated--to get revved up--by TV, regardless of content.  We read the moving images of TV at a faster rhythm that made slowing down to read words more difficult.  The time spent watching TV that previous generations may have spent reading was probably also a potent factor, as well as TV’s seductiveness.

 The Internet is known for slicing and dicing the contemporary attention span, but long before the first emoji there was television, charged with decimating our concentration.  I’ve always maintained that attention spans were shortened then, not so much by anything inherent in television, but by the bright distractions of television commercials.   Even in the 1950s, when there were fewer commercials and less of a TV hour devoted to them, and they were not so abruptly thrown in, they still distracted and disrupted attention to the narrative, with cumulative effects.

 Attention spans in childhood are already limited, however.  Perhaps I was slow on the uptake, but even though I was reading books from the library by the time I was 10, I was still having trouble stretching my attention through a long novel in high school.  There were of course books I couldn’t stop reading.  But some books stimulated me so much I couldn’t keep reading them, while others made me sleepy, or I just got lost, even if I was interested.

 Television was not alone in making books sometimes seem like a foreign country: exotic and beckoning perhaps, but confusing, hard to understand, and intimidating. So sometimes an entry point, or perhaps a bridge, was needed to get into the book and its reality. 

 Written stories, oral tales, are themselves bridges to many of Disney’s best-known animations.  But sometimes the Disney version encourages going back across that bridge to the source. 

For example, I knew the basic story of Alice in Wonderland before seeing the Disney version, though I was too young to read the Lewis Carroll book at that time.  Having some confidence from knowing the Disney version, I must have read it a few years later —all I can remember is coming to the end of it and the thrill of seeing that there was yet another Alice story to read, Through the Looking Glass.

 As I mentioned in the post previous to this one in this series, I probably had an interest in the American Revolution from reading about it, before I saw Disney’s Johnny Tremain.  But that story inspired further reading, probably including a stab at the source novel, Johnny Tremain by Esther Forbes, from the public library.  I don’t specifically recall reading it, though, and a more recent reading suggests why: the novel involves a much more complicated story, that goes on past the events in the movie.  I may not have had the attention span for all of it yet. 

Sometimes it took awhile before I was ready to walk over the bridge.  From Disney’s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, I knew the name of Jules Verne, and the success of that movie led to others made from Verne stories that I saw at Saturday matinees.  Actually reading Verne required yet another bridge: the Classics Illustrated comic books.  The first one I read was I believe the first one ever, the cover of which I remember vividly: it was From the Earth to the Moon. (It looks like a 1950s rocketship but it's actually more of a bullet.)

 The only Disney product I definitely remember leading directly to reading was not from the Disneyland anthology but another series.  I was a bit too old for the Mickey Mouse Club, but my younger sister Kathy watched it every afternoon, so I might see some of it in passing on the living room TV, still the only one in the house.  One day I noticed a filmed story beginning within the Mickey Mouse Club show, about two boy detectives, Frank and Joe Hardy.   

The story, called “The Mystery of the Applegate Treasure,” was based on the first novel in the Hardy Boys series, The Tower Treasure (though it also borrowed elements from #36: The Secret of Pirate Hill.)  The serial, starring Tim Considine and Tommy Kirk (both appeared in many other Disney stories) was broadcast in October 1956, every day for 19 episodes of fifteen minutes each. I was completely smitten.

 I asked my sister to alert me if there was another Hardy Boys story (there was and she did: “The Mystery of Ghost Farm” was broadcast in 12 segments the following year. It begins with the beginning of #2 of the novels, The House on the Cliffs, but quickly diverges.)

 Meanwhile, I discovered the Hardy Boys series of books, and hit the public library for whatever was available at the moment, for they had other readers.  These were the originals, the series that ran from 1927 into the 1950s, before the first 38 were revised (and many ruined) in 1959.  As library books they were without the dust jackets but with the brown letters on light brown covers.  I wrote about them in detail in my “History of My Reading” series.  (Or click on the Hardy Boys label.)

  This bridge relationship of TV shows to books continued for the rest of my life so far.  Just a few years ago, when I undertook to read Charles Dickens Bleak House—all 875 paperback pages—I did so after having seen the 2005 BBC miniseries, and I borrowed the DVDs from the university library to watch after I’d read the appropriate chapters, to make sure I had the characters and action straight in my mind. 

 The theme of such bridges will recur in this series, which now moves on beyond shows for children to other 1950s TV forms, beginning with the variety show.

Monday, May 23, 2022

The Uses of Not


Thirty spokes
 meet in the hub.
 Where the wheel isn’t
 is where it’s useful.

 Hollowed out,
 clay makes a pot.
 Where the pot’s not
 is where it’s useful.

 Cut doors and windows
 to make a room.
Where the room isn’t, 
there’s room for you.

So the profit in what is 
is in the use of what isn’t.

-- Lao Tzu 
Trans. By Ursula K. Le Guin