#no context ed neal | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

blackkudos · 5 years ago

Text

Eldridge Cleaver

Leroy Eldridge Cleaver (August 31, 1935 – May 1, 1998) was an American writer, and political activist who became an early leader of the Black Panther Party.

In 1968, Cleaver wrote Soul on Ice, a collection of essays that, at the time of its publication, was praised by The New York Times Book Review as "brilliant and revealing". Cleaver stated in Soul on Ice: "If a man like Malcolm X could change and repudiate racism, if I myself and other former Muslims can change, if young whites can change, then there is hope for America."

Cleaver went on to become a prominent member of the Black Panthers, having the titles Minister of Information and Head of the International Section of the Panthers, while a fugitive from the United States criminal justice system in Cuba and Algeria. He became a fugitive after leading an ambush on Oakland police officers, during which two officers were wounded. Cleaver was also wounded during the ambush and Black Panther member Bobby Hutton was killed. As editor of the official Panthers' newspaper, The Black Panther, Cleaver's influence on the direction of the Party was rivaled only by founders Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale. Cleaver and Newton eventually fell out with each other, resulting in a split that weakened the party.

After spending seven years in exile in Cuba, Algeria, and France, Cleaver returned to the US in 1975, where he became involved in various religious groups (Unification Church and CARP) before finally joining the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as well as becoming a conservative Republican, appearing at Republican events.

Early life

Eldridge Cleaver was born in Wabbaseka, Arkansas; as a child he moved with his large family to Phoenix and then to Los Angeles. He was the son of Leroy Cleaver and Thelma Hattie Robinson. He had four siblings: Wilhelima Marie, Helen Grace, James Weldon, and Theophilus Henry.

As a teenager, he was involved in petty crime and spent time in youth detention centers. At the age of 18, he was convicted of a felony drug charge (marijuana, a felony at the time) and sent to the adult prison at Soledad. In 1958, he was convicted of rape and assault with intent to murder, and eventually served time in Folsom and San Quentin prisons. While in prison, he was given a copy of The Communist Manifesto. Cleaver was released on parole December 12, 1966, with a discharge date of March 20, 1971. In 1968 he was arrested on violation of parole by association with individual(s) of bad reputation, and control and possession of firearms Cleaver petitioned for habeas corpus to the Solano County Court, and was granted it along with a release of a $50,000 bail.

Black Panther Party

Cleaver was released from prison on December 12, 1966. He was writing for Ramparts magazine and organizing efforts to revitalize the Organization of Afro-American Unity. The Black Panther Party was only two months old. He then joined the Oakland-based Black Panther Party (BPP), serving as Minister of Information, or spokesperson. What initially attracted Cleaver to the Panthers, as opposed to other prominent groups, was their commitment to armed struggle.

In 1967, Cleaver, along with Marvin X, Ed Bullins, and Ethna Wyatt, formed the Black House political/cultural center in San Francisco. Amiri Baraka, Sonia Sanchez, Askia Toure, Sarah Webster Fabio, Art Ensemble of Chicago, Avotcja, Reginald Lockett, Emory Douglas, Samuel Napier, Bobby Hutton, Huey Newton, and Bobby Seale were Black House regulars. The same year, he married Kathleen Neal Cleaver (divorced 1987), with whom he would have son Ahmad Maceo Eldridge (born 1969, Algeria; died 2018, Saudi Arabia) and daughter Joju Younghi (born July 31, 1970, North Korea).

Cleaver was a presidential candidate in 1968 on the ticket of the Peace and Freedom Party. Having been born on August 31, 1935, Cleaver would not have been the requisite 35 years of age until more than a year after Inauguration Day 1969. (Although the Constitution requires that the President be at least 35 years of age, it does not specify whether he need have reached that age at the time of nomination, or election, or inauguration.) Courts in both Hawaii and New York held that he could be excluded from the ballot because he could not possibly meet the Constitutional criteria. Cleaver and his running mate Judith Mage received 36,571 votes (0.05%).

In the aftermath of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on April 4, 1968, there were riots across the nation. On April 6, Cleaver and 14 other Panthers led an ambush of Oakland police officers, during which two officers were wounded. Cleaver was wounded during the ambush and 17-year-old Black Panther member Bobby Hutton was killed. They were armed with M16 rifles and shotguns. In 1980, he admitted that he had led the Panther group on a deliberate ambush of the police officers, thus provoking the shootout. Some reporters were surprised by this move, because it was in the context of an uncharacteristic speech, in which Cleaver also discredited the Black Panthers, stated "we need police as heroes", and said that he denounced civilian review boards of police shootings for the "bizarre" reason that "it is a rubber stamp for murder". Some speculated his admission could have been a pay-off to the Alameda County justice system, whose judge had only just days earlier let Eldridge Cleaver escape prison time; Cleaver was sentenced to community service after getting charged with three counts of assault against three Oakland police officers. The PBS documentary A Huey Newton Story claims that "Bobby Hutton was shot more than twelve times after he had already surrendered and stripped down to his underwear to prove he was not armed."

Charged with attempted murder after the incident, he jumped bail to flee to Cuba in late 1968. Initially treated with luxury by the Cuban government, the hospitality ended upon reports Fidel Castro had received information of the CIA infiltrating the Black Panther Party. Cleaver then decided to head to Algeria, sending word to his wife to meet him there. Elaine Klein normalized his status by getting him an invitation to attend the Pan-African Cultural festival, rendering him temporarily safe from prosecution. The festival allowed him to network with revolutionaries from all over Africa in order to discuss the perils of white supremacy and colonialism. Cleaver was outspoken in his call to violence against the United States, contributing to his mission to "position the Panthers within the revolutionary nationalist camp inside the United States and as disciples of Fanon on the world stage". Cleaver had set up an international office for the Black Panthers in Algeria. Following Timothy Leary's Weather Underground-assisted prison escape, Leary stayed with Cleaver in Algiers; however, Cleaver placed Leary under "revolutionary arrest" as a counter-revolutionary for promoting drug use.

Cleaver also cultivated an alliance with North Korea in 1969, and BPP publications began reprinting excerpts from Kim Il Sung's writings. Although leftists of the time often looked to Cuba, China, and North Vietnam for inspiration, few had paid any attention to the secretive Pyongyang regime. Bypassing US travel restrictions on North Korea, Cleaver and other BPP members made two visits to the country in 1969–1970 with the idea that the juche model could be adapted to the revolutionary liberation of African-Americans. Taken on an official tour of North Korea, Cleaver expressed admiration at "the DPRK's stable, crime-free society which provided guaranteed food, employment, and housing for all, and which had no economic or social inequalities".

Byron Vaughn Booth (former Panther Deputy Minister of Defense) claimed that, after a trip to the DPRK, Cleaver discovered his wife had been having an affair with Clinton Robert Smith Jr. Booth told the FBI he had witnessed Cleaver shoot and kill Smith with an AK47. Elaine Mokhtefi, in the London Review of Books, writes that Cleaver confessed the murder to her shortly after committing it.

Cleaver later left the DPRK, claiming that the environment was too oppressive.

In his 1978 book Soul on Fire, Cleaver made several claims regarding his exile in Algeria, including that he was supported by regular stipends from the government of North Vietnam, which the United States was then bombing. Cleaver stated that he was followed by other former criminals turned revolutionaries, many of whom (including Booth and Smith) hijacked planes to get to Algeria.

Split and new directions

Eldridge Cleaver and Huey Newton eventually fell out with each other over the necessity of armed struggle as a response to COINTELPRO and other actions by the government against the Black Panthers and other radical groups. Also Cleaver's interest in North Korea and global anti-imperialist struggle drew ire from other BPP members who felt that he was neglecting the needs of African-Americans at home in the US. Following his expulsion from the Black Panthers in 1971, the group's ties with North Korea were quickly forgotten. Cleaver advocated the escalation of armed resistance into urban guerrilla warfare, while Newton suggested the best way to respond was to put down the gun, which he felt alienated the Panthers from the rest of the black community, and focus on more pragmatic reformist activity by lobbying for increased social programs to aid African-American communities and anti-discrimination laws. Cleaver accused Newton of being an Uncle Tom for choosing to cooperate with white interests rather than overthrow them.

Cleaver left Algeria in 1972, moving to Paris, France, becoming a born again Christian during time in isolation living underground. He turned his hand to fashion design; three years later, he released codpiece-revival "virility pants" he called "the Cleavers", enthusing that they would give men "a chance to assert their masculinity".Cleaver returned to the United States in 1977 to face the unresolved attempted murder charge. By September 1978, on bail as those proceedings dragged on, he had incorporated Eldridge Cleaver Ltd, running a factory and West Hollywood shop exploiting his "Cleavers", which he claimed liberated men from "penis binding". He saw no conflict with his newfound Christianity, drawing support for his overtly sexual design from 22 Deuteronomy. The long-outstanding charge was subsequently resolved on a plea bargain reducing it to assault. A sentence of 1,200 hours' community service was imposed.

Later life

In the early 1980s, Cleaver became disillusioned with what he saw as the commercial nature of evangelical Christianity and examined alternatives, including Sun Myung Moon's campus ministry organization CARP. He later led a short-lived revivalist ministry called Eldridge Cleaver Crusades, "a hybrid synthesis of Islam and Christianity he called 'Christlam'", along with an auxiliary called the Guardians of the Sperm.

Cleaver was then later baptized into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) on December 11, 1983, periodically attended regular services, lectured by invitation at LDS gatherings.

By the 1980s, Cleaver had become a conservative Republican. He appeared at various Republican events and spoke at a California Republican State Central Committee meeting regarding his political transformation. In 1984, he ran for election to the Berkeley City Council but lost. Undaunted, he promoted his candidacy in the Republican Party primary for the 1986 Senate race but was again defeated. The next year, his 20-year marriage to Kathleen Neal Cleaver came to an end.

In 1988, Cleaver was placed on probation for burglary and was briefly jailed later in the year after testing positive for cocaine. He entered drug rehabilitation for a stated crack cocaine addiction two years later, but was arrested for possession by Oakland and Berkeley Police in 1992 and 1994. Shortly after his final arrest, he moved to Southern California, falling into poor health.

Death

Cleaver died at age 62 on May 1, 1998, at Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center in Pomona, California. He is buried at Mountain View Cemetery in Altadena, California.

Soul on Ice (1968)

[W]hen I considered myself ready enough, I crossed the tracks and sought out white prey. I did this consciously, deliberately, willfully, methodically – though looking back I see that I was in a frantic, wild and completely abandoned frame of mind. Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the white man's law, upon his system of values, and that I was defiling his women...I felt I was getting revenge. From the site of the act of rape, consternation spread outwardly in concentric circles. I wanted to send waves of consternation throughout the white race.

While in prison, he wrote a number of philosophical and political essays, first published in Ramparts magazine and then in book form as Soul on Ice. In the essays, Cleaver traces his own development from a "supermasculine menial" to a radical black liberationist, and his essays became highly influential in the black power movement.

In the most controversial part of the book, Cleaver acknowledges committing acts of rape, stating that he initially raped black women in the ghetto "for practice" and then embarked on the serial rape of white women. He described these crimes as politically inspired, motivated by a genuine conviction that the rape of white women was "an insurrectionary act". When he began writing Soul on Ice, he unequivocally renounced rape and all his previous reasoning about it.

The essays in Soul on Ice are divided into four thematic sections: "Letters from Prison", describing Cleaver's experiences with and thoughts on crime and prisons; "Blood of the Beast", discussing race relations and promoting black liberation ideology; "Prelude to Love – Three Letters", love letters written to Cleaver's attorney, Beverly Axelrod; and "White Woman, Black Man", on gender relations, black masculinity, and sexuality.

#08/31 #05/01

3 notes · View notes

scientificphilosopher · 6 years ago

Text

Book List 2018

I’m a couple weeks behind on this, but here’s the list of books I read in 2018. I’ve broken it down by category, though this is pretty loose since, you know, genres bleed into one another and such. You can also find reviews of some of these books here, and I always take requests for reviews as well. Follow me on Goodreads to see what I’m reading and rating.

Let me know what you think if you’ve read any of these books or have recommendations, and, as always, please feel free to send me malicious personal attacks if I say something you disagree with.

Non-Fiction

Philosophy

Pragmatism and Feminism: Reweaving the Social Fabric by Charlene Haddock Seigfried

The Pragmatic Turn by Richard J. Bernstein

Race Matters by Cornel West

Democracy Matters: Winning the Fight Against Imperialism by Cornel West

American Philosophy: A Love Story by John Kaag

Ethics Without Ontology by Hilary Putnam

Meaning in Life and Why It Matters by Susan Wolf

The Variety of Values: Essays on Morality, Meaning, and Love by Susan Wolf

The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World by Owen J. Flanagan

Meaning in Life by Thaddeus Metz

The Human Eros: Eco-Ontology and the Aesthetics of Existence by Thomas Alexander

Naturalism and Normativity by Mario De Caro (Editor), David Macarthur (Editor)

Truth in Context: An Essay on Pluralism and Objectivity by Michael P. Lynch

Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom by bell hooks

The Origin of Others by Toni Morrison

Experiments in Ethics by Kwame Anthony Appiah

Ethics in the Real World: 86 Brief Essays on Things that Matter by Peter Singer

The Ethics of Ambiguity by Simone de Beauvoir

A Very Easy Death by Simone de Beauvoir

The Story of Philosophy: The Lives and Opinions of the World's Greatest Philosophers by Will Durant

Why Buddhism is True: The Science and Philosophy of Enlightenment by Robert Wright

A Defense of Buddhist Virtue Ethics by Jack Hamblin

Living Buddha, Living Christ by Thich Nhat Hanh

The Infidel and the Professor: David Hume, Adam Smith, and the Friendship That Shaped Modern Thought by Dennis C. Rasmussen

The Book of Joy: Lasting Happiness in a Changing World by Dalai Lama XIV, Desmond Tutu, and Douglas Carlton Abrams

Reality, Art and Illusion by Alan Watts

Democracy and Social Ethics by Jane Addams

Common Sense by Thomas Paine

From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds by Daniel C. Dennett

Science

Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst by Robert Sapolsky

The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs: A New History of a Lost World by Stephen Brusatte

Why Dinosaurs Matter by Kenneth Lacovara

I Contain Multitudes: The Microbes Within Us and a Grander View of Life by Ed Yong

The Evolution of Beauty: How Darwin's Forgotten Theory of Mate Choice Shapes the Animal World—And Us by Richard O. Prum

Gulp: Adventures on the Alimentary Canal by Mary Roach

Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife by Mary Roach

Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex by Mary Roach

She Has Her Mother's Laugh: The Powers, Perversions, and Potential of Heredity by Carl Zimmer

Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind by Yuval Noah Harari

21 Lessons for the 21st Century by Yuval Noah Harari

Caesar's Last Breath: Decoding the Secrets of the Air Around Us by Sam Kean

Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne

What Is Real?: The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics by Adam Becker

Brief Answers to the Big Questions by Stephen Hawking

Seven Brief Lessons on Physics by Carlo Rovelli

The Physics of Time by Carlo Rovelli

Physics of the Impossible: A Scientific Exploration of the World of Phasers, Force Fields, Teleportation, and Time Travel by Michio Kaku

The Spinning Magnet: The Force That Created the Modern World--and Could Destroy It by Alanna Mitchell

Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space by Carl Sagan

Visions for the 21st Century by Carl Sagan et al.

The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer by Siddhartha Mukherjee

What the Dog Saw and Other Adventures by Malcolm Gladwell

The Soul of the Night: An Astronomical Pilgrimage by Chet Raymo

The Virgin and the Mousetrap: Essays in Search of the Soul of Science by Chet Raymo

Politics/Race/Gender

The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love by bell hooks

Bad Feminist by Roxane Gay

Not That Bad: Dispatches from Rape Culture by Roxane Gay (editor)

Dear Ijeawele, or a Feminist Manifesto in Fifteen Suggestions by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

Eloquent Rage: A Black Feminist Discovers Her Superpower by Brittney Cooper

Women & Power: A Manifesto by Mary Beard

The Fire Next Time by James Baldwin

I Am Not Your Negro by James Baldwin

The Origin of Others by Toni Morrison

Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption by Bryan Stevenson

Race Matters by Cornel West

Democracy Matters: Winning the Fight Against Imperialism by Cornel West

Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America by Ibram X. Kendi

The Souls of Black Folk by W.E.B. Du Bois

Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City by Matthew Desmond

Tears We Cannot Stand: A Sermon to White America by Michael Eric Dyson

What Truth Sounds Like: Robert F. Kennedy, James Baldwin, and Our Unfinished Conversation About Race in America by Michael Eric Dyson

White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism by Robin DiAngelo

White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America by Nancy Isenberg

The Common Good by Robert Reich

Transgender History by Susan Stryker

Memoir

Hunger: A Memoir of (My) Body by Roxane Gay

South of Forgiveness: A True Story of Rape and Responsibility by Thordis Elva

Letter to My Daughter by Maya Angelou

The Chicken Chronicles by Alice Walker

The Last Jew of Treblinka by Chil Rajchman

My Own Life by David Hume

Tough Shit: Life Advice from a Fat, Lazy Slob Who Did Good by Kevin Smith

Tibetan Peach Pie: A True Account of an Imaginative Life by Tom Robbins

Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass by Frederick Douglass

The Sun Does Shine: How I Found Life and Freedom on Death Row by Anthony Ray Hinton

Black Klansman: Race, Hate, and the Undercover Investigation of a Lifetime by Ron Stallworth

Calypso by David Sedaris

Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim by David Sedaris

Ink Spots by Brian McDonald

No Time to Spare: Thinking About What Matters by Ursula K. Le Guin

History/Biography

Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race by Margot Lee Shetterly

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: An Indian History of the American West by Dee Brown

The Devil in the White City: Murder, Magic, and Madness at the Fair That Changed America by Erik Larson

Barracoon: The Story of the Last "Black Cargo" by Zora Neale Hurston

No god but God: The Origins, Evolution and Future of Islam by Reza Aslan

God: A Human History by Reza Aslan

One Nation Under God: How Corporate America Invented Christian America by Kevin M. Kruse

The Etymologicon: A Circular Stroll through the Hidden Connections of the English Language by Mark Forsyth

Quackery: A Brief History of the Worst Ways to Cure Everything by Lydia Kang

Fiction

Literary Fiction

Go Tell It on the Mountain by James Baldwin

Another Country by James Baldwin

If Beale Street Could Talk by James Baldwin

Blues for Mister Charlie by James Baldwin

Going to Meet the Man by James Baldwin

The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas

The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho

East of Eden by John Steinbeck

Bartleby the Scrivener by Herman Melville

Home by Toni Morrison

God Help the Child by Toni Morrison

The Yellow Wallpaper and Other Stories by Charlotte Perkins Gilman

Go Set a Watchman by Harper Lee

The Dead by James Joyce

Ishmael: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit by Daniel Quinn

Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett

The Underground Railroad by Colson Whitehead

The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde

The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain

A Confederacy of Dunces by Jonh Kennedy Toole

The Dork of Cork by Chet Raymo

Genre Fiction

The Graveyard Book by Neil Gaiman

An Absolutely Remarkable Thing by Hank Green

Slice of Life by Kurt Vonnegut

2BR02B by Kurt Vonnegut

The Fifth Season by N.K. Jemisin

I, Robot by Isaac Asimov

Foundation by Isaac Asimov

Annihilation by Jeff VanderMeer

Kindred by Octavia E. Butler

Bloodchild and Other Stories by Octavia E. Butler

The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson

Pure Drivel by Steve Martin

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire by J.K. Rowling

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by J.K. Rowling

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince by J.K. Rowling

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J.K. Rowling

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them by J.K. Rowling

Pet Sematary by Stephen King

The Green Mile by Stephen King

A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens

The Legend of Sleepy Hollow by Washington Irving

The Restaurant at the End of the Universe by Douglas Adams

Life, the Universe and Everything by Douglas Adams

The Bad Beginning: A Series of Unfortunate Events #1 by Lemony Snicket

Ready Player One by Ernest Cline

Squirrel Seeks Chipmunk: A Modest Bestiary by David Sedaris

Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro

Worst of 2018

Every single book I read this past year had redemptive value. Even if it was total garbage, it still taught me some stuff (like how not to write a book). Even a bad book can be a good book if you let it be.

So, here’re a few books that didn’t quite hit the spot for me:

Ready Player One by Ernest Cline

Ishmael: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit by Daniel Quinn

Go Set a Watchman by Harper Lee

Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife by Mary Roach

The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho

Ink Spots by Brian McDonald

The Devil in the White City: Murder, Magic, and Madness at the Fair That Changed America by Erik Larson

Best of 2018

It was genuinely difficult to choose my top books of 2018. What a literary year it has been for me. 2018 marks the most books I’ve read in a year, and I was lucky enough to come across some real game-changers. I finally read the Harry Potter series and, boy howdy, did it ever live up to the hype. What took me so long?? But this was, more than anything, the year of James Baldwin. He has made an indelible mark on me as a reader, a writer, and a human. What a year this has been! I hope to read a fraction as much beautiful, lovely, challenging, profound prose in 2019.

In no particular order, here are the books of 2018 that most moved me, shook me, rattled me, rolled me:

Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst by Robert Sapolsky

Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom by bell hooks

The Pragmatic Turn by Richard J. Bernstein

Pragmatism and Feminism: Reweaving the Social Fabric by Charlene Haddock Seigfried

The Ethics of Ambiguity by Simone de Beauvoir

What Is Real?: The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics by Adam Becker

Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space by Carl Sagan

The Soul of the Night: An Astronomical Pilgrimage by Chet Raymo

The Fire Next Time by James Baldwin

Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption by Bryan Stevenson

Hunger: A Memoir of (My) Body by Roxane Gay

Well, there you have it, folks. Here’s to many more good books in the years to come!

The unread story is not a story; it is little black marks on wood pulp. The reader, reading it, makes it live: a live thing, a story. —Ursula K. Le Guin

#reading list #2018 #nich #reading #books #writing #long post #long

320 notes · View notes

protoslacker · 5 years ago

Link

The Digital Home for Duke University Professor and Left of Black host Mark Anthony Neal

Mark Anthony Neal’s Website is really a treasure. Next to this post is a post about Dick Gregory. In the video Gregory talks about “when I was in show business.” I was about 14 when they were filmed in this video. At 14 I knew Gregory as a comedian from his appearances on The Ed Sullivan Show, he was super famous. So Neal provides context for this video, the segments Neal posts build a mosaic,

#history #black experience #james baldwin #dick gregory

1 note · View note

kevinsworldofcomics-blog · 6 years ago

Photo

In my comic book reading lifetime, I’ve seen these characters as friends, allies, opponents, and blood enemies. I used to know that those last two would usually be an imaginary story, a ruse played on the villains, or else the temporary result of Red Kryptonite/mind control — emphasis on “I used to know.”

I don’t need them to be Super Friends like this...

...or sports buddies like on this Jack Burnley cover...

...but the “their methods are so different they’ll never trust each other” approach has never worked for me as the status quo.

This old issue was my first taste of the characters as “rivals” — even though it was a standard 1950s DC tale of easily solved problems & mistaken identity:

(Art by Win Mortimer)

World’s Finest covers could always be counted on to offer glimpses into the unknown/unimaginable...

(Art by Curt Swan)

(Art by Neal Adams)

(Art by Ed Hannigan & Klaus Janson)

Then everyone lost their minds for The Dark Knight Returns. I include myself in that “everyone,” and the feud made sense in context of one particular imaginary story.

(Art by Frank Miller & Lynn Varley)

Still, issue #3 — Batman’s final confrontation with the Joker — was the highlight of the series for me, not the throwdown with Superman.

After the wild success of DKR, this dynamic seemed to creep into the “real” DC titles; suddenly, Superman was the boring “Boy Scout” to Batman’s edgy cool. No, thank you.

Two of the best at finding the middle ground between extremes were John Byrne and Mark Waid (though they’d no doubt bristle at being included in the same sentence).

From Man of Steel...

(Art by Byrne & Dick Giordano)

From Kingdom Come...

(Art by Alex Ross)

The excellent “World’s Finest” crossover between the two animated series made me feel 10 years old again in the best way.

The nadir of this concept, the absolute rock bottom for this reader/viewer was a certain movie...

Of all my problems with the story — and it’s a long list — number one would be that Batman’s entire plan is the MURDER OF SUPERMAN! Not a hoax, not a dream, not an imaginary story.

Frank Miller’s operatic conflict looks subtle in comparison.

I realized later what had been itching in the back of my mind for the whole runtime: this would’ve been a perfect Earth-3 story, because the characters as presented work beautifully as Ultraman and Owlman. Unfortunately they were dressed up as Superman and Batman.

Oh well. To end on a positive note, here are two favorite images from over the decades. First, some Neal Adams insanity...

And it’s always nice to let Darwyn Cooke have the last word (from New Frontier).

#comics #dc comics #superman #batman #comicart #comic books #comic book art #illustration #world's finest #darwyn cooke #neal adams #curt swan #frank miller #john byrne #alex ross #mark waid

155 notes · View notes

mrmrsvegan · 7 years ago

Note

I'm confused about the message of all the vegan doctors (Colin Campbell, Neal Barnard, Caldwell Esselstyn, etc). Are They saying that all fat is bad, or just animal fat in bad? Or saturated fat is bad? Can we eat nuts/seeds/avocado/coconut freely, or becuase they are high fat foods should they be limited? Is having a (whole food) higher fat vegan diet unhealthy? Thanks

T Colin Campbell;

https://nutritionstudies.org/evidence-nut-consumption-human-health/

when we judge a food by one nutrient, in this case judging nuts only because of their fat content, we may be falling into the same trap that has caused so much past misinformation.

Investigating nutrients in isolation, i.e., reductionism, is fine when we are exploring the mechanisms by which they work. But, for an understanding of a food’s nutritional properties, we must seek and understand context, i.e., wholism. I am distressed with too much unnecessary confusion in this field called nutrition, most of which comes from interpretations based solely on reductionist research findings, a practice great for pharmaceutical firms and other financial interests.

https://nutritionstudies.org/fat-plant-based-diets/

In the final analysis, it is about food based nutrition, not about nutrient based nutrition that really matters.

http://www.pcrm.org/health/diets/pplate/what-about-nuts-and-seeds

A low-fat diet is not a no-fat diet. There are traces of natural oils in vegetables, beans, and fruits, and these fats are important for health. Some people add additional sources of healthful omega-3 (“good”) fats, such as walnuts, flaxseeds or flax oil, or soy products. And some researchers have found health benefits to having a small serving of nuts each day, despite the fact that nuts are very fatty. The idea is that nuts are heart-healthy and may even prevent arrhythmias—disorders of the heartbeat.

PCRM’s advice is to be cautious with these foods. They can easily impart enough fat to bring your weight loss to a halt. Rather than using nuts and seeds as snack foods (where it is so easy to go overboard), use them as condiments or in sauces, limiting them to about an ounce or so (about one modest handful) each day.

[PS this is exactly the same as our WSLF group]

http://www.dresselstyn.com/site/nuts-what-about-nuts-i-hear-so-many-different-opinions/

As nuts are a rich source of saturated fats, my preference is no nuts for heart disease patients. That also eliminates peanuts and peanut butter even though peanuts are officially a legume. For those with established heart disease to add more saturated fat that is in nuts is inappropriate. For people with no heart disease who want to eat nuts and avocado and are able to achieve a cholesterol of 150 and LDL of 80 or under without cholesterol lowering drugs, some nuts and avocado are acceptable.

You can always go to the sources for their reasoned and well sourced opinions, it is most important that the doctors in the WFPB movement have treated 1000s of patients successfully over decades. The general rule even in the nutrition community is a “handful of nuts/seeds” not meals of them.

ED Disclaimer: if you are underweight or dealing with orthorexia, these are very healthful sources of calories and can be liberally added to meals. I know its hard to hear health advice to the majority and be run over by a bus with it when you need to understand your circumstances are totally different.

9 notes · View notes

worrygutz · 11 months ago

Text

I need the five Ed Neal fans on here to gather in a circle, I made an edit of his character Nolan

#love making niche things that no one except me is gonna get excited about #edwin neal #hes a little silly a little strange #my edit #no context Ed Neal

59 notes · View notes

personalcoachingcenter · 4 years ago

Text

Understanding Coaching In Virtual Environment - Virtual Coaching

New Post has been published on https://personalcoachingcenter.com/understanding-coaching-in-virtual-environment-virtual-coaching/

Understanding Coaching In Virtual Environment - Virtual Coaching

By Catalin Bebia (Life Coach, ROMANIA)

It is very likely that 10-15 years ago when coaching sessions started to be conducted remotely due to the evolving nature of companies and their needs to have their employees embarked on coaching sessions, phone coaching was the option of choice. However, it is equally likely that concerns about phone coaching effectiveness were predominant among coaches. But that was what technology brought to support the pace.

Lately, when globalization has advanced more solid and collaborative working technologies were developed, online collaboration tools that are leveraging the Internet started to be widely used for coaching. Some of the coaches are even delivering more than 50% of the sessions via virtual platforms [1], but today we’re not actually hearing the same concerns as 15 years ago. We rather see opportunities than challenges.

Adapting to the “virtual world” has been a steep learning curve and a really valuable one. Client organizations can provide access to high-quality coaching for more of their people, regardless of their location. It reduces travel costs and the associated environmental impact. It also enables a better work/life balance for coaches! Just imagine starting the day early by having a session with a client from a time-zone ahead by few hours, and afterward having time to prepare the breakfast for kids and take them to school.

Opportunities come with risks also. Effectiveness is one of them, very real considering for example how many leaders are strongly performing when they are in a physical environment with employees but fail to uphold the same perception when shifting into a new environment.

As important as coaching is in a conventional environment, it becomes even more important in the virtual world. During an in-person coaching session, the coach has the luxury of seeing body language, facial expressions, and attitude, all of these help her/him understand the client, their feelings, and perspective better. In the world of virtual coaching, the coach will have to learn how to read through the lines in an email, watch for small subtle clues like email or voicemail response time, and learn each individual’s voice and tone to gather over the line how they are feeling.

The personal, one-on-one nature of a coaching session is part of what makes professional coaching an effective resource for organizations or individuals looking to improve performance. Therefore making this type of connection via the phone or a computer screen can be difficult.

“Relationships require some modicum of trust, which is enhanced from face-to-face, knee-to-knee, eye-to-eye contact,” says Dave Ulrich, the Rensis Likert Professor of Business at the University of Michigan and a partner at the Provo, Utah-based RBL Group. “Virtual coaching could work on a specific problem, but personal coaching requires a personal connection.”

Then what could be one of the key ingredients to make this work? Among a myriad of skills and competencies, trust is one of the upfront dependencies that shall be established between coach and client to ensure further effectiveness of the coaching sessions. This is especially true when you would consider that coaching is often aimed at enabling clients to move forward, which typically requires them to do steps outside of their comfort zone – “Life begins at the end of your comfort zone” said Neale Donald Walsh, author.

So, how would Trust look like in general and what would be special when applied in a virtual environment?

“The Trust Equation”, formulated by David Maister [2], provides a useful framework to consider forward.

According to the author, the Trust Equation is:

Enhancing trust would require increasing credibility, reliability, and intimacy. Reducing self-orientation increases trust.

If we would like to find simple expressions for the trust ingredients, the below review can be taken as a reference [1]:

Credibility – simply put do I believe they know of what they speak?

Reliability – do they turn up on time? Do they deliver what they say they will?

Intimacy – do I feel this person will keep what I say confidential? Do I feel safe?

Self-orientation – are they doing this in service of me? Versus are they doing it in service of themselves?

Let’s take them one by one and try to make them relevant in a virtual environment.

Credibility lies with the coach, while the coach credibility level is assessed by the client – for example, if the coach would be required to deliver the coaching session in a platform she/he is not familiar with, this would put a risk on the coach and eventually any hesitation in demonstrating confidence in using it would undermine coach’s credibility. Face to face they would be confident. Virtually they are less confident. Maybe they are worried the internet connection will fail. Perhaps they’re wondering if the background behind them is the “right one”. Their reduced confidence has little to do with their confidence to coach. The impact of how they come across may be the same.

Reliability – how often many of us, working day-in-day-out in a virtual environment, are getting into the risk of having a back-to-back appointment, with virtually no time between? Well, then this is exactly what a coach would critically miss being ready for an effective coaching session: the time required to make sure the technical setup works well, review previous notes and ensure no distractors around so that all attention is given to the client. What about technology? Just imagine how the reliability of the coach would be affected when in the middle of the coaching session a critical software update would require a restart of the computer. That’s frustrating for both coaches and the client.

Intimacy could be severely affected when the client does not have the confidence that the coaching conversation remains private. The new style of working, remotely from the office, provides a lot of flexibility regarding the place from where the coach would embark on a coaching session. A surrounding environment from the location the coach dials in however needs to provide to the client the comfort that this is a 1×1 conversation and nobody else would be exposed to it without his or her consent. From workplace flexibility and time considerations, a hotel lobby could be a fantastic option for coaches to save time between two other activities. But would the client consider this appropriate without affecting the expected/promised intimacy of the coaching concept? For sure there is a high risk to create some damage.

Last but not least is self-orientation. While for all the other trust ingredients the focus is on increasing, enhancing, magnifying their impact, self-orientation is exactly the opposite. Once in the coaching session, the client needs to feel that the coach is not distracted by outer events or thoughts. And needs to experience from the coach a conversation in which the benefits are all accounted for under the client and coach doesn’t take anything except maybe a bit more experience to the profile.

Additional tips could be considered as accelerators for trust and can be easily embedded into the coach practices:

In contracting conversations, agree on some ground rules for online engagement, what you might call technical etiquette. Do people know how to mute their mic when sneezing? Do their children know not to come running-in screaming whilst they’re on the video call? Is office or birdsong background noise – or the sway of a hand-held device going to distract?

Arrive early to prepare the virtual room. Check the documents you want to share are easy to access? How are your mic and light levels? Have a Plan B – do you have their mobile number if the Wi-Fi drops out? These technical checks can be incorporated into your standard coaching prep routine. They’re simple tips but they make for a much smoother session where you can relax into the difference of virtual coaching, stay mindful of the “frame” in which you’re interacting – whilst not making a distraction to the focus of coaching.

Remember that however comfortable you are, the client may need time and friendly support too. Allow them to play with the features and get used to the feel and flow of the platform.

There are also other additional tips to remember, depending on the platform and communication etiquette:

Virtual coaching can be done via phone, email, video conference, instant messages, project management software, and a myriad of other virtual mediums. Don’t limit yourself.

You may need to spend extra time (compared with face-to-face) working on building a good relationship with the client before diving into difficult coaching conversations.

Virtual coaching is a two-way conversation, not a one-way email.

Make time to have regular coaching sessions. You may want to consider creating a daily, weekly, or monthly schedule.

Make sure you allow ample time to discuss how the client views the situation.

Even though they can’t see you, do not multi-task during the coaching session.

Schedule a specific check-in date and time to follow up.

Ed Batista provided few additional points worth to mention [3]:

Don’t dictate the medium – this would translate that for the coaching sessions is critical to have a commonly agreed platform to develop the conversation. As mentioned earlier in the context of the Trust Equation, poor choice of the medium could harm the coach’s credibility and can undermine the client’s trust. The medium shall be dictated by the situation and by what is comfortable for both coach and client. E-mail and text messaging could augment the voice and video, as a suitable medium for follow-up or for feeding each-other with other resources, but not to be abused for anything other than basic information. Anything more complex should be reserved for live interaction.

Focus–a virtual coaching conversation is a special kind of interaction — very different from a typical conference call or online meeting, where we can often just partly tune in and still get the gist. When we’re coaching, the most important details are easy to miss. If we allow ourselves to become distracted, we’ll be less likely to notice things like a subtle change in someone’s facial expression or tone of voice, or an unusual turn of phrase that may signify something more. We may also fail to monitor our own emotional responses and instincts, which are vital sources of data. Even worse, others can sense when our attention wanders, leaving them reluctant to discuss truly important issues.

Manage the time–in most meetings, including phone calls and video conferences, the discussion goes right up until the end of the allotted time, at which point we rapidly conclude and move on to the next meeting. This is another way in which coaching conversations are different: It’s part of the coach’s job to track time during the conversation and stops at a point you’ve agreed on in advance. It’s hard to tell where coaching conversations will end up. They tend to be more wide-ranging than typical meetings, which makes them more meaningful and valuable. But this also means you’ll need to leave some time between the end of the session and the next event on the calendar. This enables both you and the client to reflect on the conversation and deepen the learning. Coaching conversations can also bring up strong emotions, and it’s essential to leave time to process those emotions. Even a few minutes can make a substantial difference, helping both you and the person you’re coaching get the most out of the experience.

Reflections:

There is no “I” in the “team” – how can you mirror it in coaching to mitigate self-orientation?

How can I get comfortable with my voice / my appearance in a virtual environment so that this turns into a distractor neither for the client nor me?

Is it feasible for me to have back-to-back coaching sessions in a virtual environment or is best to alternate?

Reference

The Rise and Rise of Virtual Coaching, Tim Cox and Hugh Reynolds, Management Futures, 2019

The Trusted Advisor, David H. Maister, Charles H. Green, Robert M. Galford, 2000

Tips for Coaching Someone Remotely, Ed Batista, Harvard Business Review 2015

Original source:

elink.io | See Original

0 notes

freechoicedreamer · 4 years ago

Text

Body and Soul (Foreword)

AO3

Opening Theme

"Who knows if to live is to be dead, and to be dead, to live? And we really, it may be, are dead. In fact I once heard sages say that we are now dead, and the body is our tomb…"

(Plato)

Upon a comment left by a reader of the other fanfic I wrote, The Sweet Suite, where she asked about the possibility of new storylines deriving from the setting established by it, and after giving it a lot of thought, I began to glimpse new storylines and scenarios that I hadn't considered before.

Further elaborating on those initial ideas, I started to visualize a structure that would correspond to a complete season of Once Upon a Time. The basic assumption was that OUAT did not end after its seventh season. The new scenario would comprise a complete new season divided in two parts. The first part of this hypothetical eighth season, designed to be OUAT's final season, would be 'The Sweet Suite'. The second, following straightforward without any significant time jump, would be 'Body and Soul'.

The main references for developing this new story are pictured bellow. A deeper understanding of the illustration's context requires the reading of The Sweet Suite but a brief description of its three main axes is sufficient to configure the scenario for Body and Soul:

1st axis. The Charmings: David-Snow and Neal with a flying angel at the top of their heads (their connection with their Wish-counterparts, in Heaven); the Swan-Joneses: Killian-Emma and Hope; the Sweet-Joneses: Wish Killian-Wish Emma with an illuminated heart in between them (the source of new lives), and Missy-Luna (their enchanted pets); the 'Bunny-Archer' ladies: Alice-Robyn; and the 2 Jolly Rogers.

2nd axis. The OUAT book core: besides Wish Henry and Henry (respectively, king of the New Enchanted Forest and the new Author - again) with their respective partners Violet and Cinderella, and Lucy, we see Aladdin-Jasmine on a magic carpet ride, and an allegorical representation of all United Realms and its capital, Storybrooke.

3rd axis. In the foreground, the Three-Reginas: the Good Queen-Robin Hood (in her heart, where his soul is preserved); Split Regina-Wish Robin and Coralline (their adoptive daughter); and Wish Regina and Roland (who developed a mother-son bond). We also see the LWM-UR magic link: Zelena-Chad, as representative, but not the only ones, of the connection between the Land Without Magic and the United Realms. Above, still in this axis, the Magic-Mystery link: Gideon and the souls of Rumple-Belle and Wish Rump-Wish Belle surrounded by books about incantations, potions, prophecies, legends and ancient myths.

Around the axes. Flying birds and fairies (in non-wish & wish pairs), stars and icons complete the set of elements that make up OUAT's eighth season. Below, the Ocean, home to mythical beings, reigns in its mysteries - life returning to the unknown.

Thematically, the 2 Killians and 2 Emmas are at the narrative center not only to set up and unfold their own storylines but also to drive other arcs designed for the main characters (seen in the 3 axes) and for guest stars coming from the multiple realms. You’ve got to remember that as the second and last part of a hypothetical Final Season, Body and Soul is expected to be the closure of a series with an ensemble cast. Therefore the structure of each chapter resembles a rotating spotlight illuminating 6 arcs and many characters. The focus always goes back to the 2 Killians and 2 Emmas, though.

Structurally, the narrative is divided into 14 chapters (plus this foreword). While this is not a musical fanfic as The Sweet Suite, where the songs were always an intrinsic part of the narrative, here it may or may not happen. Where it does not happen: each chapter is titled in alignment with a song, an opening theme to create the atmosphere for the narrative to unfold - in this case a relatively close match between the storyline and the lyrics may occur but not necessarily. That means the 'read only' motto won't compromise the story fruition but listening to the songs will help to set up the chapter mood. Where it does happen: eventually, you will find a song link placed in the middle or at the end of a chapter, and in these cases the song is completely pertinent to the narrative, as it happened in The Sweet Suite (although, as it happened there, for those unwilling to listen to the songs it's possible to skip them with a relatively low continuity loss). As before, the song streams may be accessed by external or embedded links, both options appear close to each other.

The tone of Body and Soul, an autumn/wintertime drama, is more sober than that of The Sweet Suite, a 'sweet' spring/summertime romance. The jazzy atmosphere, marked by a more introspective mood, allows the brushstrokes to carry heavier colors on existential quests such as the afterlife and the permanence versus impermanence of life and death, among others. Even so, fundamentally, as this is supposed to be a hypothetical Once Upon a Time final season, rest assured that love and hope will always prevail through a light dreamy-fantasy narrative.

One of my constant concerns in both stories was to build a plot that was both rich in the nuances typical of a rich plot, but mainly a springboard for character development. I am a fervent advocate - and this is one of my biggest complaints about the 7 seasons of Once Upon a Time - that the plot should serve the characters and not the other way around. Modestly, mainly because I wrote with time restrictions imposed by my personal and professional commitments, and I did that in a foreign language - which considerably reduced my 'arsenal' of vocabulary and style figures, The Final Season is my proposal to fix this problem.

With The Sweet Suite and Body and Soul I feel that the challenge I'd set to myself - to write a novel-length multimedia fanfic - has been met. I did my best to review the whole text thoroughly but I apologize for eventual typo/grammar/vocabulary/continuity errors that escaped in this non beta-ed novel (please remember that English is not my native language). Besides, the task I'd given to myself - to develop an original post-canon narrative for a canon-compliant story - has been fulfilled.

The creative process of this story reminds me the feeling of creating a mandala. When I started to think of Body and Soul, I felt a strong need to see its center and to construct a circular path to it surrounding, in a spiral way towards the center, every possible storyline angle it could encompass as well as every character and scenario I could visualize. I couldn’t pretend I was not ‘seeing’ them. Initially, that was really hard because I felt myself imprisoned by so many classic fairy tales and mythologies that it was not easy neither simple to envision any embracing path towards the most inner point which, by its turn, I could not find either. However, as I started to write, original plots and arcs started to appear naturally and to be unfolded, by their own volition, towards a 'Mother Inside' center (thematically addressed, albeit rather implicitly). Suddenly, I began to free myself from the obligation of being completely loyal to classic myths and tales and/or being limited by them – I started to find the tone of originality that I sought.

In a deep sense, I could then understand Adam and Eddy in another level and kind of felt more sympathetic with them because I could feel in my own skin a sample of the freedom degree that their formula gave to them. By twisting and mixing well known characters and their original stories, they could fly away in any direction. Even so, an essential difference between their creative work and mine, here, is that they were restricted by much more practical factors, from budget constraints to actors’ unavailability (and seemingly not bothering that much in generating narrative/character’s development inconsistencies in the process). Therefore, I ended up almost feeling a bit sorry for them - but not so much, and I also know that they were well paid for doing their job. In my turn, I also found a dose of impairment: my available time to write being the most important, but I managed it given that I was really motivated to write. So, about motivation, what really moves me is the pleasure in creating – it’s so fun – and in sharing the fun, hoping that the resultant of this effort will be appreciated by others.

For many years I’ve read and enjoyed so many great CS stories that a feeling of gratitude inspired me to dedicate this series, The Final Season, to their talented and creative authors. The Final Season series is a gift to all CS writers that have been able to shine without switching off anyone's light. This is my ‘thank you’ to all of them!

That said, let’s go back to Body and Soul and get into the mood of what is to come. I propose a short break to relax and let a soothing music massage our imagination, thus preparing us to re-enter the Once Upon a Time world that has already been introduced in Part One of the Final Season. So, please, inhale and exhale deeply, calming down while listening to the song/mantra in the link below (by chanting this mantra, you become surrounded by a field of white light of protection), breathing slowly to free your minds, to open your senses and… bon voyage!

I hope you will enjoy the ride and thank you in advance if you decide to leave a constructive feedback.

Have fun, guys, take care…

Light, Peace and Love!

In Gurmukhi:

"Aad Guray Nameh Jugaad Guray Nameh Sat Guray Nameh Siri Guru Dayvay Nameh"

Translation:

"I bow to the Primal Wisdom. I bow to the Wisdom through the Ages. I bow to the True Wisdom. I bow to the great, unseen Wisdom"

#body and soul #Double CS fic #Foreword

0 notes

mandibierly · 7 years ago

Text

Danny McBride breaks down that wild 'Vice Principals' ending

Danny McBride in the series finale of ‘Vice Principals’ (Photo: Fred Norris/HBO)

Spoiler alert! If you tell Danny McBride that you thought Lee Russell (Walton Goggins) really had been shot dead by Ms. Abbott (Edi Patterson) in the series finale of HBO’s Vice Principals, you’ll make him very happy.

“I just love hearing that you really bought it, ’cause that’s sort of what our goal was with this whole show,” he says of himself and fellow exec producers/directors Jody Hill and David Gordon Green. “We all felt like we were bored of just watching something and knowing where it’s going to go. We felt like, if we can just make something that people don’t see the end coming a mile away, we’ll have done what we were supposed to do here. … We’d adjust back and forth between super-dark-weird drama and dumb comedy — it just makes the audience kind of sit back on their heels. You never really know what’s going to come. So I think it’s kind of funny to think that when you get into that, you really do think, ‘Wow, they can kill Lee Russell ’cause they don’t give a f**k.’ We did give a s**t, but we’re just pretending that we don’t.”

Lee had figured out that it was jilted Ms. Abbott who’d shot McBride’s Neal Gamby in the Season 1 finale, and then, jealous of Gamby’s relationship with Russell, tried to frame Lee for the attempted murder by planting evidence in his car in Season 2’s Spring Break episode.

“Lee’s flaw is that he’s a compulsive liar. It made more sense to us that that would be ultimately what would come to damage him. That his reputation is so severe, being accused of this and no one believing him [when he insists he didn’t shoot Gamby] — that’d almost be a greater way to have him have to explore himself,” McBride says. “Ultimately, at the end of the day, these guys have done so much bad stuff, but I think that’s the way it is in life: justice isn’t always served for our greatest wrongs. Sometimes it’s the small slights that we don’t even think of as a wrong that come back to bite us in the ass.”

The producers had decided Abbott was the killer before they began filming the series, though they didn’t tell Patterson and the rest of the cast until they got to Season 2. “We didn’t want everybody tipping off what was going to happen in the first season,” McBride says.

He admits it was a bit of a gamble. “What was interesting with this show was we never shot a pilot. We wrote the whole series and we just started shooting, so we never had that time to just see, is everybody going to work? Are all these actors going to pan out? Which I think is what most people use the pilot for — to test-drive the concept of the show,” he says. “But with Edi Patterson, I mean she was just so funny from the very first day that she showed up on set. She just made us so excited to see where her character was going to go. So we didn’t sway from her being the culprit. I think she’s one of the funniest people I’ve ever met before. I had just the absolute best time working with her. And honestly, when the show was over, I just kind of looked at her and was like, ‘Me and you have to do something else together again.’ So, we locked up, Edi and myself, and wrote this script together that’s a vehicle for her that I want to direct. So hopefully after this performance of hers, someone will finance that and make that movie.”

He would also love to work again with Goggins, who became a good friend. They had so many memorable scenes together, but he points to the one in the finale after the tiger that Lee had ordered for graduation attacks him. “The one that really got me the most was when he’s, like, dying for the second time because of the tiger wounds,” McBride says. “I remember him and I both were like, ‘This is what the whole entire series is about. It’s about this scene. If we can just make people take this ride for this scene, then we will have done what we needed to do with the show.’ So much so that we were actually supposed to shoot that scene one night. Then the night had kind of gone wrong, and Walt and I were both like, ‘Let’s not do it tonight. We’re not in the mindset. Let’s push it down the road a little bit.’ So we both just kind of knew that we needed to be in the right head space for that scene, and those two guys basically just acknowledging that they helped each other move past this f**ked up part in their life.”

Lee told Gamby that this last year was his favorite year of his whole life, and that he loves him. Then, he badgered Gamby into saying that he loves him, too. “That was all pretty much in the script. We probably improv-ed the least amount of any [project] we’ve done on this. I think that’s because there were so many spinning plates,” McBride says.

Yes, when Russell changed the school’s mascot to the tigers at the beginning of Season 2, it was so they could have that ending. “We started with [the idea that] these guys are out of date. Their views are out of date, the way they see the world is out of date, and it’s unfair. So the idea that the symbol that represents them in the beginning is the Native American warrior — something that is obviously insulting to so many people, something that really was out of place and out of context, it sort of makes sense. And then the idea that Lee’s ambition turns their warrior into the tiger — that’s how ambition sort of ends up eating him at the end. That was always in the DNA of [the show].”

Plus, we got to see the brilliant moment when Gamby, the ultimate disciplinarian, stopped the tiger from attacking again with the sheer force of his anger and a “f**k you.”

“He has so much rage and anger and displaced anger, this was a place for him to finally harness it, and try to use it to protect himself,” McBride says with a laugh.

Walton Goggins in the series finale of ‘Vice Principals’ (Photo: Fred Norris/HBO)

The finale ended with a flash-forward to three months later. Gamby’s still with Ms. Snodgrass (Georgia King), who’s now a published author, but he’s now the principal of a middle school. Lee, meanwhile, is the regional manager of a boutique in the mall. Gamby and Russell see each other in the food court and smile. But when Gamby looks again, Russell is gone. Does that mean they know their friendship is too toxic for them to spend time together? “I think that both of these guys [know] the importance that each of them played in their lives in this particular moment,” McBride says, “but I also think that both of them have grown enough to know that it’s probably better for the world if they don’t join forces.”

They never questioned where Lee would end up, he adds. “What’s really so funny is, ironically, when you write something like this where you explore these characters so deeply, by the end of it, your last episodes sort of end up writing themselves. You’ve set all this stuff up, and the characters sort of tell you where they need to go,” he says. “For some reason we just thought that he would take that lust of power and move into retail. He always cared about what he wore. He always had a sense for style. And it made sense that would be how he would build his empire again.”

And what’s the take-away from Gamby laying down the law for his new vice principal (Steve Little)? “Well, I think that Gamby learned a lot from Welles [Bill Murray]. I think he learned a lot more from Dr. Brown [Kimberly Hebert Gregory],” McBride says. “He is sort of using a little bit of her tactics of being open, but at the end of the day, letting people know that she shouldn’t be f**ked with.”

Maya Love and Danny McBride in the series finale of ‘Vice Principals’ (Photo: Fred Norris/HBO)

It’s a bittersweet fate for Gamby, for sure. “Weirdly, it’s one of the things that I find the most heartbreaking, when Gamby pulls up to that principal sign at a different school, because at the end of the day you know that North Jackson, and being there when his daughter was going to be there, is kind of all he ever wanted,” McBride says. “So I really look at that ending like he’s an exiled king that got booted out of his homeland. But the idea that Steve Little, who played Stevie Janowski on Eastbound, is there — [we’re] literally leaving the audience thinking that maybe all of the fun isn’t over just yet for him.”

Still, striking the right tone in the finale had to be tricky: we all know the criminal acts Russell and Gamby committed, and yet, we’ve grown to root for them. “We really set out to tell the story of the villain. In doing so, we didn’t even really want to totally redeem them, because I think true villains don’t just change overnight or become different people. So I think that there was a balance between how much justice do these guys deserve, and how much of it is just really like we’re showing this character piece?” McBride says. “Like with Tony Soprano in The Sopranos, you don’t necessarily have to see him get arrested or get killed for that to be a complete story. I think that’s sort of what we’re doing here. Do I think that being the principal of the middle school is a punishment enough for burning someone’s house down? Definitely not. But I think that in this world, it’s like we don’t really even know if this is all that’s going to happen to these guys. This is definitely a show about vice principals fighting for a job. When both of those guys are out of the running for that job, the story is sort of over, and the audience is kind of left to fill in the blanks of what happens next.”

The show was conceived as a limited series, but especially now that we’ve gotten to know the teachers so well in Season 2, maybe we could at least get a reunion special on the DVD? “I had probably the best time of my career working on the show and meeting these friends, and I love them — every one of them from Kimberly to Walton to Edi, Georgia, they’re all just incredible. I would love to work with all these guys again, and if it was in this world, if it was the right idea, I’d do it again,” McBride says. “But I think that part of what makes the story work is the idea that it isn’t designed to go on forever. We were really able to show character growth and flip the story on its ass because we didn’t have the restraints of having to make sure we maintained a formula that would be workable year after year after year. I think that’s what ultimately made the show interesting.”

As a viewer, it was satisfying to see how Gamby’s moments with the “workers” (DeShawn!), “bad kids” (yay, Robin Shandrell!), and “gold-star teachers” all built to them joining forces in the penultimate episode after Gamby and Russell’s epic brawl through the school. (McBride directed that fight in less than a day, by the way: “I just had to get creative and figure out how to shoot this in a way where I didn’t need to get in there and cover every single punch and kick,” he says. “So I was just walking around the set and came up with an idea for that tracking shot, and I just started to devise the whole fight that way — seeing these guys with the background, with the school, which is the other character of the show.”)

What was the most satisfying part for McBride in the end? “We took a year to write the whole series, and I swear to god I never had an anxiety attack ever in my life until about a week before we went down to shoot. I just woke up in the middle of the night, panicked in a straight-up anxiety attack, just because of the sheer amount of time we spent writing on this, then knowing we were about to go shoot it,” he says. “This whole thing was an adventure, and to be able to put that much energy into something, then to at the end of the day come up with something that you’re proud of, and that you’re happy with, and that you made new friends with — I think it’s the ultimate sort of pay-off because the whole thing was ultimately rewarding. It was such a fun way to make a living.”

Since he doubts we’ll get the trademark group commentary on the Season 2 Blu-ray (he hears it’s being rush-packaged for Christmas: “Maybe one day down the road Criterion will decide to release a TV show and they’ll have us do a commentary,” he jokes), can he at least answer one burning question: What did Lee do to get kicked out of gymnastics?!

“The world will never know,” McBride says with another laugh. “I know what he did, but I will never tell anyone. I will keep Lee Russell’s secret to the grave.”

yahoo

Read more from Yahoo Entertainment:

‘The Walking Dead’ recap: ‘I’m just some guy’

‘The Walking Dead’ postmortem: Melissa McBride talks Carol’s bravery and Ezekiel’s crushing losses

‘The Walking Dead’ postmortem: Khary Payton on King Ezekiel maintaining his humanity after so much loss

#_revsp:wp.yahoo.tv.us #vice principals #_uuid:62a6106a-f6ac-3323-b407-c9a291888dda #hbo #Danny McBride #_author:Mandi Bierly #walton goggins #_category:yct:001000086 #_lmsid:a0Vd000000AE7lXEAT #interviews

16 notes · View notes

dillhome69-blog · 5 years ago

Text

Jack M Silverstein’s Pro Football Hall of Fame Class of 2019

Later this month, the Pro Football Hall of Fame selection committee will take its list of 102 modern-era nominees — players and coaches — and cull from that 25 semifinalist candidates for the Class of 2019. In January, they will trim down to 15 finalists. On February 2, 2019, the day before the Super Bowl, the 48 voters will convene in Atlanta — site of the game — and bring the list from 15 to 10 and then 10 to 5.

They will then vote “yes” or “no” on each of the remaining five players. Any player receiving 80% “yes” votes makes the Hall of Fame.

For players and coaches on the list of modern-era nominees, making the semifinalist list of 25 is the first true step toward the Hall of Fame.

That’s because any person can nominate any player, provided that the player has been retired for five or more years and was voted to at least one Pro Bowl or one All-Pro team. Brad Biggs and I were among those who put Olin Kreutz on this year’s ballot, for instance, though Kreutz had been on before and is a true Hall of Fame candidate himself, as we’ll see below.

A much stranger nomination came last year when Steve Smith was on the list — not the heralded Smith of the Panthers, but the one from the Giants. He made the 2009 Pro Bowl and had some clutch catches in Super Bowl XLII, but few people consider him a Hall of Famer.

Therefore the cut to 25 is a significantly greater honor than just landing on the modern-era list.

In a way, this is the most difficult cutdown. While there might only be 10 guys in a given year who are legitimate Hall of Famers, there are 40-50 who can legitimately be considered worthy of that semifinal round.

I learned that the hard way. In this story, I will unveil my entire Hall of Fame ballot at each stage, starting with my top 25, which includes three Bears. In making the list, I had to ultimately make a top 40 list too, because there were 15 guys who I thought were soooooo close to being worthy of the 25 that I had to find a way to include them as well.

My methodology was to rank all of the players within their position groups, put the top-flight guys into the 25 first (including Gonzalez, Sterling Sharpe, Ed Reed and a few others), and then drop in the guys who I think we want to continue discussing based on positions.

For example, Kevin Mawae is my top center, but there are three other centers who I think are truly Hall-worthy: Kent Hull, Olin Kreutz and Tom Nalen. I had to then rank those three guys, and then decide how many of the three should be in my top 25.

My voting methodology will grow more clear as you read. Here are the nominees I would vote for this year, which I will then explain by position:

Hardest cuts from my top 40: Randall Cunningham, Steve McNair, Shaun Alexander, Kent Hull, Tom Nalen, Ty Law, Don Coryell

Semifinalists (25, announced this month): Donovan McNabb, Edgerrin James, Daryl Johnston, Torry Holt, Sterling Sharpe, Tony Gonzalez, Tony Boselli, Mike Kenn, Richmond Webb, Alan Faneca, Steve Hutchinson, Olin Kreutz, Kevin Mawae, Simeon Rice, Richard Seymour, Karl Mecklenburg, Wilber Marshall, Champ Bailey, Steve Atwater, LeRoy Butler, Ed Reed, Darren Woodson, Brian Mitchell, Steve Tasker, Clark Shaughnessy

Finalists (15, announced in January): James, Sharpe, Gonzalez, Boselli, Kenn, Webb, Faneca, Hutchinson, Mawae, Bailey, Atwater, Reed, Mitchell, Tasker, Shaughnessy

Round of 10 (chosen the day before Super Bowl LIII): Sharpe, Gonzalez, Boselli, Faneca, Mawae, Bailey, Reed, Mitchell, Tasker, Shaughnessy

Hall of Fame Class of 2019 (chosen the day before Super Bowl LIII): Sharpe, Gonzalez, Reed, Mitchell, Shaughnessy

Here are my explanations by position. Let the debate begin!

(Side note #1 — Here is my ongoing spreadsheet that I keep for my research. If there are small inconsistencies between the spreadsheet and the article in terms of rankings, that’s because I tinker a lot and changed the story but didn’t go back to update the sheet. Anyhow, feel free to take a look if you’re interested.)

(Side note #2 — There are three other candidates for the Class of 2019: safety Johnny Robinson from the seniors committee, and longtime Cowboys personnel guru Gil Brandt and Broncos owner Pat Bowlen from the contributors committee. All three candidates will be voted with the same “yes” or “no” process as the final five modern-era candidates, and will also require the same 80% “yes” vote for induction. All three can be elected. For more on Robinson, here is an interview with his long-time foe — and Hall of Famer — Lance Alworth.)

Photo by Al Messerschmidt/Getty Images

Top 25: Donovan McNabb

Top 40: Randall Cunningham, Steve McNair

Jack sez: This was one of the categories where I went around and around, since each guy has an edge over the other two.

Randall has the highest personal peak. McNabb has the best career and was the one of the three who I would have said most consistently throughout his career that he was a HOFer. McNair got the closest to a ring (one yard from OT in a Super Bowl), played the best in his biggest games and won an MVP (a co-MVP with Peyton Manning, which almost makes it bigger).

I had to pick McNabb for the top 25. He was the one guy I always thought was a HOFer during his career, measuring him against Manning and Brady.

I came very close to including both or either Cunningham and McNair and ended up removing them for others.

After that, I ended up dropping McNabb. I hate to say it, but the bar for quarterback is fantastically high, probably the highest of any position. I think we probably elect too many QBs to the Hall, and as I look ahead, there are two guys who I think have a great chance of getting in but who I would definitely not vote for: Eli Manning and Ben Roethlisberger.

I think Philip Rivers has a decent shot — he’s another guy I don’t think should be in. Coming up in the next decade will be four guys who are all going in, including at least two first ballot: Peyton, Brady, Brees and Rodgers.

In that context, I can’t give it to McNabb, Eli, Roethlisberger, Rivers, the spectacular Mike Vick, or two of my favorite QBs ever: Cunningham and McNair.

We’ll see what plays out for Cam Newton and Matt Ryan. My next QB going in is Peyton in the Class of 2021.

Photo by Robert B. Stanton/NFLPhotoLibrary

Top 15: Edgerrin James

Top 40: Shaun Alexander

Jack sez: The Hall merges halfbacks/running backs with fullbacks into a single category as “Running Backs,” but I’m going to split them because that’s how we think about them.

I love Shaun Alexander, and he just nudged my other top 40 candidates at running back: my guy Eddie George, the great Ricky Watters and the very talented Corey Dillon.

I think Edge is the best of the bunch, and I’ve got him going to the round of 15, which will be his third finalist selection in five years. He was a semifinalist the other two years.

Why Edge? He was just flat out better than the other guys, with a greater combination of skills. He’s got the most rushing titles of any of the nominees (two — Alexander has one), he’s got the most career rushing yards, the most yards per game, he’s one of the top two receivers (Watters) and he probably would have won a ring if he didn’t leave Indy. In fact, he might have even been Super Bowl MVP considering that Addai and Rhodes should have shared it.

Top 25: Daryl Johnston

Top 40: Larry Centers

Jack sez: A common theme for me with the Hall of Fame is the inequity in positional honors. Namely fullbacks, centers, and everyone on special teams. So it was disappointing but not surprising when I checked the Hall of Fame’s positional page and found that there is no true, modern fullback in the Hall.

We have to start somewhere, and Moose Johnston is a great starting point. He was arguably the best fullback of his time, paved the way for the NFL’s all-time leading rusher and started — and won — three Super Bowls. He deserves a top 25 recognition, no question.

Larry Centers was also arguably the best fullback of his time, albeit with different responsibilities. I’ll take Moose because his skill adhere to the position, whereas Centers’ standout statistic is valuable but more of a curiosity at the position (receptions for a fullback). Same idea as Mike Alstott — great player, but got a lot of recognition for the novelty (short-yardage touchdowns) rather than the blocking.

But here is my question: WHERE IS LORENZO NEAL? Not only is he not a nominee, but he’s only been nominated once since he’s been eligible, which was the Class of 2014. That happened last year.

Photo by Robert B. Stanton/NFLPhotoLibrary

Here are his credentials:

Arguably the best pure blocking back ever (my choice, for sure)

Passed the eye test as a monster fullback

16 seasons at a brutal position

239 games, with 14 seasons of 16+ games, including his last at age 38

4x Pro Bowl, 1x All Pro

Played in 6 postseasons including one Super Bowl

Starter at fullback in front of x 1,000-yard rushers: Eddie George (‘99, ‘00 Titans), Corey Dillons (‘01, ‘02 Bengals), LaDainian Tomlinson (‘03-’07, Chargers)

Lead blocker for MVP and first-ballot Hall of Famer Tomlinson

Lorenzo Neal belongs in the Hall. So do Moose and Larry Centers. And by the way, if fullbacks were given the HOF consideration of wide receivers, the following guys would be in play along with Neal, Moose, Centers and Rathman:

And that leaves off a ton of guys who had great careers, paved the way for 1,000-yard rushers and helped their teams reach or win Super Bowls, including my guy Jason McKie plus Howard Griffith, William Henderson and Brad Hoover, to name a few.

Hall of Fame Class of 2019: Sterling Sharpe

Top 25: Torry Holt

Jack sez: As I explained here, Sterling Sharpe needs to be in the HOF yesterday. This is his final year of eligibility before heading to the senior committee, and I 100% want to see him in now. He earned it and then some, and is one of the five guys in my Class of 2019. (We’ll get to the other four as we go along.)

In 19 years of eligibility, Sharpe has never even been a semifinalist. Torry Holt has been one in each of his four seasons of eligibility. And with good reason. He was electric. In an era with Moss, Harrison and T.O., and on an offense with Kurt Warner, Marshall Faulk and Isaac Bruce, Holt managed to distinguish himself as one of the very best at his position.

I’m not sure at what point I would vote him in — not this year, and not ahead of Calvin Johnson, who will be eligible in the Class of 2021, should Holt remain on the ballot that long. But I do know that I would have put him in ahead of recent HOFers Andre Reed and Tim Brown. And I know that the gap between Holt and the other nominated WRs is too great to move anyone else into the top 40.

Having said that, where are Herman Moore and Jimmy Smith? Those two guys need to be on the ballot too.

Photo by Robert B. Stanton/NFLPhotoLibrary

Hall of Fame Class of 2019: Tony Gonzalez

Jack sez: Tony Gonzalez is the number one guy on my list for the Class of 2019, the only one about whom I had not one millisecond of debate. He is arguably the greatest tight end ever in four respects: skillset, statistics, accolade, legacy.

Quite simply, he changed the position forever, not just in terms of the level of production a team could seek from the position but also the build a player could have at the position.

He changed the prototype, bringing the super-athletic basketball body to tight end. He is the predecessor of future HOFers Antonio Gates and Rob Gronkowski, and he’s better than both. The other three tight ends who are nominated had marvelous careers and were all talented players in their own right: Mark Bavaro, Brent Jones, Jay Novacek.

But none is good enough to warrant a top 40 in a year when Tony Gonzalez is going in first ballot. It’s not worth including them when there are other guys I want to debate, and when Gonzalez is so far ahead of the rest.

Two other guys are though, and they’re not on the list.

Ben Coates and Keith Jackson.

WHERE ARE BEN COATES AND KEITH JACKSON?

Of the five guys, Coates and Jackson rank 1st and 2nd, respectively, in receptions, receiving yards and touchdowns. Coates had 50 TDs, Jackson 49, and then Bavaro was 3rd at 39.

Coates, Jackson and Novacek are on top of the pack with 5 Pro Bowls, and Jackson leads the All Pro 1st team selections with three, followed by Coates with two.

Next year.

Top 15: Tony Boselli

Top 25: Mike Kenn, Richmond Webb

Jack sez: The group of nominated offensive tackles is imposing. There are seven nominees; joining Boselli, Kenn and Webb are Willie Anderson, Lomas Brown, Chris Hinton and Chris Samuels. Anderson has the fewest Pro Bowls, and he has four. Samuels is the only one without a first-team All-Pro selection and he was a Pro Bowler in six of his 10 seasons. This is a fantastic group.

At the top is the trio of Boselli, Kenn and Webb. I struggled with where these guys should go. Boselli had the best peak but the shortest career due to injuries. He’s on the Terrell Davis / Sterling Sharpe track. Webb was probably the best tackle of his time year in and year out. Between 1990 and 1999, if I had to pick one active tackle and I was assigned one of their seasons in that time frame at random and I had to start that player from that season in the Super Bowl, Webb would be the guy I would feel best about picking.

And then there’s Mike Kenn, a steady-as-she-comes tackle, 17 years, all with the Falcons, with peaks that included his being regarded as the best in the league. His most famous season was 1991, at age 35, when he was first-team All Pro for the first time since 1980.

Here’s what Kenn did against some of the league’s best pass-rushers:

Pat Swilling, Saints: ‘91 DPOY, ‘91 AP1, ‘91 PB, 17.0 sacks in ‘91, 0 vs. Kenn

Derrick Thomas, Chiefs: HOF, ‘91 AP1, ‘91 PB, 13.0 sacks in ‘91, 0 vs. Kenn

Leslie O’Neal, Chargers: 6x PB, 9 sacks in ‘91, 0 vs. Kenn

Chris Doleman, Vikings: HOF, 7 sacks in ‘91, 0 vs. Kenn

Charles Haley, 49ers: HOF, ‘91 PB, 7 sacks in ‘91, 0 vs. Kenn

Look again at that Swilling line. He was Defensive Player of the Year with a league-leading 17 sacks, and the key here is that Kenn played Swilling three times: twice in the regular season and once in the playoffs, a Wild Card game that the Falcons won.

Now read this list of accolades from his peers.

This is Kenn’s final year of eligibility before he moves into the senior category. From what I’ve read and watched, he seems like someone who was considered a Hall of Fame-talent in his time but fell through the cracks. I would like to see one final discussion on Kenn before he moves on.

Photo by Rick Stewart/Getty Images

Top 10: Alan Faneca

Top 15: Steve Hutchinson

Top 40: Steve Wisniewski

Jack sez: Only three guards are nominated this year, and they are a stronger trio than the three top tackles. Faneca was in the top 15 his first two years of eligibility and moved into the top 10 last year. If not for needing to do some makeup work with my HOF votes with Sharpe and two others, I would be voting Faneca in this year.

Hutchinson was also top 10 last year in his first year of eligibility. He needs to be the next guard in. And Wisniewski’s eight Pro Bowl selections is the most of the 15 nominated offensive linemen.

Photo by Ronald Martinez/Getty Images

Top 10: Kevin Mawae

Top 25: Olin Kreutz

Top 40: Kent Hull, Tom Nalen

Jack sez: Kevin Mawae was the best center of his time, and will be the next center in the Hall. Because I see a large enough gap between him and the rest of the pack, I’m putting him into the top 10 and leaving the next man, our guy Olin, at the top 25.

After that, the choice between Hull, Kreutz and Nalen is super tough. (Ray Donaldson is just on the outside of that group, another guy with a wonderful career.) None of these three guys has ever advanced to the semifinals, a sign of the disrespect toward pure centers.

The last one voted in as a modern-era nominee was Dermontti Dawson in 2012. Bruce Matthews went in 2007, though he spent more of his career at guard than center. Dwight Stephenson entered in 1998, Mike Webster in 1997, and that’s the entire list of HOF centers inducted since Jim Langer in 1987, which is the last time a center went in on the first ballot.

I am obviously biased here in my choice of Kreutz over Hull and Nalen, not just because I am a Bears fan and have come to know Olin personally, but from just a pragmatic level I watched nearly every game of his career and know his candidacy better than the other two guys. I think the Hull-Kreutz-Nalen debate is a great one, and though I will stick with Olin, whoever you choose of that three should be in the top 25.

Photo by Brian Bahr/Getty Images

Top 25: Simeon Rice

Jack sez: Ooooooh Simeon Rice. Man. On a personal level, he might have been my toughest cut after the top 25. He’s in a tough spot because with the exception of transcendent players — of his era, really just Reggie White and Bruce Smith — the defensive end position tends to get boiled down to just sacks.

Rice had a lot — 122.0 — but that’s still only good for 20th all-time. He was also only selected to three Pro Bowls and was only first-team All Pro once, in 2002, with three 2nd team selections.

But let’s talk about that one year.

In 2002, Simeon Rice had one of the most dominant seasons I’ve ever watched for a defensive end. His Buccaneers won the Super Bowl that year behind its defense, and Rice was one of three Bucs named to the All Pro 1st team. The other two are in the HOF: Warren Sapp and Derrick Brooks.

Rice finished 2nd in sacks that year to DPOY Jason Taylor, with 15.5 to Taylor’s 18.5, and then ripped off a spectacular postseason: four sacks in three games, one forced fumble in each game and two fumbles recovered. His two sacks in Super Bowl XXXVII led the Bucs, and his pass rush helped force Raiders QB Rich Gannon into his first interception to eventual MVP Dexter Jackson. Jackson’s second interception came when Rice dropped into coverage, and Gannon’s first read was to the left, toward Rice, causing him to look back to the right where he threw the pick.

Rice later forced Gannon into Warren Sapp’s one sack. And when the game was nearly over, announcer John Madden said that he voted for Rice for MVP.

Photo by Al Messerschmidt/Getty Images

Top 25: Richard Seymour

Jack sez: Again, like with “Running Backs” and “Offensive Linemen,” “Defensive Linemen” is one category, but I’m splitting it up to reflect how we actually think of players. The Patriots won three Super Bowls in four years led by their defense, and Seymour — who the team drafted #6 in 2001 — was the their best defensive player.

He was versatile, beginning his career as a 4-3 d-tackle and then moving to a 3-4 d-end. He was great from the jump, earning a starting job during his rookie year and starting in New England’s stunning Super Bowl victory over the Rams. He made 7 Pro Bowls and was 1st team All Pro three times. He was strong and fast, got to the quarterback, could stuff the run and was a great leader.

Top 25: Karl Mecklenburg

Top 40: London Fletcher, Sam Mills, Zach Thomas

Jack sez: Fourteen linebackers are nominated this year, all in one category, and once again I’m separating inside from outside backers. It’s a valuable distinction for nearly everyone on the list, with one notable exception: Karl Mecklenburg.

As Rick Gosselin broke down two years ago, Mecklenburg was predominantly a 3-4 inside linebacker, but played outside as well, along with positions along the line. As a result, he is not remembered for a single position, nor did he accumulate a ton of any one stat.

“My position is strange because I played all seven front positions,” Mecklenburg told Gosselin. “One of the challenges I face in having an opportunity of going to the Hall of Fame is that, statistically, people don’t know what to do with me.”

A newspaper feature on Mecklenburg prior to Super Bowl XXI, with the headline “Denver’s Mecklenburg fools computer,” opened thusly:

“At one time, Karl Mecklenburg was a football player without a position. Now ... he has a bunch of them.”

The author went on to say that Mecklenburg “lines up everywhere but in the defensive backfield.”

Like Kenn, Mecklenburg is in his 20th and final year of eligibility. He was a defensive standout on three Super Bowl teams, made six Pro Bowls and was All Pro 1st team three times. I’m curious to hear more discussion on him.

The guy getting the biggest shaft here is Zach Thomas, with London Fletcher and Sam Mills just a bit behind. I think fans of these three players probably feel about them the way I feel about Kreutz, Peanut Tillman and Lance Briggs. Strong cases exist for them, but just-as-strong cases exist for others too. I know in particular that Dolphins fans think Thomas was just as good as Urlacher, and many see Lak’s first ballot selection as an affront to Thomas’s candidacy.

Fletcher, Mills and Thomas put up stats that in many ways rival Urlacher’s. To me, Brian just had that extra umph, in large part because of his speed. Look at these rankings of the four players:

Recovered fumbles: Mills, 23 (Urlacher 2nd, 15)

Fumble return yards: Urlacher, 177 (Mills 2nd, 154)

Interceptions: Fletcher, 23 (Urlacher 2nd, 22)

Interception return yards: Urlacher 324 (Thomas 2nd, 170)

Yards per takeaway: Urlacher, 13.5 (Mills 2nd, 8.0)

Sacks: Urlacher, 41.0 (Fletcher, 39.0, in 74 more games)

Touchdowns: Mills, Urlacher and Thomas all with four

In other words, despite not being first in the group in either takeaway category, Urlacher was dominant in takeaway yards, gaining five more per play than the next best man, Sam Mills. Statistically, that is a great indicator for where you see Urlacher’s difference — in other words, that is his eye test translated into a stat.

Add that to Urlacher’s DPOY and while I understand why fans of Fletcher, Mills and Thomas feel like their guy is getting shorted, to me this was a no-brainer.

But okay, let’s put Mecklenburg into the group.

Recovered fumbles: 3rd, with 14

Fumble return yards: 3rd, with 47

Interceptions: last, with 5

Interception return yards: 4th, with 128

Yards per takeaway: 2nd, with 9.2

Sacks: 1st, with 79.0

Touchdowns: last, with two

Suddenly, Mecklenburg’s candidacy looks pretty good. I was just a tad too young to really know his game. He strikes me as a true eye test guy. I want to hear from the voters who watched him before he’s eliminated.

Top 25: Wilber Marshall

Top 40: Leslie O’Neal

Jack sez: I wrote a ton about the inside backers, so I’m going to keep this one quick.

Wilber’s another guy like Simeon Rice. He only made three Pro Bowls and was 1st team All Pro only twice, but he made significant contributions to two Super Bowl champions known for their defense. He was a starter on the Super Bowl Shufflin’ ‘85 Bears, making him a standout on arguably the greatest defense the league has ever seen.

And then he went to Washington and was a starter for another champ, becoming a guy who Washington defensive coordinator (and fellow Class of 2019 HOF nominee) Richie Petitbon called “our best football player” the week leading up to Super Bowl XXVI.

Photo by Scott Halleran/Getty Images

Top 10: Champ Bailey

Top 40: Ty Law

Jack sez: Champ Bailey is probably going to be voted into the HOF this year, and he totally deserves the first ballot treatment. The only reason I’m leaving him off is that my ballot is sending in some guys who I think should have been in a while ago, and as a result I only have two first ballot spots.

One is for Gonzalez.

The other came down to Bailey and fellow DB Ed Reed, who I think did more at safety than Bailey did at corner. So I’m taking Reed, and next year I’m voting for Bailey.

But that’s just me. Bailey is almost definitely going to be voted in this year, and I’ll be applauding for sure when it happens.

Photo by Harry How/Getty Images

Hall of Fame Class of 2019: Ed Reed

Top 15: Steve Atwater

Top 25: LeRoy Butler, Darren Woodson

Jack sez: If we separate the “Defensive Backs” category into corners and safeties, then safety is probably the strongest position group of the entire ballot. I’ve got Ed Reed going in on the first ballot, joining Brian Dawkins, Ken Houston and Larry Wilson as the only pure safeties selected in their first year of eligibility. (Rod Woodson and Ronnie Lott were too, but also played extensively at corner.)

I think Steve Atwater needs to go in, while LeRoy Butler and Darren Woodson would be the tops of almost any other class.

And because we have four safeties in our top 25, I left out 2018 finalist John Lynch and two-time Super Bowl champion Rodney Harrison. Reed, Atwater, Butler, Woodson, Lynch, Harrison. That is a murderer’s row, and though I suspect Lynch will again be voted higher than Butler and Woodson, I’m rolling with the list that makes sense to me based not just on stats but my experience watching all of these guys.

Hall of Fame Class of 2019: Brian Mitchell

Top 40: Eric Metcalf

Jack sez: In 2016, I argued that while Devin Hester needs to go into the HOF, electing him and only him on the basis of him being the GOAT at his position is NFL tokenism. I selected a group of five guys who I called the inaugural class of HOF returners, and along with Hester was 2019 nominee Brian Mitchell.

I’m sure there are plenty of people who will be surprised that I’m voting for Mitchell in a year with Bailey, Faneca and others. Mitchell deserves it though, for this stat alone:

All-purpose yards, career

Jerry Rice, 23,546

Brian Mitchell, 23,330

Walter Payton, 21,803

Emmitt Smith, 21,564

Tim Brown, 19,682

That’s right: Brian Mitchell, he of a mere one Pro Bowl selection (though he was also 1st team All Pro that year, 1995), is 2nd all-time in all-purpose yards, behind only Jerry Rice.

Here’s another list:

Combined kick and punt return yards, career

Brian Mitchell, 19,013

Allen Rossum, 15,003

Josh Cribbs, 13,488

Mel Gray, 13,003

Glyn Milburn, 12,772

I don’t know how far down those lists we should extend the HOF qualification — Darren Sproles is 6th in all-purpose yards, and Allen Rossum is 2nd in return yards, and I don’t think I would vote for either as a HOFer (though Sproles is closer). But I think when you’re #2 in yardage and #1 in return yardage, you deserve that honor.

Top 10: Steve Tasker

Jack sez: The special teams slot in the Pro Bowl typically bounces around. If you go in consecutive years, you’re a stud. Steve Tasker was elected six years in a row, and bagged another three years prior to the start of his streak. He is widely called the greatest special teams coverage man of all time.

Any time the word “greatest” is in your title, you need to be there.

Top 40: none

Jack sez: We have two nominees: Jason Elam and Nick Lowery. They were both wonderful players, and I give Elam the edge, but I don’t feel strongly enough about either to move them along, let alone into the Hall.

The guy who is not nominated who should be, and who would be in my top 25, is Gary Anderson. I’ve said it before (kind of) and I’ll say it again: WHERE IS GARY ANDERSON? He was the first man to break George Blanda’s all-time scoring record, a mark he held from 2000 until the end of 2006, when Class of 2017 HOFer Morten Andersen passed him.

Anderson is still third in points, third in field goals and second in games played. He belongs in this discussion.

Top 40: Sean Landeta

Jack sez: In a 21-year career, Landeta won two Super Bowls, reached two Pro Bowls and was first-team All Pro three — yep, three — times. That’s excellent for a punter. I was very close to nudging him into the top 25 but I couldn’t decide who I would remove.

Landeta was also named to the NFL’s All-Decade team for the 1990s as the 1st team punter, and was 2nd team for the 2000s. That’s an element we haven’t discussed yet in this story, and is a valuable barometer for HOF odds, because the HOF selection committee votes for it. (Its flaw as a barometer is that players whose prime straddles decades get left off.)

I would like to hear more arguments for Landeta from the people who watched him. I’ve got him ahead of Jeff Feagles, this year’s other nominee.

Two other guys I would like to see considered were known for their powerful legs and were both game-changers (in the game) and Game-changers (at the position): the late Reggie Roby, best known for his time with the Dolphins, and Darren Bennett, best known for his time with the Chargers. These were the punters who really put me in awe of punting and made me sit up and take notice whenever they were on the field. They had what Isiah Thomas once called “the oohs and the ahs.”

That’s important at any position, but especially at punter, which so often goes unnoticed unless a mistake is made or unless they rack up a ton of years.

Top 40: none, as there are no nominees

Should a long snapper be considered for the Hall? I posed that question last year to none other than our own Pat Mannelly, who certainly goes down in history as one of the greatest to ever do it. Here’s what he said:

I don’t think so. If you were going to go off positions, I would say yes, but to me, the long snapper didn’t become truly a football position until the year 2000. I wrote on my blog a thank you to all the guys who came before me, because they helped the long snapping position become what it is. All the guys before me, they played other positions. There are now 32 long snappers. There weren’t always 32 long snappers. ... All these guys were backups at their positions. They weren’t truly just long snappers. The game has changed in that regard.

Mannelly did note, however, that long snapper should be a position in the Pro Bowl. I agree completely. Here is his argument for that:

They vote for a fullback. How many teams have a fullback? There are 32 long snappers now. There are not 32 fullbacks. So why not make it a voted-on position? People say, “Well, we don’t know how to vote for it.” Well do people really know how to vote for a guard? Does your average fan know what the best guard is? It’s from what they read in the media. And then players and coaches vote as well, so I don’t understand why they don’t have that.

I agree with that too. And while I understand what Pat is saying about long snapper only being a separate position since the year 2000, that means we’ve nearly had two decades of long snappers as their own position. It’s probably time we undertake this discussion in earnest. I’m in favor of it. Certainly Mannelly is one who should be considered in that respect. I would be curious to hear more from him on who he thinks the greatest long snappers are since 2000.

Hall of Fame Class of 2019: Clark Shaughnessy

Top 40: Don Coryell

Jack sez: At last, we get to Shaughnessy.

The innovator extraordinaire and one of the fathers of the modern offense was a finalist three times in the 1970s, but has been largely forgotten since then. There was a time when he seemed like a sure-thing to make the Hall. In 1975, five years after his death at age 78, George Puscas of the Detroit Free Press called Shaughnessy “the most inventive genius of modern football,” adding that “For sure, one of these years, Clark Shaughnessy will make it.”

He still hasn’t.

The main problem with Shaughnessy’s candidacy is that to me, he’s in the wrong category. First of all, coaches don’t advance to the seniors committee, as far as I can tell, so we end up with a guy like Shaughnessy as a “modern-era nominee” 126 years after his birth, 56 years after his final NFL job and 48 years after his death.

Second, some coaches weren’t necessarily Hall of Fame coaches, but as the years go on we see that their contributions to the game have exceeded their coaching career. That’s true for Shaughnessy, and then some. His actual NFL career looks like this:

1944-1947: Washington, as an advisor

1948-1948: Los Angeles Rams, head coach

1951-1962: Chicago Bears, defensive coordinator

If that was his entire NFL career, I doubt we’re still talking about him lo these many years later. The reason we are is because what he did in the 1940s to revive, invigorate and spread the old T-formation, the game’s oldest formation.

While working as head football coach of University of Chicago he became friends with George Halas, and after a wildly successful season as head coach at Stanford, he spent time with Halas and Bears assistant Ralph Jones, all of whom were tinkering with updating the T.

Shaughnessy and Jones helped install the new T — known for its man in motion, spread formations, multiple play options and general trickery — with the Bears, leading to the team’s famous deconstruction of Washington 73-0 in the 1940 NFL championship game.

The degree to which Shaughnessy deserves credit for the T vs. Jones or Halas is a matter of debate. In 1941, when Jones became head coach at Lake Forest College, columnist Henry McLemore of the United Press called Jones the “real master” of the T-formation and credited him with the man in motion innovation.

What is not up for debate is the respect Shaughnessy’s peers had for him, and the influence he had on the game. Sid Luckman credits Shaughnessy with teaching him the T. After Shaughnessy’s death in 1970, Halas called Shaughnessy “one of the great inventive minds of the game” and “a master strategist.”

In his new book, “The Genius of Desparation,” Doug Farrar quotes Halas on Shaughnessy:

“Before we began collaborating, our T formation had two major weaknesses (...). One trouble was we only had two end runs ... thanks to Shaughnessy, we have 22 maneuvers around the ends — touchdown plays. Second, the majority of our plays went to the side of the line of the man in motion. Shaughnessy designed ground-gainers that run to the side opposite the man in motion. These counter plays were honeys.”

Added Farrar to me on Twitter: “Jones brought it forward some, but I think Shaughnessy was the more obvious innovator.”

I am still exploring the true wrinkles of history with regards to Shaughnessy and the T, but I’ll take Halas’s word on this one, and Farrar’s too.

Fellow nominee Don Coryell, whose Air Coryell offense helped usher in the modern passing attacks, is another man without a true categorical home, at least for now.

“You know, I’m sitting down there in front, and next to me is Joe Gibbs, and next to him is Dan Fouts, and the three of us are in the Hall of Fame because of Don Coryell,” said John Madden in 2010 at a memorial service for Coryell, whom he coached under at San Diego State in the 1960s. “There’s something missing.”

I’ve emailed the Pro Football Hall of Fame to ask whether there has been any discussion about separating coaches, about creating a seniors division for coaches, and about whether some coaches should be moved into the contributor category when warranted.

That’s where I would put Shaughnessy. It’s where I would put Don Coryell, too. But they’re in this category, and as long as they are, I’ll vote for them until they’re in.

Clark, you’re up first. Thanks for the T, good sir.

Jack M Silverstein is Windy City Gridiron’s Bears historian, and author of “How The GOAT Was Built: 6 Life Lessons From the 1996 Chicago Bulls.” He is the proprietor of Chicago sports history Instagram “A Shot on Ehlo.” Say hey at @readjack.

Source: https://www.windycitygridiron.com/2018/11/15/18067462/historian-jack-m-silverstein-class-of-2019-pro-football-hall-of-fame-ballot-clark-shaughnessy

0 notes

blackkudos · 8 years ago

Text

Eldridge Cleaver

Leroy Eldridge Cleaver (August 31, 1935 – May 1, 1998) was an American writer and political activist who became an early leader of the Black Panther Party. His 1968 book, Soul On Ice, is a collection of essays that, at the time of its publication, was praised by The New York Times Book Review as "brilliant and revealing".

Cleaver went on to become a prominent member of the Black Panthers, having the titles Minister of Information and Head of the International Section of the Panthers, while a fugitive from the United States criminal justice system in Cuba and Algeria. As editor of the official Panther's newspaper, The Black Panther, Cleaver's influence on the direction of the Party was rivaled only by founders Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale. Cleaver and Newton eventually fell out with each other, resulting in a split that weakened the party.

Cleaver wrote in Soul on Ice: "If a man like Malcolm X could change and repudiate racism, if I myself and other former Muslims can change, if young whites can change, then there is hope for America."

After spending seven years in exile in Cuba, Algeria, and France, Cleaver returned to the US in 1975, where he became involved in various religious groups (Unification Church and CARP) before finally becoming a Mormon and joining the LDS Church, as well as becoming a conservative Republican, appearing at Republican events.

Early life

Born in Wabbaseka, Arkansas, as a child, Cleaver moved with his family to Phoenix and then to Los Angeles. He was the son of Leroy Cleaver and Thelma Hattie Robinson. He had four siblings: Wilhelima Marie, Helen Grace, James Weldon, and Theophilus Henry.

Black Panther Party

Eldridge Cleaver was released from prison on December 12, 1966. He was writing for Ramparts magazine and organizing efforts to revitalize the Organization of Afro-American Unity. At this time, President John F. Kennedy and Malcolm X were dead. The Black Panther Party was only two months old. He then joined the Oakland-based Black Panther Party, serving as Minister of Information, or spokesperson. What initially attracted Cleaver to the Panthers, as opposed to other prominent groups, was their commitment to armed struggle.

In 1967, Eldridge Cleaver, along with Marvin X, Ed Bullins, and Ethna Wyatt, formed the Black House political/cultural center in San Francisco. Amiri Baraka, Sonia Sanchez, Askia Toure, Sarah Webster Fabio, Art Ensemble of Chicago, Avotcja, Reginald Lockett, Emory Douglas, Samuel Napier, Bobby Hutton, Huey Newton, and Bobby Seale were Black House regulars. The same year, he married Kathleen Neal Cleaver (divorced 1987) with whom he would have son Ahmad Maceo Eldridge (b.1969, Algeria) and daughter Joju Younghi (b.July 31, 1970, North Korea).

Cleaver was a presidential candidate in 1968 on the ticket of the Peace and Freedom Party. Having been born on August 31, 1935, Cleaver would not have been the requisite 35 years of age until more than a year after Inauguration Day 1969. (Although the Constitution requires that the President be 35 years of age, it does not specify if he must have reached that age at the time of nomination, or election, or inauguration.) Courts in both Hawaii and New York held that he could be excluded from the ballot because he could not possibly meet the Constitutional criteria. Cleaver and his running mate Judith Mage received 36,571 votes (0.05%).

Also in 1968, Cleaver led an ambush of Oakland police officers, during which two officers were wounded. In the aftermath of the ambush, Cleaver was wounded and 17-year-old Black Panther member Bobby Hutton was killed. The eight Panthers who ambushed the police department had two objectives: to break Newton out of jail and to kill police officers. In 1980, he claimed that he had led the Panther group on a deliberate ambush of the police officers, thus provoking the shootout. The same author who broke the news of this claim doubted its veracity, because it was in the context of an uncharacteristic speech, in which Cleaver also discredited the Black Panthers, stated "we need police as heroes," and said that he denounced civilian review boards of police shootings for the "bizarre" reason that "it is a rubber stamp for murder." The author speculates that it could have been a pay off to the Alameda County justice system, whose judge had only just days earlier let Eldridge Cleaver escape prison time; Cleaver was sentenced to mere community service after getting charged with three counts of assault against three Oakland cops. The PBS documentary A Huey Newton Story finds that “Bobby Hutton was shot more than twelve times after he had already surrendered and stripped down to his underwear to prove he was not armed.”

Charged with attempted murder, he jumped bail to flee to Cuba in late 1968. In Cuba, he received red-carpet treatment. Cleaver was set up in a Havana penthouse with his own personal maid and cook. The penthouse was stocked with all the food, rum, and cigars he would need. The hospitality soon ended. Having received information that the CIA had infiltrated the Black Panther Party, Castro could no longer trust them. Cleaver then decided to head to Algeria, sending word to his wife to meet him there. Cleaver had set up an international office for the Black Panthers in Algeria. Following Timothy Leary's Weather Underground-assisted prison escape, Leary stayed with Cleaver in Algeria; however, Cleaver placed Leary under "revolutionary arrest" as a counter-revolutionary for promoting drug use.

In 1969, Cleaver also cultivated an alliance with North Korea and BPP publications began reprinting excerpts from Kim Il Sung's writings. Although leftists of the time often looked to Cuba, China, and North Vietnam for inspiration, few had paid any attention to the secretive Pyongyang regime. Bypassing US travel restrictions on North Korea, Cleaver and other BPP members made two visits to the country in 1969-70 with the idea that the juche model could be adapted to the revolutionary liberation of African-Americans. Taken on an official tour of North Korea, Cleaver expressed admiration at "the DPRK's stable, crime-free society which provided guaranteed food, employment, and housing for all, and which had no economic or social inequalities."

Split and new directions

Eldridge Cleaver and Huey Newton eventually fell out with each other over the necessity of armed struggle as a response to COINTELPRO and other actions by the government against the Black Panthers and other radical groups. Also Cleaver's interest in North Korea and global anti-imperialist struggle drew ire from other BPP members who felt that he was neglecting the needs of African-Americans at home in the US. Following his expulsion from the Black Panthers in 1971, the group's ties with North Korea were quickly forgotten. Cleaver advocated the escalation of armed resistance into urban guerilla warfare, while Newton suggested the best way to respond was to put down the gun, which he felt alienated the Panthers from the rest of the black community, and focus on more pragmatic reformist activity by lobbying for increased social programs to aid African-American communities and anti-discrimination laws. Cleaver accused Newton of being an Uncle Tom for choosing to cooperate with white interests rather than overthrow them.

Cleaver left Algeria in 1972, moving to Paris, France, becoming a born again Christian during time in isolation living underground. He turned his hand to fashion design, three years later releasing his codpiece revival "virility pants" he called "the Cleavers", enthusing that they would give men "a chance to assert their masculinity".

Cleaver returned to the United States in 1977 to face the unresolved attempted murder charge. By September 1978, on bail as those proceedings dragged on, he had incorporated Eldridge Cleaver Ltd, running a factory and West Hollywood shop exploiting his "Cleavers", which he claimed liberated men from "penis binding". He saw no conflict with his newfound Christianity, drawing support for his overtly sexual design from 22 Deuteronomy. The long outstanding charge was subsequently resolved on a plea bargain reducing it to assault. A sentence of 1,200 hours' community service was imposed.

Later life

In the early 1980s, Cleaver became disillusioned with what he saw as the commercial nature of evangelical Christianity and examined alternatives, including Sun Myung Moon's campus ministry organization CARP, and Mormonism. He later led a short-lived revivalist ministry called Eldridge Cleaver Crusades, "a hybrid synthesis of Islam and Christianity he called 'Christlam'", along with an auxiliary called the Guardians of the Sperm.

Death

Cleaver died at Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center in Pomona, California, on May 1, 1998, at 6:20 am. His family asked that the hospital not reveal the cause of death, although he was known to have diabetes and prostate cancer. He is buried at Mountain View Cemetery in Altadena, California.

Soul on Ice (1968)

Wikipedia

#Eldridge Cleaver #08-31 #05-01

7 notes · View notes

crimsondude · 8 years ago

Text

Heat (1995), one of the best and worst influences on Shadowrun

Michael Mann's Heat (1995) is a Los Angeles crime epic that, if you're reading this, you've probably seen or been told to see. It is among Blade Runner and Ronin in the fan canon of Shadowrun inspirations. This is because it's an incredible movie with a well-crafted story world, and a gunfight so realistic that the Marine Corps shows it during Basic Training. Neal McCauley's (Robert De Niro's) crew is team of professional criminals, experienced in working together, are well-armed (They carry CAR-15s, Galil, H&K G33 or SR9 rifle, etc.) well-trained in their specialties and in overall combat and heist/burglary tradecraft (including hacking or using very technical methods to counter alarms and other technology), use sophisticated counterintelligence and counter-surveillance methods, and basically depicts what could easily be described as a Prime Runner team (The jobs they pull off or attempt to pull off escalate from $1.6 million to ~$4 million to over $12 million).

However ...

I was listening to the Sixth World Podcast #14 with Adam Koebel and as I replied in that episode's post (See More), I generally agreed with him. One thing that he discussed that I didn't really touch upon then that I noticed this time and want to comment on is the dichotomy between the cyberpunk fiction of a loose confederation of lone wolves and the reality of a tabletop crew being a recurring group of characters involved in a long-term campaign. The reason this matters is that First and early Second Edition were written mostly by the original developers, especially by Nigel Findley, and there was a consistent vision of the world that didn't really have anything to do with the experience of playing this game at a tabletop. Then Steve Kenson, Jon Szeto, and other second-generation authors came along; freelancers who had actually played Shadowrun (They even played by snail mail). Following them were freelancers who came up through the Internet because Shadowrun has had a consistent presence online and a close relationship with Internet fans since it was published.

And a lot of these players knew of Heat and referenced it. And beyond that, they also tended to come to Shadowrun as players or GMs in campaigns with set teams and basically running "professional" shadowrunner crews like in Heat. To be fair, Heat does not stand alone at this time in the mid-90s. Reservoir Dogs, Mission: Impossible, and Ronin are thoroughly Shadowrun movies even without knowing they are. These fans took influence from crime and noir fiction like the Donald Westlake Parker novels and similar movies that run from the 1950s-70s (Payback [1999] was the first film adaptation of Westlake's The Hunter since Lee Marvin’s Point Blank was released in 1967). Anyway, nostalgia in the 1990s was for the 1970s, just as today we are nostalgic for the 1990s. There were also very distinct themes and settings when it came to Shadowrun and especially Shadowrun online in the mid to late 1990s.

This was the era of the Professional Shadowrunner.

As it happens, this coincided with the release of a hyper-useful Shadowrun sourcebook, Fields of Fire. Fields of Fire was the intellectual precursor to adopting the attitudes and techniques we then saw in Heat because the first third to half of FoF is a treatise on being a Professional – it's about being a professional mercenary and also addressed repeatedly in the book to how to behave as a shadowrunner. It's so useful that it's a starting reference for being an adult in general because – SPOILER ALERT – "common sense" actually isn't. Plus, Tom Dowd wrote it. It's not quite Gospel, but at the time it was more like the Dark Lord on High's Letter to the Pink Mohawks.

Anyway, the Professional Shadowrunner was a mercenary and a sociopath, if not in fact then at least in effect, and any punk ethos was eliminated in favor of "realism." I should add that in the 90s, the idea of real-life mercenaries and private contractors was becoming a thing as the end of the Cold War put a lot of professionals onto the streets. So what do you do? In Ronin, you steal a case (Which is actually cover for a whole other job). The Professional Shadowrunner wasn't a Black Trenchcoat, he was a Grey Man Assassin. Black trench coats are ostentatious as Hell even here in the Pacific Northwest. The only people who wear them, except for a short time in the 90s, are men who need a coat long enough to protect their suits, which appropriately enough describes the Professional Shadowrunner sometimes.

The Professional Shadowrunner has to worry about living in the real world because once they're off the job, they're trying to be an inconspicuous as possible. These people don't squat in the Barrens, they have houses their fixer bought through cut-outs with laundered money and impeccable fake SINs. The Black Trenchcoat focuses on drama; the Professional Shadowrunner is No-Drama Obama about this shit. They over-prepare for everything. And like in Heat, when combat does go down they operate like a team of Navy SEALs — probably because according to the PCs’ backgrounds, they were Navy SEALs. Having a "legitimate" or "realistic" background to acquiring skills and learning tactics (and you could learn tactics online from field manuals and other resources) was critical to justifying basically the runner's entire existence.

This attitude towards "realism" eventually stretched into how people treated the entirety of the setting, excusing the fact that Shadowrun has MAGIC and just flat-out is not Real Life. All of this influence began coming to a head in the material following, ironically enough, Dunkelzahn's Will.

Yes, kids, the last will and testament of the first Great Dragon to be elected President of the successor to the United States was the primary catalyst to making Shadowrun more "realistic."

I should also mention that the death of Dunkelzahn and the will were also used as capstones for a period of time that was absolutely batshit within the context of the entire life of the line. In a two-year period, we got Bug City, Aztechnology Blood Magic, Harlequin's Back trying to stop the Azzies from bring the Horrors back sooner, and a ton of Earthdawn connections (Earthdawn was released in 1993, but references to the Fourth World have existed since the original Big Black Book in 1989) to sell the connection between both games, especially ED since there's never been a lack of fantasy settings for tabletop RPGs. Earthdawn's schtick was that it led to an already-popular cyberpunk and magic game set in the dark future.

With Dunkelzahn's Will in late 1996, FASA slammed the door on a lot of the more fantastical elements that had dominated the setting and metaplot. 1997 was the year of the Mob War, and 1998 was the year of the Corp Wars of 2059-60. The Corp Wars sought to address some of that lack of realism such as how Japan had experienced the Ghost Decade IRL while in Shadowrun the Japanacorps still ruled everything. So they added White Monday (the Tokyo Stock Exchange plummets), moved Yamatetsu to Russia, killed Fuchi, and replaced it with Novatech in Boston, and brought on CATCo and Wuxing – because no one foresaw China mattering at all in 1989.

And thematically, tonally, Shadowrun players were increasingly being told to reference 90s crime movies and other films about teams of clandestine or covert professional, either proprietary or freelance, and the library expanded. To contrast 1999's The Matrix; Mamet's Heist, Way of the Gun (Its combat scenes were choreographed by a Navy SEAL), and Payback (Yet another adaptation of Westlake's The Hunter). At the top of that list, however, are Heat and Ronin, and while Ronin is a better depiction of the random crew assembled for a job, Heat is the model for how to build a team of PCs who are going to run together for a long-term tabletop campaign.

I love this movie, and it's one of the only I still own a hard copy of (along with The Godfather Trilogy). It's incredibly useful for envisioning the life of shadowrunners both on the job and during their downtime, where the PCs have to balance life with their career of being professional criminals. Michael Mann created a beautiful world of the criminal underworld in Los Angeles, complete with a fixer, a Mr. Johnson, an Information Broker, Fences ("All fences are informants," Mann revealed in the 10th Anniversary DVD commentary), and the world they occupy off the clock. And, again, the downtown gunfight is fucking brilliant.

I also appreciate much of the influence, directly and indirectly, for inspiring people to add realism and depth to their characters and the world. However, I think these drives sometimes were excessive, and adding realism without appreciating the full context and world that preceded them. I'm not revealing state secrets to mention that people who would become freelancers, including myself, would even dismiss some material because it was "wrong" and not because, you know, this is a game.

#shadowrun #shadowrun tabletop #heat #cyberpunk #rpg #tabletop rpg

2 notes · View notes