Author: Michael Austin

If you are an Antiwar.com reader living near our home office in the San Francisco Bay Area, we’d like to ask for your help! We are looking for a volunteer to help us with processing donations. The job isn’t for thrill-seekers; it would mostly involve data entry, and possibly mail merging, print overseeing and envelope stuffing. But the commitment is light and the hours flexible; after a little training, we’d probably just need you for a few days at a time, four times throughout the year. So if you’ve been looking for a hands-on way to support Antiwar.com, here’s your chance. If interested, please contact Outreach Coordinator and Culture Editor Michael Austin with inquiries.

Antiwar.com Editorial Director Justin Raimondo will be speaking at Whittier Law School tomorrow, Tuesday, March 15 from 12-2 p.m. His topic will be the media’s responsibility to report the truth. The speech will be free and open to the public.

Directions: Whittier Law School is located at 3333 Harbor Blvd., Costa Mesa, CA 92626. Justin is speaking in Room 1 of the Main Building (which houses the classrooms and library). For more information about the location, contact Whittier at 714-444-4141, ext. 0 during business hours.

According to Mark Kassis’ letter to the editor of Ames, IA’s Tribune newspaper (12/9/04, print edition), the “economic draft” is gaining strength. Kassis writes that his son, a college student, recently received an offer from the US Army of “up to $20,000 enlistment bonus, up to $70,000 for college…and the choice of more than 150 careers.” This offer comes the same year that Kassis and his son have been notified that Pell student grants will be cut, causing as many as 1.2 million low-income students to have their grants reduced. There’s no cited proof of a correlation between these two events, but it’s difficult not to see the indications: As subsidies are moved from one low-income area to another, more and more potential students will see no better choice for their futures than to fight US wars, whether or not they agree with the reasons for these wars. Even when those in the US government insist a conventional draft will not be necessary, the system will find ways to fill the endless need for more bodies to fight its open-ended wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond – with or without public support.

This Saturday, 42nd Street Moon’s new production of the Broadway Musical Hooray for What! opens in San Francisco. This will be the first time the Harold Arlen/Yip Harburg show has been performed in its entirety since its original run and tour in 1937-38, and its return is long overdue.

For Hooray for What! is not just a Broadway hit of yesteryear; it is also a razor-sharp examination and dissection of war—uniquely topical in 1937, and still surprisingly relevant today. Under its light and bubbly romantic-comedy surface brew themes of misguided and jingoistic patriotism, war profiteering, international conflict, the all-too-often empty gestures of treaties and peace conferences, and the importance of the individual in standing up for peace.

In the small (and small-minded) town of Sprinkle, Indiana, a mild mannered and naïve scientist named Chuckles accidentally invents the most powerful and dangerous death gas the world has ever seen (while trying to come up with a humane gas to keep worms out of apples). Chuckles is immediately co-opted by a huge munitions manufacturer with a slick front man named Breezy Cunningham, who bribes the scientist with the promise of continued support for his peaceful research. Chuckles refuses to give up the death gas formula, however, and international spy Stephanie Stephanovich is hired to steal it from him. Convinced she will soon wrest it from Chuckles’ grasp, Breezy takes them all to the League of Nations Peace Conference in Geneva, Switzerland, knowing he can find a willing buyer for the new death gas among the many bickering delegates from the worlds’ most powerful nations, who are all arguing and trying to get the upper hand and start another world war for excitement and profit. Stephanie does manage to steal the formula, and Breezy hopes to sell it for a huge profit and make his getaway, but when he finally makes a deal giving it to the entire League of Nations, he quickly realizes the dire consequences of his actions, as what threatens to be the deadliest war in history immediately begins all around him.

This is, of course, the fantasy world of old Broadway, and so there does come a happy ending by the time the curtain falls, and there are plenty of hilarious antics, sweet songs, romantic subplots along the way. But the light framework of the play does not lessen the weight of the ideas contained therein. If anything, the contrast between the levity of tone and the life-and-death issues explored gives the issues more weight, and the laughter at the expense of the greedy, short-sighted profiteers and childish, petty world leaders and spies makes it a bit easier to confront and consider these difficult issues, which people might ordinarily choose to ignore. Additionally, it is almost shockingly easy to see parallels between the some of the events and players on today’s world stage (not to mention those involved in the then-imminent WWII) and the characters and events which are presented as bordering on lunatic in this 1937 classic. Looking back from today’s post-atomic, post-holocaust world of Halliburton, terrorism, International Intelligence Organizations and powerful nations’ continuing lust for global hegemony, the foresight of Hooray for What! is tragic but impressive.

For more behind-the-scenes background on this production and the show’s history, check out the 42nd Street Moon Blog.
For more information on the original Broadway production, click here.

If you’re in the San Francisco Bay Area:
42nd Street Moon’s Hooray for What! plays November 10-28th at the Eureka Theatre, 215 Battery St. at Jackson in San Francisco. For more information on the production dates, times and tickets, please visit www.42ndstreetmoon.org or call (415) 255-8207.

This Saturday, 42^nd Street Moon’s new production of the Broadway Musical Hooray for What! opens in San Francisco. This will be the first time the Harold Arlen/Yip Harburg show has been performed in its entirety since its original run and tour in 1937-38, and its return is long overdue.

For Hooray for What! is not just a Broadway hit of yesteryear; it is also a razor-sharp examination and dissection of war—uniquely topical in 1937, and still surprisingly relevant today. Under its light and bubbly romantic-comedy surface brew themes of misguided and jingoistic patriotism, war profiteering, international conflict, the all-too-often empty gestures of treaties and peace conferences, and the importance of the individual in standing up for peace.

In the small (and small-minded) town of Sprinkle, Indiana, a mild mannered and naïve scientist named Chuckles accidentally invents the most powerful and dangerous death gas the world has ever seen (while trying to come up with a humane gas to keep worms out of apples). Chuckles is immediately co-opted by a huge munitions manufacturer with a slick front man named Breezy Cunningham, who bribes the scientist with the promise of continued support for his peaceful research. Chuckles refuses to give up the death gas formula, however, and international spy Stephanie Stephanovich is hired to steal it from him. Convinced she will soon wrest it from Chuckles’ grasp, Breezy takes them all to the League of Nations Peace Conference in Geneva, Switzerland, knowing he can find a willing buyer for the new death gas among the many bickering delegates from the worlds’ most powerful nations, who are all arguing and trying to get the upper hand and start another world war for excitement and profit. Stephanie does manage to steal the formula, and Breezy hopes to sell it for a huge profit and make his getaway, but when he finally makes a deal giving it to the entire League of Nations, he quickly realizes the dire consequences of his actions, as what threatens to be the deadliest war in history immediately begins all around him.

This is, of course, the fantasy world of old Broadway, and so there does come a happy ending by the time the curtain falls, and there are plenty of hilarious antics, sweet songs, romantic subplots along the way. But the light framework of the play does not lessen the weight of the ideas contained therein. If anything, the contrast between the levity of tone and the life-and-death issues explored gives the issues more weight, and the laughter at the expense of the greedy, short-sighted profiteers and childish, petty world leaders and spies makes it a bit easier to confront and consider these difficult issues, which people might ordinarily choose to ignore. Additionally, it is almost shockingly easy to see parallels between the some of the events and players on today’s world stage (not to mention those involved in the then-imminent WWII) and the characters and events which are presented as bordering on lunatic in this 1937 classic. Looking back from today’s post-atomic, post-holocaust world of Halliburton, terrorism, International Intelligence Organizations and powerful nations’ continuing lust for global hegemony, the foresight of Hooray for What! is tragic but impressive.

For more behind-the-scenes background on this production and the show’s history, check out the 42^nd Street Moon Blog.

For more information on the original Broadway production, click here.

If you’re in the San Francisco Bay Area:
42^nd Street Moon’s Hooray for What! plays November 10-28^th at the Eureka Theatre, 215 Battery St. at Jackson in San Francisco. For more information on the production dates, times and tickets, please visit the 42^nd Street Moon website or call (415) 255-8207.

A Review of Lee Blessings’ A Walk in the Woods

The California Theatre Center of Sunnyvale, California, has chosen for its summer season to revive contemporary playwright Lee Blessing’s 1988 play A Walk in the Woods, a microcosm of the entire Cold War, presented in an intimate two-character, two-hour, one-setting play. Sound implausible?

Well, okay — the play is really focuses more directly on the relationship and personalities of two arms negotiators, one Soviet and one American, who meet four times during one year for walks through “a pleasant woods on the outskirts of Geneva, Switzerland” to try to agree on some sort of partial disarmament treaty between their homelands. But just as each man represents his country in the literal sense, each man also represents the feelings and personality of both the populous and the governing forces of his respective country, along with his personal feelings about what his purpose is in these negotiations. Herein the audience is confronted with of all of the fears, hopes, distrust and power issues of decades of mounting imminent destruction, brooding competition and incredibly fragile survival; encapsulated in the conversation of two people, who we alternately love and hate, but finally identify with mightily.

The Russian negotiator is Andrey Botvinnik (played with pitch-perfect accent, attitude and timing by the entirely believable Charlie Shoemaker), an aging version of the stock theatrical character of the “wise fool.” While he appears to be all jocular smiles and casual wit, and continually plays the loveable, almost childish clown (at one point he weaves a crown of leaves to wear), in reality he is an experienced, confident man with a shrewd knowledge of people, who knows exactly what his government expects of him, and how to get what he wants. He is a total contrast to the American diplomat, John Honeyman (played with committed intensity by equity actor William Church, who looks very much like movie actor Luke Wilson). Honeyman is a laughably serious stiff who attempts to cover up his stereotypical American competitive drive (when left alone onstage after he gets Botvinnik to agree to work for a small change with his government, he looks like John McEnroe celebrating a match point) with hard edged formality, going by the book and using the politically correct terminology.

Andrey wants the two men to make friends before they start formal negotiations, whereas John thinks friendship can only come after they accomplish an initial settlement between their countries. The idea of the importance of basic human friendship and the common bond of humanity echoes significantly throughout the play. Andrey purports that there are no differences between people and the way they think; only differences in their traditions and ideologies, influenced by their geographical histories. He argues that America, surrounded by oceans and thereby unchallenged, believes in “conquest without competition,” with a doctrine of freedom and destiny. Russia, in contrast, has always been beset by the threat of invasion on all its borders, and therefore engaged in “conquest because of competition,” with a doctrine of security and control. If the Russians had come to North America, they would have become the same nation the United States did, and vice-versa—people are the same everywhere. Likewise, after enough prodding from John to “be serious,” he explains their governments are basically the same: both want to look as if they are the benevolent peace seeker. But according to Andrey (whose views are supported by the events of the play) neither government is willing to sacrifice any power, and neither is willing agree to any peace agreement put forth by the other, because both want to look like they are the stronger and smarter, and neither trusts the other!

If you are getting the idea that the issues in this play are complicated, you are correct. This makes sense; the issues of international diplomacy are infinitely complicated. The moral Andrey puts forth in the second act, however, is simple. To achieve a solid and lasting peace, he says, the governments and their people must find a way to develop trust and friendship faster than they are developing weapons technology. But he does not believe it will ever happen, or that either of their nations really want it to, because each nation is pouring millions of dollars, hours and men into their war preparation efforts, and only two little men conversing into their peace efforts. This view is perhaps overly simplistic, but seems a pretty good distillation of all the ancient history, embittered feelings and communication barriers that made up the cold war, along with most global conflicts.

The play wisely steers clear of specifics concerning time, people and what exactly the conditions being discussed are, instead concentrating on the universal and timeless themes of human vs. nation, people vs. politics and the psychology of international relations. The result is that sixteen years after its debut, it feels just distant enough to be viewed objectively, yet still terribly resonant in its frustrations over the seemingly hopeless situation of distrust that existed between the two superpowers for so many years, and still exists between so many countries today. A Walk in the Woods tells us that all people, wherever they live, are basically the same: we all want to survive, to be left alone and to leave others alone. Yet we mistakenly believe that safety and security can only come through possession of more power over others, and more ability to destroy. It’s easy to blame the steady escalation of international hostility on governmental forces, but as Andrey’s ruminations and John’s behavior suggest in the play, until the “man in the street” is truly willing to give up ultimate power, his government will keep trying to achieve it.

While the play ends pessimistically, it does offer its audience a chance to learn from observing all that these two men go through, and all that these two countries went through. A Walk in the Woods illustrates the similarities between the games played by the USSR and the USA during the cold war, and their common traits of arrogance, deceit and distrust. Today one of these two nations is collapsed, but one might suggest that the other continues to practice the same boorish behavior towards its international neighbors: a policy of aggression abroad inspired by fear at home. The play strongly invites a reconsideration of America’s foreign policy, then and especially now, reminding us that trust and friendship are perhaps better forms of security than the power of arms can ever be.

IF YOU’RE IN THE SF BAY AREA: A Walk in the Woods runs through July 24th as part of California Theatre Center’s “Summer Rep.” For more information or to order tickets, check out their website or call the box office: (408) 720-0873.