The Fort Worth/Dallas Greater Metroplex

The Doc and I just got back from visiting the Dallas half of our grandkids.  As the oldest of the bunch was graduating from high school (yes, I’m that old), it was an excuse for both of my sons, What’s-His-Name and the The-Other-One, and me to play computer games together and drink beer.   Naturally, this upset the women, so we turned off the computers and binge-watched BeardMeatsFood on YouTube and drank beer.  

BeardMeatsFood ought to be compulsory watching at Weight Watcher meetings.  Where does such a skinny guy put all that food?  I watched the guy eat a 72-ounce steak and a monster basket of French fries, then ask for the dessert menu.   After that, I could barely finish a salad for dinner.  And is there anything more indicative of First World Problems than the existence of competitive food eaters?

After the graduation party, when he asked me what I wanted to do, I immediately dragged my son down to Dealey Plaza to go through the museums, particularly the excellent new Holocaust Museum next to the infamous School Book Suppository Building.   He really wasn’t surprised as I’ve inflicted museums on him in six countries.  So far.

Besides the museums, we took the compulsory walk along Elm Street and looked at the large ‘X’ painted on the tarmac.  As I turned and looked back towards the sixth floor, I couldn’t help but wish for the tree to have been that tall sixty years ago.

As I slowly walked towards the grassy knoll, I encountered a wild-eyed old man with crazy white hair and I knew instantly that he was some kind of half-witted conspiracy loon who was going to grab my arm, drag me to the top of the small hill, all the while lecturing me on “who really did it”.  Then, from the raised eyebrows and concerned look on his face, it suddenly dawned on me that the poor man was seeing the same apparition approaching him and fully expected me to behave the same way.  Luckily, we passed each other without incident.

It is probably a good thing that I don’t live near Dallas.  I would probably visit that grassy knoll once a month, hiding empty rifle shell casings like easter eggs for the fools who gather daily, intent on discovering the long-lost clue that has evaded everyone else for the last six decades.

“Look, Myrtle!  There it is, behind the tree!  I knew it all along…the real killer was here!”

Dallas has certainly changed in my lifetime.  I remember when, if you traveled east from Fort Worth on the newly completed turnpike, first there were fields and cows, then Arlington and the construction site where they were building Six Flags, followed by more cows and fields and then you hit Dallas.  Today, the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex spans than twelve counties and is the fastest growing metropolitan area in the United States.

A five-minute drive down any freeway shows what is probably more new commercial construction than exists in all of New Mexico.  One of the really striking features is the erection of vast warehouses and factory complexes with signs offering space to rent, meaning that investors are so confident of finding potential lessees that they are building large commercial buildings in advance of need.  The whole metroplex is attracting business and people eager to seek lower crime, relief from state income tax, and a business-friendly atmosphere.  

The area now has a population larger that eight million, it has an economy that is larger than Houston’s and only slightly smaller than Chicago’s, and it is still growing.  If the area were an independent country, the economy of the new nation would rank in the top twenty—right above Switzerland and the Netherlands.  And the economy is growing faster than most of those countries above it on the list.

Let’s project the current economic trends into the future just a little bit—say, 25 years.  This requires us to do a little guess work and to make a few assumptions.  If current trends continue, we are likely to see continued economic flight from New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles while we see continued growth in the already massive Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex.  In just 25 years, both the economy of and the population of the area will be larger than Chicago’s, which will drop to fifth place in the nation (lower than Houston’s).  The top two spots will remain New York and Los Angeles, while the total economy of Texas will come close to tying the economy of California.  

This kind of economic growth invites comparisons with the economy of neighboring New Mexico, where economic stagnation is the rule.  It wasn’t that long ago that the headline story in my local newspaper heralded the opening of a new coffee shop.  Sadly, the most valuable export from New Mexico is neither energy nor green chile, but our educated children, who must leave the state in search of good jobs.

I hope New Mexico never becomes as populated as Fort Worth and Dallas are about to become, but we could use little more economic development, at least enough to create some jobs, raise the standard of living, and keep our children from leaving the state.  

Politically, New Mexico has looked to California as a role model for our economic policy.  Perhaps it is time we looked at what is working in Texas.

The Books Lost on the Titanic

When the Titanic sank April 15, 1912, there was, indeed, a tragic loss of life.  Of the  2,240 souls who sailed on Titanic, over 1500 men, women, and children went down with the White Star liner.  Widows and orphaned children mourned their losses, and the loss of an “unsinkable” ship caused a shock wave that is still rippling across our culture.  Since three times as many first-class men survived in the lifeboats as the number of steerage class children who drowned, the myths of class and male chivalry were severely challenged.

Note.  Everyone knows that Captain Smith went down with his ship.  Roughly 75% of the crew perished when the great ship sank.  Less widely known is that the crew included two children, Frederick William Hopkins (Plates Steward) and William Albert Watson (Bellboy), both only 14 years old.  Exactly what happened to the two children is unknown, but neither made it to the safety of a lifeboat.

Besides the immense loss of life, the sinking of the RMS Titanic also resulted in the loss of valuable cargo, including works of art, a valuable and rare book, and the property of all those who were traveling on the ship.  Did you know that part of that lost cargo included some important and irreplaceable books?

Probably the most valuable book lost with Titanic was a jewel-encrusted copy of The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam that was a unique and lavishly decorated edition.  This book, often referred to as “The Great Omar”, was so carefully crafted that it took the London bookbinders, Sangorski and Sutcliffe, three years to complete.

The book was breathtakingly magnificent, measuring 16 inches by 13 inches and it was encrusted with 1,050 jewels including specially cut rubies, topazes, and emeralds.  Over 100 square feet of gold leaf and some 5,000 pieces of leather were used in its creation.  The cover of Moroccan leather was inlaid with a depiction of three peacocks with their tail feathers spread dramatically, and included gold embroidery in the details.  Only black and white photos were taken of the valuable book, but a digitized color image of the book was created by the BBC in 2001 (right).

The book, nicknamed ‘The Great Omar’ was being shipped aboard the Titanic to a New York book collector but it never arrived and was never recovered.  Twenty years later, the same bookbinders decided to make a second copy of the book, using the drawings and notes created for the first volume.  It took years to remake the book and when finished, the book was promptly destroyed by German bombers in The Blitz.  The bookbinders are still in business today, but they do not plan to create a third copy of the book.

Among the casualties was the American journalist and author, Jacques Futrelle.  Futrelle had received great acclaim for his detective stories featuring Professor Augustus S. F. X. van Dusen, a scientist who solved the toughest cases through logic and scientific reasoning.  After publishing forty short stories under the title, “The Thinking Machine”, Futrelle traveled with his wife to Europe, to do research to write more stories.  Following their visit to London and Scotland Yard, they booked a first-class suite for their return to New York, where Futrelle was to meet with his publisher.

After the ship collided with the iceberg, Futrelle reassured his wife that there was no cause for alarm, but insisted she board lifeboat No. 9.  Futrelle, himself, refused to enter the lifeboat, even though it was only half full.  The last May Futrelle saw of her husband, he was calmly smoking a cigarette next to John Jacob Astor. 

The last I saw of my husband he was standing beside Colonel Astor. He had a cigarette in his mouth. As I watched him, he lighted a match and held it in his cupped hands before his face. By its light I could see his eyes roam anxiously out over the water. Then he dropped his head toward his hands and lighted his cigarette. I saw Colonel Astor turn toward Jacques and a second later Jacques handed the colonel his cigarette box. The colonel screened Jacques' hands with his own, and their faces stood out together as the match flared at the cigarette tip. I know those hands never trembled.

Futrelle’s body was never recovered.  In 1913, May Futrelle filed a claim against the White Star Line for the loss of her husband, their property, and two lost unpublished book manuscripts.  The claim was never paid.  If you have never read “The Thinking Machine Stories”, you can read one of the best stories here.

Joseph Conrad, the author of Heart of Darkness and Lord Jim, was not aboard the Titanic that fateful night, but one of his handwritten manuscripts was.  The short story, Karain: Personal Recollections, was being shipped to New York, to a bibliophile who was willing to pay the author $40 to add the manuscript to his collection.  Conrad, who was destitute at the time, had failed to take out insurance on the shipment, so he received no compensation for the loss.

The short story had been previously published in 1897, in the literary publication, Blackwood’s Magazine, and it deals with gunrunning and a Malay chief’s quest for revenge.  While the plot , in my opinion, is equal to similar adventure stories by Kipling or Haggard, it is also a stinging denouncement of English Imperialism.  You can read the original magazine article here.  

Financially pinched, Conrad struck back the only way he could: in print.  In a series of essays, Conrad blamed the shipping company, the shipbuilders, the Board of Trade, technicians in general, and just about anyone who had ever even seen the ship.  He even speculated about the reports of muffled explosions within the ship how does project—sounds that we now know were, in reality, the sounds of the doomed vessel tearing itself apart (a fact that the White Star Line went to great lengths to denounce).

The Titanic had two libraries aboard—one for the First Class passengers and a smaller “cozy” library, located at the aft end of C deck, for the Second Class passengers.  Evidently the White Star company decided that Steerage Class passengers either couldn’t or wouldn’t read, so no accommodation was made for them.  While called libraries, the rooms were more like tea rooms where passengers could drink tea, write letters, and read comfortably.  Unfortunately, no details remain about the books available in either of the two libraries, nor did any of the books from the libraries survive.  The photo of the second-class Library at left is from the Titanic’s sister ship, the RMS Olympic.

Let’s end on a positive note, however.  The loss of the Titanic did lead to the creation of one great library.  One of the first-class passengers was Harry Elkins Widener, whose collection of rare books included a Shakespeare First Folio.  As the Titanic sank, Harry’s mother made it into a lifeboat, but Harry, his father, (as well as his father’s valet) remained on the ship and perished.  In memory of her son, Mrs. Widener donated his collection, along with a bequest of $2 million, to his alma mater.  Today, the collection is part of the Harry Elkins Widener Memorial Library at Harvard University.   Harry’s uncle, figuring that if Harry had lived long enough would have eventually purchased a Gutenberg Bible, donated one to the collection in his nephew’s name.

The Monument Mens' Other Story

There is an episode of the television show Justified, in which U.S. Marshal Raylan Givens (played by Timothy Olyphant) is asked to investigate a possible neo-Nazi who is buying up the remaining artwork of Adolf Hitler.  Concerned about the possibility that the man intends to open a Nazi museum, the good marshal tracked the man down, only to discover that the art collection consisted of a dozen jars of ashes.  The man had been burning the remaining paintings of Hitler.

Justified is an excellent television show, but it very unlikely that anyone would ever make a career of buying and burning all of der Fuehrer’s paintings.  The few museums that have them don’t particularly like them but won’t sell them.  In addition, there are all those paintings by Hitler that the United States “stole” in World War II.  You know…the ones the Monument Men stole.

Assuming that you have seen the George Clooney movie, then we are all experts about the Monument Men, the U.S. Army group that President Roosevelt authorized to save and repatriate the artwork that the Nazis had stolen from all over Europe.  These men did an extraordinary job, saving tens of thousands of priceless pieces of art.  

It is not mentioned in the movie, but the Monuments Men were also tasked with removing artwork commissioned by the German government to glorify the Nazi leaders or the war movement.   Adolf Hitler was generally considered to be a failure as an artist.  (Or as a human, for that matter.). He was rejected twice by the Academy of Fine Art in Vienna, and spent several years creating postcards and dabbling in street art.  Though unsuccessful as an artist, Hitler never lost in interest in creating (or stealing) artwork.  

Giving the devil his due, Hitler understood the use of artwork as a propaganda tool and how the German people would react to it.  Hitler commissioned a small army of artists to create paintings glorifying war, promoting the father land, and occasionally, portraying the Nazi hierarchy (particularly Hitler) as half man and half God.  After the paintings were copied into countless posters, the original works went to museums or were sold to high-ranking military officers.  

At Yalta, President Roosevelt had agreed to removing as much of this artwork as possible and after the war was over, the Army began scouring the German countryside to do just that, confiscating original artwork displaying the swastika that glorified war or depicted the Nazi elite such as Hitler, Goebbels, or Goehring.  The post-war Monument Men found paintings in cellars, in caves, in government offices, under the floorboards of mountain cabins, and in the homes of the Nazi hierarchy.  There is something ironic about the Monument Men, the guys that recovered so much stolen art, making off with the art of the defeated.  I understand why they did it, and approve, but it is still a little ironic.  I can understand why George Clooney left that part out of his movie.

When the propaganda art had been gathered, 8,722 pieces in all were shipped back home to the United States and hidden away at a military base in Virginia to prevent its being used to rekindle a far-right regime in Germany.  But, in the haste to gather the propaganda art, some of the legitimate artwork of German artists was also seized.  Within a few years after the artwork had been gathered and stored, some Germans were demanding that the non-political works be returned.

After carefully sorting through the artwork, the United States sent over 1500 pieces back to Berlin for return to their rightful owners.  The postwar German Republic was not exactly happy to have any reminders of the Nazis back, and simply warehoused the paintings away until the 1970’s, ignoring the claims of the rightful owners.

Three decades after the war’s end, most of the seized artwork was no longer deemed very threatening—the pompous over-the-top poses of “The Master Race” looked more comical than threatening.  Perhaps three decades of movies and television shows in which the Germans always lost to the Allies, had diminished the threat.  A painting showing the guards from Hogan’s Heroes was nothing to be worried about.  

So, the Army returned all but the most offensive pieces.   Today, almost eighty years after the war, Fort Belvoir still houses a three-foot bust of Adolf Hitler, hundreds of paintings showing the SS in heroic poses, statues of Nazis, and an undisclosed number of rather creepy watercolors done by Adolf Hitler.

What exactly should be done with such art is still a dilemma.  Who are the rightful owners?  If the owners could be located, would they even want the art?  Should this type of art even be exhibited in a museum?  There are probably no good answers to these questions, which explains why the US Army is still warehousing the art so long after the war.  For now, Hitler’s watercolors stay safely locked up in a filing cabinet drawer.

These works are not shown to the public and by now, the Army probably wishes that they were elsewhere.  Most of the artwork has been photographed and I could show you a few examples of Hitler’s art….but I won’t.  Perhaps this is a case in which life should imitate art, and the paintings, at least those done by Hitler, should be burned.  

The Gordon Riots

Among the many reasons that America won their Revolutionary War are my top three:

First, there was the French Alliance.  Though it pains me to admit it, our victory was largely due to help from the French, who not only did not surrender during the war but actually fought well.  The French played a crucial role by providing the United States with a formidable navy and by spreading Britain’s forces thin across the world.  Before the French entered the war, the British could focus their attention on the rebellion without much fear of other global conflicts.  (Though we should remember that part of the France’s motivation was not only to harm its historic enemy, England, but also to be able to pick up new territories that the British military was too thinly stretched to defend.)

Second, there was the sheer impossibility of the Britain being able to logistically support its army so far from home.  As we become accustomed to modern transportation, we tend to forget that two hundred years ago a small wooden fort equipped with a single cannon and barrel of moldy flour could control a huge amount of territory primarily because of the flour.  The hardest task for generals of the era was to keep their armies fed well enough to be able to survive (never mind being well enough to fight).  England could never supply its army well enough for the forces to go on the offensive.

Last, America won because George Washington didn’t lose.  As asinine as that sounds, it is correct.  Washington could have blundered so badly that the war could have been lost.  The fact that he managed to keep his army supplied, trained, and largely undefeated until Great Britain realized that the war was unwinnable was an impressive strategic victory.

There are a host of other, smaller reasons.  Among those reasons are included the lack of Loyalist support in the colonies, the fact that Native Americans didn’t (for the most part) side with the British, that the colonists fought unconventionally, and the incredible incompetence of some British generals.  

A somewhat obscure reason for the British loss, however, is the impact of the London Gordon Riots of 1780.  The riots, the worst in a century, had prolonged effects in both domestic and foreign policy.

The root of the riot goes all the way back to the Popery Act of 1698, a hateful, discriminatory law that basically stripped all civil rights from Catholics—as evidenced by the actual title of the law, “An Act for the further preventing the Growth of Popery”.  The discriminatory provisions included a prohibition of Catholics attending school, of owning property, or of receiving an inheritance.  Catholic priests were to be perpetually jailed at the pleasure of the monarch and any British citizen lucky enough to apprehend a priest would receive a bounty of £100.

I wish I could tell you the riot was because concerned citizens were angry at the injustice of the act, but actually the people of London were furious that The Papists Act of 1788 lifted, ever so slightly, some of the harsher provisions of the previous act, specifically that if Catholics took an oath of allegiance to the monarch and rejected the authority of the Pope over English law, they could own property and enlist in the British Army.

The act was passed for two pressing reasons.  First, England was at war with practically everybody and the army desperately needed more recruits.  Second, England was terrified that Ireland might emulate the Americans and start its own revolution for independence.  The law formally recognized something of a settled fact—the Irish were already in the army and Naval Press Gangs were snatching up any men who were even close to physically fit, regardless of nationality or religion.  (Occasionally, as it turned out, some of those “men” were actually women.)

Note.  I have never understood why governments periodically decide that certain groups cannot join the army, whether it is because of their religion or sexual orientation.  Imagine the outrage if, in time of war, all those prohibited from serving went down to the docks and waved goodbye to the departing troops.  “Goodbye boys!  Have fun in the war!”

Terribly upset about the return of civil rights to Catholics, Lord George Gordon, the head of the Protestant Association, began making a series of inflammatory speeches to the poor of London.  (Think of this as George Wallace addressing the KKK, but without bedsheets.). Because the ongoing wars hurt trade, the poor were suffering from high unemployment and inflation, and according to Wallace/George, if Catholics were allowed into the military, there would be an inevitable return to absolute monarchy, enslavement to the Pope, watered down beer, and dogs would marry cats.  (This is not the famous General Charles George Gordon of Khartoum, but an altogether different British nobleman with a similar name.)

After two and a half centuries, there is a rather obvious effort by some historians to shift the cause of the riots to economic reasons, but in the end, the primary cause was religious persecution against Catholics.  (As you read that last sentence, try desperately hard not to think about the Lost Cause of the Glorious South.  I don’t care how many times you have read the books of Shelby Foote, the American Civil War was fought over slavery.) 

Lord George met with King George III and tried to convince the monarch to repeal the law, but the King was only periodically crazy, and not stupid.  Lord George marched his followers to Parliament and urged them to act, but even Parliament refused to listen to him.  Within days, the Protestant Association took to the streets and was quickly joined by a mob of 40,000 to 60,000 angry people who were eager to demonstrate their stupidity with violence.

The target of the mob was initially the poor Irish immigrant neighborhood of Moorfields.  Despite the pleas of prominent merchants in the area, the London Mayor refused to send troops.  The rioters quickly burned and looted Moorfields homes, then moved towards the center of London.  

The mob, wearing blue ribbons for identification, grew steadily in size and stormed Newgate Prison, freeing the convicts and destroying the prison.  When the government still didn’t move to stop the riot, three other prisons were destroyed, along with Catholic churches and the homes of prominent citizens.  

The riot lasted five days and it was only after the violent mob turned to the Bank of England that the King sent in 15,000 soldiers who had orders to fire at will on any group of four or more people who refused to disperse.  Almost three hundred people were killed and another two hundred were wounded.  

When the riot was over, about two dozen ring leaders were quickly charged with treason and executed, the Mayor was convicted of criminal negligence and fined £1,000, and Lord George was arrested and charged with high treason, but was acquitted. A few years later, George, the great defender of the One True Faith converted to Judaism, taking the name of Yisrael bar Avraham Gordon.

This riot had far-reaching ramifications.  England had been negotiating with Spain to stop supporting the Americans in their revolution, but the rise of anti-Catholic sentiment in London brought a sharp end to the diplomatic talks.  And Austria, also a Catholic country, decided not to aid England in the war against America.  

In London, the riots helped convince !merchants that the protracted wars, both in Europe and America, were bad for business.  There was also a growing cry for London to create a police force—an idea that was criticized because it would be copying something that had been done in Paris.  (This was more than forty years before Sir Robert Peel established Scotland Yard.)

There was, additionally, general agreement among the leadership of British Society that when a mob commences to use violence to achieve political  aims, a delayed response only encourages more destruction.  This seems to be a lesson we have to relearn at least once a generation.