Virginia's comments (member since Sep 09, 2008)

Virginia's comments from the The History Book Club group.

FDR gave Eleanor her role - as his domestic partner in the US which was more of a partnership than at home. He would tell her to attend various events, talk to certain people, and report back to him what she had learned. This knowledge ranged from what people were saying about the US and what was going on to Hollywood gossip a la Paulette Goddard. The European theatre of WWII was opening up fast, and FDR had to concentrate on this. Eleanor helped him by going out where/when he couldn't, and keep him informed and up to date on domestic issues. You can say it was gender specific also, where Eleanor concentrated on 'home' and FDR focused on away-from-home issues.
I believe FDR saw the war as unavoidable, and it would be only a matter of time before the US got directly involved. His speech asking for additional funds to stock up and build up defense was mobilizing for war. I think Eleanor knew this, too, but let his domestic assignments to her enable her to avoid thinking about this unpleasant time to come.

Ed said, "Lucy Mercer was a Roman Catholic and could not marry again because divorce was forbidden...
This is all quite true, technically, or should I say church technically. The influence of having to confess to clear herself of their affair would be how heavily it bothered her to sin in any way.

I agree that FDR's mother's disapproval of divorce carried a ton of weight; also the effect it would have on his political career I believe was of equal consideration against divorcing.
Nowadays, it has become the effects of an affair out in the open rather than divorce itself that can quickly eliminate any high political ambitions; even that has degrees, though. Jon Corzine is divorced because of an affair he had, and he carries on. I don't have to go into the circumstances of the John Edwards affair and the slaughter of his political future. Again, the media is involved, where in the 1940's, one could indeed hide so much more than now.

The 1940's was an entirely different time; there are a lot more media sources/technology now than was then, and also during JFK's time. There were rumors abounding about JFK's affairs and 'visitors'; as Bill Clinton found out, that can't be hidden today, at least not for long. WWII also was a major distraction; Hitler invading Europe was just the beginning, as we know. Nothing else was important but that, and this distraction from 'mundane' things certainly increased.
The Puritanical culture that still exists nowadays makes a lot of people hypocrits, and the over-inquisitive media eggs it on. The lack of 24/7 and instant technology in the 1940's enabled the President and other leaders and politicians to hide their private lives rather well, especially if lived quietly and discretely, with a good front of normalcy, as shown by Eleanor and FDR. FDR's courage with his disability attracted more attention than who was in the White House with he and Eleanor. They showed freely that they were working together, so not many people thought there was anything else going on aside from a 'normal' marriage.

Eleanor Roosevelt was ahead of her time as a pioneer of women's liberation. She did it all - raised 5 children (probably with help but still the mother), and went around the US on various jaunts as needed for the issue and by FDR to see what was going on in the US. I would imagine their marriage wasn't unusual among prominent people who married unhappily for whatever reason, but could not divorce in those days because of the extreme consequences. Eleanor took advantage of every bit of her new 'freedom' and the freedom of being an intellectual partner with FDR, as was said without the marial intimacy that had constrained her before because of her dislike of the 'marital duty'. Lol, after having five children, I guess she wasn't interested in any more consequences of unprotected sex!
FDR's dislike of being alone - the frustration of the polio had to be incredible for this very independent man. People being with him was a distraction. If you have any time in your life where you are ill and your independence is interferred with, fear comes into the picture easily. While I can't see that he showed any fear - particularly in his constant battle with his disability - he had to have been hit with a raging fear, especially where he got sick so quickly and suddenly. Having minimal time alone enabled him to concentrate on Presidential matters, and not have too much time to have his own problems grip him and take over his thoughts.

#98 - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jackie-k-c...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1320286/

I think I agree with the first comment about the movie on the IMDB. They were very passionate artists, and while Lifetime is on cable, it was shown during primetime. I think the movie was filmed a bit tempered down, as was said in this review. Anyway, it was definitely enough to spark an interest in them.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094747/

I found the movie I saw a long time ago that brought back his music.

If the link fails, the title is Bird.

I could never picture O'Keeffe and Stieglitz together either...until I saw this movie. Jeremy Irons really looked like Stieglitz, and Joan Allen is fabulous in just about anything she does. I suspect that Irons portrayed Stieglitz pretty close to the person, and he did have charisma not physically visible. But O'Keeffe did end up going away and living on her own.
I've started the Roosevelt, and can't now understand why this is the first Kearns book I've really picked up to really read; I can see already only half way through Chapter 1 (easier to read on Metro-North than Express Bus) how interesting she makes history and how you learn a lot as you read.

Things are as well as can ever be; I've missed being here.

I'm overdue for a trip to the Met.
But before that - did anyone here see the movie on I think Lifetime of Georgia O'Keeffe and Stieglitz, and that there is a showing at the Whitney of both of them, going through I think January (?). This will be my first trip to the Whitney when I'm able to get there.
I hope to be back now; I have the Roosevelt book which I'm starting. I still haven't found Barzum, so that forced me out of that. I still have a lot of books to unpack, but that will come, slowly.

My parents had Big Band music, and jazz and blues going at my house. I'm not familiar with Johnny Adams, but knew of Charlie Parker, etc. from that time.

Seeing The Good Earth mentioned here reminded me that it was required reading for class discussion my senior year of high school. It would be a good idea for me to reread it now, and whether all these years passing have made a difference, which it probably would, in my interpretation and feelings about the book.
While all of us do 'serious' fiction reading, I'd love to see how many Pat Conroy fans can come out and admit they are reading his current novel South of Broad. ??

Hi, Bentley,
I'm slowly coming back to 'normal' daily living in my new surroundings. And while I don't have my own computer for now - my 'old' one died, and I am awaiting a new one a friend is prepping for me, and once I have room for it, lol - I am using my work one, and the computer room here in my building (while I can come down here anytime, it is especially handy while I am doing laundry where the laundry room is around the corner from the computer room).
I have not found the Barzum book yet, so I am lost on that for now, and so far behind I wouldn't know what to do when I find it.
I would love to get American Lion, but by the time it would arrive, it would be too late. I can take a trip to Border's - my favorite place which I avoid to save money, lol - and see if they have it. Should I do so, and pick up where you are, or join the next one?
I do want to do Federalist Papers; am glad to see it is upcoming rather than being done now so I won't miss it.
What exactly comes after American Lion, so I can get the book. Is it the Lincoln one, or another one before that?
I grew up in Massachusetts, 20 miles from Cape Cod, so was 'raised' on the Kennedy family, as you were, too. While Ted Kennedy certainly wasn't an angel by any means, Ted, Jr's fantastic eulogy told the true story of his father and how seriously he took his role as father and patriarch. While it is obvious that his sons and a lot of the other Kennedy offspring all suffered from the effects of either losing their fathers or various effects of being a Kennedy including bad examples of adulthood, Ted's spirit and survival and work ethic has carried on. His own kids have not been idle and most of the others have been busy as well.
I've always felt that Ted really didn't want to be President. Once he got into the Senate, and got past the freshman year, he took to it like a duck to water. There was no more relieved and free man than when he backed out of the Presidential campaign in 1980, and didn't have to go through that ever again. He could really concentrate on the Senate, and he did so grandly. A lot of people dislike his Senate work because he was a liberal; that's too bad, in my opinion. His civil rights influence and bill creation and passing alone is a major accomplishment, and most people agree with that.
I do feel there is quite an empty space now that Ted has gone.
Sorry to get long-winded, but his death affected me a lot; it brought back a lot of memories of my SE MA upbringing and environment.
Happy Labor Day!

I sure hope so; but it is nearly late August, so heat spells should be shorter and less intense as we get into September. That's what I tell myself to keep up the courage, but it was kinda hard in the midst of the move. And I need to shop but am too tired to cope with the heat outside (this entire building, as well as my apartment is beautifully a/cd). Oh, well, nothing's perfect, especially the weather!

As I indicated to Bentley not long ago, I had to move this past Saturday, from Yonkers to New Rochelle. Not having moved for 22 years, it has been traumatic and very physically difficult (arthritis doesn't ease up just because you need to be loose and able to do packing, etc.). Now the move is done, and I'm unpacking (not after this AM; exhaustion caught up with me), and now have to hunt for where the special box I put our current book, etc. is, or at least remember what that was. Of course, we had to have an August heat spell for the move and these days afterwards, which is weather I hate, and find very difficult. I moved from a communal living situation in a private house to a Senior Living building that is just months old, and just perfect for me now; I wish this had existed before now, actually. But it has still been traumatic.
I shall be back, but I am WAY behind. This move has taken over me mentally and emotionally for several months. Now maybe life can come back to some kind of normalcy and in as much in my control as anyone's life can be.

I'm slowly catching up; just got the Roanoke book, so bare with me on that one. I see I have some Constitution areas to check out.
I like Barzun so far; I agree that it's setup is interesting.
I like the 'side' reading we are now doing; that way, if you just want some variety from the main selection, you have something else to read and follow.

I think it is a great idea. So far we have to post current event comments on the Off-Topic area, and we do get into current events often enough that I agree that it warrants its own thread.

"When I visited China for periods of time; I was often struck at how poorly they treat each other; but I often wonder how well a democracy would work in that environment. It is just my opinion; but I think there is a learning curve associated with a democratic environment."
I'll say there is a learning curve - remember the Soviet Union when they became NOT the Soviet Union any more - a lot of turmoil as major adjustment occurred. It always amazed me as to how difficult it was over there, after all the years the people wanted freedom from Communism, and some of the previous monarchy. But everyone in the world including them got a lesson on how hard it is to majorly change one's country's operations and government.
Yes, there is a lot to discuss; I'm still mulling over your questions, Bentley.

"The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind."

I agree with this; America was discovered by refugees from oppression, in their opinion. The oppression they fled from was government oppression, and lack of religious freedom, so they claimed.

#1 issue (to me): The original immigrants to America ended up mistreating the Native Americans horribly. Isn't that true of invading forces/populations that go into other countries in the world to set up their lives, and what happens to the natives already there? I'll come up with more issues, but this to me is paramount, and definitely goes through mankind. The original Americans were outfront about it, screaming about the Indian massacres of the Whites (while we were killing off the Indians and stealing their land, duh! How about self-defense??) and it is there in our history books; it's real easy to read between the lines of any of the books that gloss over the facts.

Yes, they do have too much time on their hands, and/or use the time they grab inappropriately. I wonder, too, if they are hiding behind the cloak of religion to use it as their reason for objecting to whatever bill or law they are supposed to be working on.
I feel I am a moderately religious person, but one has to live in this world, and this world often comes first, but you can maintain your religious base as you do your citizen duties and work for the majority and/or support a rightful minority. A real Christian, Jew, Muslim, etc., truly practices religion by the example of their behavior and life. Rev. Fred Phelps forgot that fact many many years ago, if he ever knew it: he's a clear example of the devil disguised as a religious.
But Phelps is a drastic example of what I mean; he's no example of good. Good examples of true followers of their religion: Billy Graham, Pope John Paul II, Mother Theresa (even then-Mayor Giuliani knew better than to argue with her, lol). There are more I know, but these names come to mind quickly.

I agree; let's hope there is nothing in her closet that will mess this up. No one is perfect, but it seems some of the past candidates' background investigations or nervous remarks during the hearings have taken away a few good people.
Just on principle, I'm glad Judge Clarence Thomas got through the protest by Anita Hill. Her timing always made me suspicious; there was reasonable doubt as to whether she told the truth. I definitely don't like harassment in the work place, but I dislike liars even more. With the majority of testifying former Thomas co-workers denying what Hill claimed happened, I've always wondered if Hill was rejected by Thomas, and she went after him in revenge. Whether or not we like him as a Justice, he did survive an attack because of reasonable doubt. Let's hope Sotomayor has nothing heavy in her past, or can be accused of anything so she passes on her hearing testimony.

Oldesq wrote: "Have never seen U2 in concert but was in labor during the Amnesty Concert East Rutherford date in 1986 and my (much younger) sisters were attending that concert. My mother had little regard for me in labor because she was so worried about the sisters <g>- which always makes me grin at the idea of U2 concerts!"
LOL, I would think so.
I've seen U2 in concert live twice - first time in Atlanta during the Joshua Tree tour; second time the last time they were on tour - can't remember which year exactly - in MSG. At the last tour, I was sitting behind the stage up in the 300's; Bono was great at working all areas of the circular runway they used. He is unreal, and I was happy just being there.
Will never forget his urging all of us to turn on our cellphones, and show the light, and having the MSG lights turned off; it was quite a sight; he made the comment about "contemporary lighting method of the 21st century".