This column originally appeared in the Williston Observer on June 25, 2009.
A Historical Look at the Fourth of July
As a young boy, I remember quite well the trips that I, my siblings, and cousins would all take to the fireworks stands that sprouted up all around Los Angeles and Orange counties, California in late June. July 4 was not only a celebration of our nation's birth, but of my grandfather's, too. We would buy some fireworks to celebrate each. On the night of the Fourth, the entire block would close down as families set off all sorts of pyrotechnics to honor the nation and my grandfather.
As an early teen, my family celebrated a private July 4. We lived in Canada, and the big July celebration there, July 1, is for Canada Day. Since we lived in Quebec, the Canada Day celebrations were a bit ironic, since Quebec seemed poised to secede from Canada.
As a full-fledged grown-up, I gained distinct and fond memories of my first Fourth of July in Williston. We came here from Starksboro, a town too small for any extensive July 4 celebrations. Coming to Williston, with its magnificent parade, day-long family activities, cacophonous book sale, and glorious fireworks show, I suddenly had something to look forward to, like those youthful days in California.
It's worth taking a few moments to remember what the fuss is all about, and to realize that if not for the work of some very dedicated men, we might not be celebrating at all. In early 1776, the case for independence had not yet been forcefully made. Compromise with Britain, and seats in Parliament, were seen by many as the better way to go.
A relatively short pamphlet, Common Sense by Thomas Paine, finally made a convincing argument for independence, and the opinion of the populace and the Congress began to change.
On June 7, 1776, Richard Henry Lee, delegate from Virginia, formally brought the arguments in Common Sense to the Second Continental Congress. He proposed both a declaration of independence and a union of the colonies. A committee was formed to craft a document. The committee included Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin. Jefferson was assigned by the committee to write the declaration, which he completed in just a few days.
Jefferson's first draft was edited by Franklin, then forwarded on to the Congress, which toned down some of Jefferson's most inflammatory language. In the end, the Declaration of Independence listed almost thirty grievances against the King, called for independence and unification, and told the people of Britain that the quarrel of the United States was with the King, and not with them.
The document was accepted by the Congress on July 4, 1776, though not until August 2, 1776, was the Declaration was actually signed.
Though the new United States was still at war in 1777, history records several small-scale celebrations to celebrate the first anniversary, including several 13-gun salutes. In Philadelphia, official dinners and celebrations were held along with prayers, parades, and fireworks. In 1778, General George Washington ordered a double ration of run for the troops.
By the turn of the 19th century, fireworks were becoming more and more common, as were formal celebrations of the day at the White House. Parades, military revues, bands, songs, plays, poems, anthems, and ballet were all performed to celebrate the date.
In 1870, July 4 was designated a day off, without pay, for federal workers; in 1938, the law was changed to give the day off with pay. In 1998, Congress designated the days between Flag Day and Independence Day as "Honor America Days."
Many notable events have been scheduled to happen on July 4, including temperance and anti-slavery speeches, the laying of cornerstones (of the Washington Monument, for one), and the christening of ships. In recent memory, the July 4's of 1976, the nation's bicentennial year, and 2002, the first following the September 11 attacks, were notable for the proud displays of patriotism from the citizenry.
The Fourth of July is a uniquely American holiday, and we celebrate it in a uniquely American way. At some point before the holiday, to celebrate the two hundred and thirty-third year of the American Republic, take a few minutes and read the Declaration of Independence; refresh your memory about what the fireworks, barbecue, and camaraderie are all about.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
The Importance of Self-Editing
This column originally appeared in the Williston Observer on June 11, 2009.
The Importance of Self-Editing
When you're writing for yourself, as in a diary, there's little need to be careful about how you write or even what you write. You can make up facts, twist reality, leave out inconvenient truths.
When you read your diary back to yourself, you do not edit it. In fact, if you edit your diary, correcting for misstatements, you might lose something valuable -- how you were feeling at the moment you put those thoughts down.
Similarly, fiction is, by definition, one big, long lie. I recently wrote a short story that is based on a trip I recently took to Hershey, Pennsylvania. Aside from the fact of the trip itself, however, none of the events in the story actually happened to me.
When you read back a piece of fiction, you will notice inconsistencies that need to be corrected, lest you jar your reader with them. But you generally don't correct misstatements, because the entire thing is a misstatement.
When you're writing "the news," though, you have an entirely different set of rules to live by. The writer is responsible for telling a compelling story, but more than that, the story must be true, it must be accurate.
If you write, you might find, as I do, that you fall in love with your words, that you come to see them as little children. You don't want to cut any of them -- you lose your objectivity.
When I was a reporter back in college, I developed quite a love/hate relationship with my editors. They would take my stories and rearrange, reword, cut. I hated each revision, dreaded seeing the edited copy. But, invariably, my story was better because of the editing.
Later in my college career, I became the editor, and my hope was that when I rearranged, reworded, and cut, I was doing my writers a favor, making the stories tighter, more readable. But even then, when I wrote hard news, I insisted that someone, anyone, edit my stories. The story, the integrity of the words, was more important than the writer.
Had I not been in love with my words, I would have been able to self-edit. But with my objectivity gone, it took a disinterested third party to keep me, and my words, honest. It is this love of ones own words that seems to be dampening the self-editing skills of the famous right-of-center commentators.
Talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, touted by both the left and right (and by himself) as the de facto leader of the Republican Party, has repeatedly, unabashedly, and unashamedly spread half-truths, innuendo, and outright falsehoods. Senator-elect Al Franken went so far as to write a book, with Limbaugh as a prime example, called "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them".
Fox News Commentator Bill O'Reilly repeatedly called Dr. George Tiller a "baby killer" and equated him with Hitler, Mao, and Stalin. After Tiller was gunned down in his Kansas church, several right-wing websites repeated O'Reilly's rhetoric as they applauded and justified Tiller's death. O'Reilly half-heartedly decried the killing, but we are not fooled.
Most recently, the right's attack machine has been twisting a comment by Associate Justice-designate Sonia Sotomayor about the ability of a female Hispanic to render neutral judgement. They all came to the intellectually dishonest conclusion that she is a "racist." The futile attack was levelled by Newt Gingrich, Glenn Beck, Charles Krauthammer, Ann Coulter, Tucker Carlson, and, of course, Rush Limbaugh.
Some of these personalities, after taking a step back, decided the rhetoric was over the top. Gingrich, for example, apologized for using the term. Republican Senator Jeff Sessions called for an end to the name-calling.
I understand how hard it is to self-edit -- it's even harder when your words are spoken than when they are written. I also understand that for these commentators, it is a part of their job to be loud, brash, and controversial. But with their wide following, self-editing is a skill they would do well to hone.
The Importance of Self-Editing
When you're writing for yourself, as in a diary, there's little need to be careful about how you write or even what you write. You can make up facts, twist reality, leave out inconvenient truths.
When you read your diary back to yourself, you do not edit it. In fact, if you edit your diary, correcting for misstatements, you might lose something valuable -- how you were feeling at the moment you put those thoughts down.
Similarly, fiction is, by definition, one big, long lie. I recently wrote a short story that is based on a trip I recently took to Hershey, Pennsylvania. Aside from the fact of the trip itself, however, none of the events in the story actually happened to me.
When you read back a piece of fiction, you will notice inconsistencies that need to be corrected, lest you jar your reader with them. But you generally don't correct misstatements, because the entire thing is a misstatement.
When you're writing "the news," though, you have an entirely different set of rules to live by. The writer is responsible for telling a compelling story, but more than that, the story must be true, it must be accurate.
If you write, you might find, as I do, that you fall in love with your words, that you come to see them as little children. You don't want to cut any of them -- you lose your objectivity.
When I was a reporter back in college, I developed quite a love/hate relationship with my editors. They would take my stories and rearrange, reword, cut. I hated each revision, dreaded seeing the edited copy. But, invariably, my story was better because of the editing.
Later in my college career, I became the editor, and my hope was that when I rearranged, reworded, and cut, I was doing my writers a favor, making the stories tighter, more readable. But even then, when I wrote hard news, I insisted that someone, anyone, edit my stories. The story, the integrity of the words, was more important than the writer.
Had I not been in love with my words, I would have been able to self-edit. But with my objectivity gone, it took a disinterested third party to keep me, and my words, honest. It is this love of ones own words that seems to be dampening the self-editing skills of the famous right-of-center commentators.
Talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, touted by both the left and right (and by himself) as the de facto leader of the Republican Party, has repeatedly, unabashedly, and unashamedly spread half-truths, innuendo, and outright falsehoods. Senator-elect Al Franken went so far as to write a book, with Limbaugh as a prime example, called "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them".
Fox News Commentator Bill O'Reilly repeatedly called Dr. George Tiller a "baby killer" and equated him with Hitler, Mao, and Stalin. After Tiller was gunned down in his Kansas church, several right-wing websites repeated O'Reilly's rhetoric as they applauded and justified Tiller's death. O'Reilly half-heartedly decried the killing, but we are not fooled.
Most recently, the right's attack machine has been twisting a comment by Associate Justice-designate Sonia Sotomayor about the ability of a female Hispanic to render neutral judgement. They all came to the intellectually dishonest conclusion that she is a "racist." The futile attack was levelled by Newt Gingrich, Glenn Beck, Charles Krauthammer, Ann Coulter, Tucker Carlson, and, of course, Rush Limbaugh.
Some of these personalities, after taking a step back, decided the rhetoric was over the top. Gingrich, for example, apologized for using the term. Republican Senator Jeff Sessions called for an end to the name-calling.
I understand how hard it is to self-edit -- it's even harder when your words are spoken than when they are written. I also understand that for these commentators, it is a part of their job to be loud, brash, and controversial. But with their wide following, self-editing is a skill they would do well to hone.
Labels:
bill o'reilly,
editing,
fiction,
lies,
news,
racism,
rush limbaugh,
sotomayor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)