Author: docallegro

Consulting Psychologist
Specialties in: Cognitve-Behavioral Interventions, Conflict Resolution, Mediation, Stress Management, Relationship Expertise, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Fluent in Spanish

Arthur Miller Writes a Letter

In ancient times, lightyears from where we presently are, people used to write letters, some of a personal nature, others pertaining to business, to express themselves.  This long-gone behavior was abruptly replaced by the internet’s email and rapid-fire texts. Because Mr. Miller’s play, Death of a Salesman, had universal appeal, it was read by most of us in high school or in college and/or seen performed on the stage.  After the great success it had on Broadway in 1949, when it opened, he received a letter from a student, Barbara Beattie, studying journalism, asking him how he came to construct the play.  Barbara’s daughter, in helping her 95-year mother relocate, fortuitously found the letter in her mother’s attic, stored in a trunk with some of her other keepsakes.  I consider it a gem inasmuch as it revealed Miller’s approach to theater.  However, as you may guess, there is more to what I read in this review of a letter than at first meets the eye.

In the letter, the playwright pointed out that the genesis of Death of a Salesman came from Elizabethan drama, namely, Shakespeare.  The playwright enumerated on this by saying the heart of Shakespearian tragedy is rooted in the Fall where chaos occurs when social status embodied by royalty is threatened.  Hamlet, the protagonist of Shakespeare’s most widely read play, is faced with the dilemma of what to do with his uncle, Claudius, upon proving that the latter had murdered his father, the former King of Denmark.  There is a complete upheaval of social status that is sacrosanct in Elizabethan feudalism.  Hamlet has no legal recourse or alternative, but to take matters in his own hands, resulting in the revenge he seeks against King Claudius.  The outcome being the tragic deaths of several of the characters in the play, including Hamlet.

But, as Miller talked about, in viewing contemporary society, namely that of America, the Fall no longer represents that of a socially elevated person exclusively.  Thinking more abstractly, Miller interpreted the Fall in a much broader sense than social status.  Rather, in America, Miller states that his view of the Fall is much deeper insofar as it is rooted in the “destruction of a man’s idea of what he is by forces opposing him.”  Willie Loman, the principal character in Death of a Salesman, suffers from his need to be accepted by what he can accumulate materialistically, but not what he can offer to society. He possesses an illusory state of mind insofar as he tirelessly seeks what he considers to be the American Dream.

The force that moves Willie is his need to succeed by what he views as the standards of others.  He is so wrapped up in his job identity that when he loses his job, he loses his self, causing him to undermine his relationship with his sons and wife.  His son, Biff, wants so badly to be revered by his father but is taken aback when he catches his father with another woman.  The betrayal of love and one’s inner values conflict with this image of father that Biff sees in Willie. The loss of a moral center, where the ideas of a man are trampled by his underlying need for fame and fortune, result in the tragic death of Willie.

Later in life, Mr. Miller took on a much greater task than writing drama, when he lived it in marrying Marilyn Monroe.  Although Monroe was and still is an icon of fame and fortune, there was something in her inner core that left her deeply frustrated and unhappy with her life.  Mr. Miller could not fill the hollowness that she experienced and, the two subsequently divorced.  Mr. Miller, similar to Willie’s family, could not save Marilyn, and two years later, her life came to an abrupt and sad ending.

In his letter, the playwright pointed out that his view of tragedy reverses the idea of contributing to society by believing that accumulating the accoutrements of fame represent the greater good.  Whether we succeed or not at this goal, we are left with a spiritual emptiness, depicted so well in Willie Loman’s plight.  We then experience a brooding inner poverty that can lead to the tragedies so central in Mr. Miller’s most noted plays.  The tragedies that Mr. Miller speaks of are generally based on that of an individual.  But it would be much worse if the conglomeration of individuals that make up America abandon the ideals that made this country so different from others.  Willie Loman and Marily Monroe, one fictitious and one real, represent individual tragedies. America was and is an experiment created by humans with ideas that outlawed social stature, by elevating the rights of the common citizen.  How sad it would be if these same citizens succumb to the lies and untruths that filter down from social media and other false sources.  Individuals that lose their lives prematurely from some ill-fated set of choices or values are indicative of tragedy. But a country that loses sight of its ideals and self-destructs would be a colossal tragedy.

Whereas Arthur Miller wrote about individuals betraying their ideals, perhaps some future playwright will write about how a nation’s people allowed their illusions of grandiosity, contained in their moral bankruptcy, get the better of their natures.  And this play, like The Death of a Salesman, may be taught to high schoolers and college students and shown all over the United States.  It will be regarded so highly that it will become a part of the core curriculum throughout the country and have a great influence on those who read it.  More importantly, it will serve as a beacon to all of us to change the deviant path we find ourselves in the hope of preserving the freedom and liberty so sacred to our country.   

Emotional Insight

A couple of evenings ago my wife, Lisa, and I attended a ceremony to recognize women in Long Beach who have made significant contributions to Jewish Long Beach.  Prior to the event, when appetizers and wine were served, I spoke to Deborah Goldfarb, the acting CEO of the organization.  She has managed to do an excellent job navigating the Jewish community during this most difficult time in both Israeli and Jewish history.  I asked her if she had made any progress with the Long Beach City Council in explaining the issues more clearly than both the news and social media have done.  She replied that they understand our position but do not necessarily accept it.

When she made this distinction, I pointed out that Albert Ellis, a former teacher and mentor of mine in psychology at Rutgers University, had made a similar distinction.  He had learned that clients often have an intellectual understanding of what their problems are but remain still stuck in the quagmire of their distorted thinking.  The point he was making is that even when clients in therapy tell you they understand what you are saying and might even agree with your perception of their problem, they still do not change.  He believed attitudinal and behavioral change come when clients not only understand and define what their problem is, but when they can accept it as a part of their being.  The key word here is what Ms. Goldfarb had referred to as acceptance.  This level of understanding Ellis labeled emotional insight.  To Ellis, emotional insight is that deeper level of understanding that an individual needs to possess as a prerequisite for behavioral change.

In a certain sense, the notion of acceptance can be likened to the work I have done with couples.  Often times each partner within a relationship will come into my office arguing that one of them is right or righter than the other.  Here it is so important to have each listen to the other’s perspective and make an effort to walk in that person’s shoes.  The idea here is to generate a sense of empathy that each feels for the other that will broaden, and frequently strengthen the couple’s bond.  I liken this deeper awareness that each partner has gained as quite similar to what Ellis called emotional insight.

Unfortunately, in our present political climate such sharing, that would facilitate a move toward acceptance by offering a more conciliatory approach, is not evident.  When we once more look at Ms. Goldfarb’s observation about the Long Beach City Council not accepting the message of Jewish Long Beach, I don’t think she was saying they have to fully agree with our side.  But if the Council could accept the complexity and ramifications of what is involved, perhaps its members would be more conducive to a change of attitude and behavior.  Of course, this same acceptance cannot be ignored on the Israeli side either.  In fact, when two warring parties are in the midst of conflict, the status quo cannot be broken until the two begin to see more deeply the plight and hurt that each is doing to themselves and to the other.     

Tim Wakefield

Years ago, I was on a subway in New York City enroute to a Yankee-Red Sox game with my friend Sanford Lewis when I began a conversation with a Yankee fan much younger than myself.  Because of the frequency of players trading teams, I told him it was difficult to keep track of which ones were on what team. I mentioned everyone knew what team the greats from the past played for such as Ted Williams, Yogi Berra and Mickey Mantle.  He agreed with me stating that we no longer root for the players but for a uniform.  What he meant was players no longer had a loyalty to the club they first played for if they could sign a more lucrative monetary contract with another team. 

The late Tim Wakefield, Red Sox hurler, to his credit, honored on opening day at Fenway Park in Boston, did not follow this pattern of switching teams.  Tim did not start his career with the Sox but rather with the Pittsburgh Pirates.  In the early ’90s he struggled, but was demoted to the minors, and finally released in 1995.  Subsequently, he signed on with the Red Sox, developed a knuckleball, and soon after, found himself once more in the major league with Boston.  During his time in Boston, he fell in love with the city where he met his wife, Stacy, and with her, had two children, Trevor and Brianna.  He became very much involved in charitable work, helping out the Jimmy Fund, the monies of which went to the pediatric care of cancer patients. 

Regarding Tim’s pitching career with the Red Sox, he played on two World Series winners in his 17 seasons at Boston.  There he resurrected his career in performing quite admirably throwing his choice pitch, the knuckleball.  During the unforgettable playoff series with the Yankees in 2004, when the Red Sox, in a legendary effort, overcame a 3-game deficit, Wakefield showed himself to be the ultimate team player: He sacrificed his turn to start in the 4th game, by telling Terry Francona, Boston manager, to put him in as a reliever in the 3rd game, saving the bullpen.  The game was a Yankee rout, 19-8, of which Wakefield and the rest of the Sox pitching squad got blasted.  However, this move was essential in the Sox conquest of the Yankees insofar as Games 4 and 5 each required extra innings that necessitated prolonged use of the Red Sox bullpen.  The Red Sox triumphed in those games, along with the 6th and 7th games, to make a comeback, considered to be one of the greatest of all time, and win the series from the Yankees 4 to 3. 

After having been pummeled by the Yankee batters in the 3rd game, in the 5th game,Wakefield’s knuckleball totally baffled the Yankee hitters.  As the last Boston reliever in the game, he pitched three scoreless innings, to receive the win after 14 innings, 5 to 4.  The winning run came on a single by David Ortiz after the game had lasted close to 6 hours.  That Wakefield could come back and make such a huge effort in the win showed his grit and determination.

In the following year, Tim was already 38 years old and in the final season of a 13-million-dollar contract he had signed.  Although he did not wish to retire, he did not want to leave Boston, where as earlier mentioned, he was involved with much of the charity work he oversaw.  Because the reserve clause that kept players on the same team had been superseded by player free agency, Wakefield could have left the Red Sox to receive a better offer from another team.  However, because of his love of Boston and the Red Sox organization, he and his agent, Barry Meister, agreed to a one-year guarantee, below his market value, if he were to be picked up by another club.  This contract had the option of renewing each year paying Wakefield the same amount.  Meanwhile, Wakefield’s pitching continued to shine in the subsequent years so it turned out to be a great deal for the Red Sox, who named the agreement a perpetual option.

Tim retired at the ripe “young age” of 45 in 2012.  His loyalty to the Sox, a decision never made by other players, kept him with them, allowing fans to root not only for a “uniform” but also a player they cared about.

It was fitting that in the Sox home opener, celebrating Tim, the ceremonial pitch before the game started was thrown by Brianna, Tim’s daughter, to the ex-Red Sox catcher, Jason Varitek.  Because Wakefield’s knuckleball could be hard to catch, Doug Mirabelli, who had a special glove, was the regular catcher, during the season, when Tim pitched.  However, in the playoff series against the Yankees in 2004, Terry Francona, then the Boston manager, needed Varitek in the lineup.  He was a much better hitter than Mirabelli and, fortunately for the Sox, was able to catch Wakefield’s unpredictable knuckleball in that 5th game. This allowed the Sox to return to Yankee Stadium and to win the last two games in that amazing series.

Letter to Penn

Dear Ms. Kernan,

I find little joy in writing this letter to you.  I have been donating to the University of Pennsylvania on a regular basis for many years.  I treasured my years as an undergraduate there from 1963 to the year I graduated in 1967.  But of recent years I have questioned the education afforded today’s students as that same education has appeared to stray from the mark of its original model in which academic freedom was its hallmark.  This became evident to many at the congressional hearing last December when Liz Magill, then president of the University of Pennsylvania, along with the presidents of Harvard and MIT, were unable to say whether calls for the genocide of Jews were in violation of their schools’ code of conduct. Public and alumni outrage resulted in her resigning from her position that indeed had been short-lived.

Let me make it clear that I don’t believe Ms. Magill is or was an antisemite. A combination of the policies that preceded her presidency along with the coaching she received from attorneys prior to her testimony, no doubt, influenced her answers.  Much of the problem resides in the differential treatment accorded certain minority groups when it comes to free speech.  Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt wrote about this in their book:  The Coddling of the American Mind.  These authors point how the past eight years have seen the concept of free speech take a reversal when students from various “minorities” have complained to faculty and administrators about triggering remarks made by their peers.  One of the functions of administrative staff is to censure such comments, known as “microaggressions,” to protect these same minorities by creating safe spaces for their exclusive use.  This line of reasoning of course is contrary to what the notion of free speech is all about.  Moreover, as New York Times journalists, Bret Stephens and David French maintain, following this practice creates a double standard on Jewish students.

Although Jews have a longer history of persecution than any other racial or ethnic group that I know, they have enjoyed a sense of freedom and wide acceptance in America never experienced in any other country.  Many have regarded them as white, though to what should be no one’s surprise, I know many Jews that clearly are not white.  Besides, elite universities, such as the University of Pennsylvania, apparently do not deem those as white in need of protection from overt hostility.  An example of this occurs when students chant “free Palestine from the river to the sea” that translates to the end of the Jewish state, Israel. This is an example of where free speech targets Jewish students. However, rather than creating safe spaces, I prefer Jonathan Greenblatt’s (the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League—ADL) idea of protest zones or spaces.  This would limit the disruption of classes and disallow students to threaten or harass those who don’t hold their beliefs.  Furthermore, this would give speakers, who may not be popular with the prevailing sentiment of many students, a chance to present their view of what may be considered controversial.

I am in agreement with Bret Stephens when he said universities need to replace ideology with their raison d’etre, pedagogy. As Pamela Paul, another columnist of the New York Times put it, faculties were given an “essential role and stake in both a pluralistic democracy and a capitalistic economy—without being subject to the whims of politics or industry.”  Accordingly, I don’t think donors like myself should tell universities how to educate their students.  But I also don’t think identity politics featuring social justice and other such ideologies, should be the default mode found in much of contemporary academia.  This is not to say that ethnic studies should not be a part of the curricula in academic coursework.  But as Pamela Paul has pointed out since the summer of 2020, a focus on social justice has permeated college reading lists.  My concern here is if this is a focal point, the original intent of a liberal education could be undermined.  The repercussion being the substantial loss in the development and burgeoning of the young minds that attend these institutions. Not to have experienced the likes of Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky, Joyce, Ellison and Faulkner to name a few, would deprive them of studying some of the greatest artists of all time.

Let me conclude by saying I remain optimistic.  I recently heard Julie Platt, a Penn alumna and current trustee at Penn, speak at a Zoom meeting sponsored by a local Jewish group.  She indicated she would be in favor of adding to the curriculum at Penn a course in the history of antisemitism.  I have been told that such a course has not been included in many programs of ethnic studies.  Emily, I would like you or a representative from the University to keep me posted on any new developments occurring at Penn. It is my hope that some positive changes will bring Penn back to its foundation of a liberal education where people can listen, and even learn, what those from a different background and different set of beliefs may have to offer.   

Cordially,

Dr. Bernard F. Natelson

College, 1967

    A Rat’s Tale

Several years ago, my wife, Lisa, and I were watching a television show in the late evening when we suddenly heard a pitter-pattering sound coming from somewhere above.  Because our garage is attached to the house, as the noise continued, we realized the light thumping had to be coming from the garage roof.  Not having heard this noise previously, we tried to guess its origin.  Too light to be that of a human and too heavy to be that of a flock of birds, we thought it might be squirrels. We did not pay any further attention to what we heard, but indeed did hope that the noise would disappear, as it finally, did.  Moreover, upon going outside to check the garage, I did not spot any movement or anything unusual.

Out of curiosity, we did a quick google search and discovered that squirrels tend to be solitary and highly territorial.  This fact only heightened our anxiety inasmuch as we never had experienced this noise in the past.  The next evening, I needed to retrieve something from my car and, as I opened the door from the house leading into the unlit garage, two beady eyes, glowing in the dark, came running toward me. After I quickly turned on the garage light, whatever had been coming toward me had disappeared.  Recovering from my momentary fright, I realized that I had seen a rat running on the track of our garage opener.  When I reported to my wife what I had seen, she refused to believe me telling me: “You are seeing things.”  Upon retiring to bed, I felt conflicted insofar as I was quite sure as to what I had seen, but given how rapidly the rat or whatever it was had disappeared, I thought perhaps, in fact, what I had seen was a mere figment of my imagination. 

Often, we, as humans, don’t want to allow negative or painful experiences to enter our consciousness.  The next evening my inner conflict was resolved when, once more, I saw two glaring eyes in the darkness heading toward me.  I knew that what I seen was real and not imagined.  Upon turning the garage light, the rodent had scurried to protection probably in the loft of our garage where it no longer could be seen.  But this time, however, I had concrete proof of what I had seen:   We had recently bought a 10-pound bag of cat food that had been torn opened by either the teeth or paws of a rat.  This rat or rats (I was hoping it was only one) had left a trail of poop by the side of my car.  Unhappily, we recognized that our state of denial had been pierced necessitating the need to act.

A friend of mine that is quite handy noticed that there were some gaps left by the eave of the garage roof.  He volunteered to help me close these open spaces by putting some mesh wire in the interstices. As we could see no other way the rodents were entering, both my wife and I hoped this would solve our problem.  Unfortunately, it did not as we continued to hear the light trampling on our garage roof afterwards.  I had heard that rat poison was a solution to our problem, so the next day I purchased some from Home Depot neatly placing the green pebbles in a container in the loft of our garage.  The next day I climbed the ladder to the loft of our garage and discovered that much of the poison had been devoured, but remnants of the green little stones were scattered outsize the box in which I had placed them.  Not having any idea where these creatures were coming from, my wife and I both decided to call an exterminator.

When the exterminator arrived, I accompanied him to the loft where he saw the scattered rat poison.  He told me that the rats had been fighting over the “treat.”  He indicated rat traps are both safer and more efficient than poison because in the latter case the rodents may die, while stuck in the walls, causing a fetid odor throughout the house.  Although he set four rat traps with melted chocolate as the bait, after looking around for any telltale crevices or openings, he could not reveal to me where the rats were gaining entrance to the garage. 

After disposing of the poison with gloves, with my foot, I gently pushed one of the traps to an area in the loft apart from the other traps.  Suddenly, I heard an explosion as loud as what us kids used to call a “cherry bomb.” (firecracker).  It scared the hell out of me as, accidentally, I must have disengaged the spring of the trap.  For those of you who will ever need to set rat trap, be sure not to stick your hand in it once it’s set.  Guaranteed the loss of a finger or two if you make that mistake.

The next day I walked up the ladder to the loft of our garage wondering what I would find.  Sure enough there was a dead rat in one of the traps.  Rats, dead or alive, are not the most beautiful creatures to behold:  This one, brownish-gray colored with a long tail and a bit of blood on the side of the trap.  After disposing of the rat, I had no idea how many more of those fellows were going to invade our garage.  Well, guess what?  That was the last rat we saw.  We did not change anything following that day so I have no idea what caused their disappearance.  Because rats often hang out together, with a group of rats being called a mischief (I wonder why), perhaps its chums got the message.  It remains a mystery to me.  If any of you readers are experts in animal behavior, send me your take on the blessed ending of Lisa and my rat problems. 

On Cultural Variants

Because I taught in Bangkok years ago, I am familiar with some Thai customs and mores.  Despite the fact that apparent chaos has permeated the news here in America and abroad, a recent trip to Thailand reminded me how cultural norms still purvey the order and decency many of us today find lacking.  What follows are some of my favorite examples from my travels to Thailand.

There are two mass transits systems in Bangkok:  1) A Sky-Train that runs above ground level and a 2) Metro that runs underground like many of our subways here in America.  These two transportation modes are a boon to the Thai population as they are faster and less expensive than taxis that have to deal with the terrible traffic endemic to Bangkok. 

Upon entering the platform of either the Metro or the Sky-Train, there are arrows pointing toward doors to enter and arrows pointing toward exiting.  These arrows are at every door and people, in a most orderly fashion, line-up behind the arrows in a straight line.  The only people that might deviate from this simple procedure would be foreigners.  In fact, there was a white male who had a walking cane appearing both somewhat impaired and confused standing in the middle of the rows marked by the arrows.  When the Sky-Train or Metro cars arrive, everyone patiently waits until all have gotten off at the stop before anyone boards the train.  This observance of orderliness simply does not exist in the subway system in New York City, perhaps the city, with regard to population density and activities, that can best be compared to Bangkok.

However, the civility and propriety that Thai exhibit in the mass transit system becomes a state of bedlam when it comes to vehicular traffic patterns.  To start, tourists and guests need recognize that Thais have adopted the English custom of driving on the left rather than the right side of the road.  Then there are the motorcycles weaving and bobbing in all directions.  Although most busy streets have traffic lights, some do not and, you as pedestrians, do not necessarily have the right of way.  In some ways this is also true of New York City, where visitors to the city need to look at cars coming rather than traffic lights as cars do not always stop when a light turns red.  But New Yorkers do not face the many motorcyclists so ubiquitous in Bangkok traffic.  Other cities in the United States, may treat the pedestrian with much greater respect than that found in New York.  In San Francisco, for example, the pedestrian has the right of way at all crosswalks and it behooves automobile drivers to follow this rule.

On a trip to Thailand with my college roommate, Jack, he discovered that motorcyclists parked at the sides of streets, who were wearing orange vests, were available for hire to take riders wherever they wanted to go.  When we decided to separate and see different sights, upon returning he told me he had been driven to his destination by one of these motorcycle operators.  There is a curious contrast in the behavior of these drivers, I believe typical of the Thai culture.  When inquiring about a ride and showing one of them where you wish to be taken, that driver will point to the driver whose turn it is.  Thus, rather than hawking your business they cooperate with each other in a very organized manner.  However, once you are on the back of the motorcycle, as I indicated in the above, all order disappears.

Thai motorcyclists are excellent operators and, are probably the fastest transport for short distances, especially, if the two mass transit systems are not nearby.  Although they all wear helmets, they do not provide them to their riders.  I have regularly seen young Thai females, perhaps students, mount them and ride them with little fear.  The first time I was on one reminded me of my first ride on a roller coaster.  These motorbikers move intrepidly from lane to lane in bumper car traffic managing to find the fastest route to their goal.  It can be scary at times and, I’m sure accidents have occurred.  If an accident did happen, it would be the fault of a car that did not see the biker.  And as I indicated in the above, for short distances a motorcycle ride is a very good alternative as walking long distances in both the heat and traffic can be aversive.

One of my more humorous experiences occurred when I was going to meet some Thai friends in Chiang Mai, a city in Northern Thailand.  Somehow the taxi took me to the wrong address.  There was a woman on a motorbike, who looked to be in her 70’s, that wanted to help but as she could not speak English and my ability to communicate in Thai was extremely limited, I called my friend who told the woman, in Thai, where I needed to go.   As the woman offered me a ride, I mounted her motorbike and, she drove me to the spot where my friend met me.   What surprised me was how agility in handling her bike at her age. I would not trust myself to operate a motorcycle in city traffic, or for that matter in any kind of traffic, at her age.  As it turned out, my destination was only about one mile away and, when I offered to repay her for her generosity, she refused to accept any money.

Years ago, during a trip to Thailand with my younger brother, Andrew, upon returning to our hotel at night, we walked down a dark alley that led to the hotel.  When he asked me if we were in danger of being robbed or mugged, I told him no.  On the contrary, I would not recommend tourists coming to America, who are staying in urban areas, to walk down blind alleys.   The risk is far greater being robbed in America as a tourist than in Thailand.  But then again, if you are a tourist, you need be careful about taxis.  I have been told by natives of Bangkok that before getting into a taxi make sure you ask the driver to put the meter on (word in Thai is “meter,” as in English, but pronounced differently).

As my recent trip was coming to an end, I decided to visit the Saxophone Pub, a place that I had been to with my wife, Lisa, and friends several times in the past.  The concierge assured me there would be a saxophone playing some jazz tunes.  When I arrived, though it was a Tuesday evening, the place was jam packed.  Having come alone, I was seated right behind the front half circle that surrounds the players, the best seats in the house.

During the performance I noticed a young Thai couple sitting in front of me.  It was clear from their body language that they were quite in love with one another.  Cheerfully, they were drinking and toasting each other.  When some young women sitting next to them left, I quickly moved up to the semi-circle, next to the couple, allowing me to have a much better view of the jazz quartet.  I lifted my beer to both of them and said in Thai the word for “Cheers.”  They smiled at me and I smiled back.  Suddenly, another glass of beer was placed in front of me by the waiter and, with a look of bewilderment, I wondered if the drink had been delivered to the wrong party. The waiter pointed to the couple indicating that the male had bought it for me.

I thanked them both for the gesture in my limited ability to speak Thai.  When I told them that I had taught psychology at ABAC in Bangkok, the girlfriend told me that she had graduated from there a few years back.  Because the school is international and English is the language in which the classes are taught, I knew she could speak English enabling me to begin a conversation with her.   She told me her name was Ploy and her boyfriend’s name was Chi.  Although his family was Chinese, he was raised in Thailand so he spoke both Mandarin and Thai.  Ploy was fluent in English and Thai.  At first, she apologized telling me that her English was only so and so, but it was clear to me that this was not the case insofar as she made no grammatical errors in the conversation.  She told me that she had started studying English when she was 8 years old.

Because many Asian languages do not have different tenses to describe changes in time as English does, grammar is difficult for Asians to master when they learn English.  However, on the contrary, Thai and other Asian languages, though lacking the complexity of grammar, are still extremely difficult to learn because they are tonal. Once when I was in a Thai restaurant in Bangkok, I ordered a bowl of rice but was brought a glass by the waiter.  To the Western ear, the Thai word for glass and rice sound almost the same.

Couples that are in love fill the air with a sparkle and enthusiasm that one can relate to if one has experienced that sparkle.  Their sparkle that evening was enchanting.  I certainly had that excitement when I first met my wife, Lisa, only hoping that she felt the same about me.  And I had the good fortune that she did!  That sensation of love is what movie goers experience in a Hollywood ending when boy meets girl, conflict arises between the two, but somehow, they overcome the conflict to live happily ever after. I learned that they had known each other for 9 years but only started dating two months ago.  I told them it was obvious to me that they were very much in love with one another and that pleased the boyfriend so much that he offered me a glass of the third bottle of wine he had purchased.

When Ploy told me they were both drunk I cautioned Chi not to drive and, they wisely chose to stay at a hotel that evening. We exchanged information through Line, a connection many Asians have that is similar to Skype.  When Ploy let me know she and Chi were planning to get married in December, I kiddingly told her my wife and I would make it our best effort to come to their wedding.  We parted company smiling with big grins on our faces when Ploy told me they just might invite us to their wedding.  Now that’s quite a great ending to my trip, isn’t it?

 Rudolf the Red-Nosed

Sadly, 2023 did not end on a positive note as the world currently witnesses two wars:  1) The Mideast and 2) Russia-Ukraine.  Let me turn to a cheerier note about a favorite song of mine in my youth that is sung during Christmas time:

 Rudolf, the Red Nosed-Reindeer

You know Dasher and Dancer and Prancer and Vixen

Comet and Cupid and Donner and Blitzen

But do you recall…

The most famous reindeer of all?

Rudolph, the red-nosed reindeer

Had a very shiny nose

And if you ever saw it

You would even say it glows

All of the other reindeer

Used to laugh and call him names

They never let poor Rudolph

Join in any reindeer games

Then one foggy Christmas eve

Santa came to say

“Rudolph, with your nose so bright

Won’t you guide my sleigh tonight?”

Then how the reindeer loved him

As they shouted out with glee

Rudolph, the red-nosed reindeer

You’ll go down in history

In looking at the lyrics of the song, it may be helpful to recognize that many of the more secular, less religious songs, were written by Jewish writers.  Perhaps the most famous of them all:  White Christmas was written by Irving Berlin, a Jewish American composer and lyricist.  This song reached a high note when Bing Crosby first sung it in the 1942 film, Holiday Inn.

Robert L. May, a Jewish male, introduced Rudoph to the world in 1939 as an assignment for Chicago-based Montgomery Ward Department Store’s marketing campaign.  Mr. May was said to be an outlier like Rudolph inasmuch as early in his life he skipped a grade in school, was smaller than his classmates, and felt himself to be a loser.  Ten years later, in 1949, Johnny Marks another Jewish male, composed the music and lyrics to Rudolph. Ironically, in 1947, he married the sister of Robert May, Margaret May Marks. Perhaps the work that Robert May had done earlier inspired Marks to compose the song so well-known to children, not only from America, but from all over the world.

The most prominent part of Rudolph, his red nose, is really what the song is all about.  Of course, Jewish people, me included, have been teased about the size of our nose.  My wife’s late sister-in-law, who was not Jewish, once asked my wife, whose nose is by no measure big, whether she had a nose job.  In 1978, I was giving a lecture to a class of psychology students from Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena.  When one of them asked if I were Jewish and I replied in the affirmative, he stated that he was from Germany and during his childhood, he had become terrified upon being accosted by German soldiers who had mistaken him for a Jew.  When asked why this happened, he said it was because of his unusually large nose.

Rudolph is also chastised and bullied because of his nose.  But it is his shiny nose that attracts Santa who asks him to “guide my sleigh tonight.”  Suddenly Rudolph is regarded in a positive light as “all the reindeer loved him.”  One can only guess the many thoughts May and Marks may have had in first creating Rudolph, and then, subsequently, composing a song and lyrics.  Perhaps the deep need for Jewish people to fit into America, in part, inspired the creation of a deer that gains both admiration and fame despite the protuberance of its nose.  But it also could have been an inspiration to children, who like May, perhaps did not fit into or were not accepted by any peer group.

If we expand the above idea of some people not fitting into a society, perhaps this speaks to what it’s like to come and settle in a foreign country, such as America, where those that are native born often slight them.  But, if initially they are derided, be it for their customs that they bring to their new home or their outer appearance, their own effort, embodied in their uniqueness, often will culminate in acceptance.  After all, isn’t America a land where immigrants, so much a part of the foundation of this country, set out to fulfill their dreams? In this sense, Rudolph, along with other songs, represented to its Jewish writers a means of fulfilling their dreams by contributing to the music and lyrics that added to the celebration of Christmas.  

Three Fs for Academia

Many of us gasped in utter disbelief when three female college presidents from universities, considered the most prestigious in the country, met at a congressional hearing and were asked whether statements implying genocide of Jewish people went against their code of harassment and conduct.  All three responded similarly by saying it depends on the context or conduct of those individuals.  It was evident that all three had been coached by lawyers inasmuch as their answers almost sounded as if each were parroting one another.

I graduated from one of the three, the University of Pennsylvania, where its President, Liz Magill, came under fire by alumni that culminated in her resignation.  The other two university presidents, Claudine Gay from Harvard, and Sally Kornbluth from M.I.T., have, to date, withstood the criticism and pressure to leave their respective positions.  Although their responses appeared to affirm what appeared to be protests that smack of obvious antisemitism, I very much doubt that any of these three women, in fact, were antisemites.  Their responses to Representative Elise Stefanik’s inquiry at the hearing, subsequently widely televised to the American public, I would maintain was merely a symptom of a much greater problem that has existed on college campuses for a long time.

Experts that study adolescence have likened this period to the German expression, Sturm and Drang, whose literal translation is storm and stress.  The term originated in the mid-18th century and embodied a movement in which free expression and individualism was exalted over the rationalism personified by the Enlightenment.  Puberty and the ensuing rebelliousness of adolescence have become a cliché for this period of life.  This then is the period in which these young people begin to question the conventions of their parents when they attend a college.  Whereas classical conservative beliefs maintain much of a laissez faire (i.e., leave things the way they are) attitude toward their surroundings, liberals on the other side of the spectrum, demand change for the “greater good.”  Contemporary progressive thinking has expanded greater good to mean the protection of classes/races deemed as oppressed.  Because change is what adolescence is all about, many college students are prone to grasp on to a more liberal, or progressive mindset.  Elite universities, such as those from the Ivy League, rather than disappointing these adolescent proclivities, have encouraged them.

Make no mistake back when I attended the University of Pennsylvania in the ‘60’s, there was a Leftist tinge but nothing like it is currently.  I remember taking a course in sociology in which the teacher was a fan of the philosopher, Herbert Marcuse, and he assigned us to read his book:  One Dimensional Man.  Marcuse who taught at Columbia and Harvard in the ‘50’s was a Neo-Marxist who believed that the capitalistic system that focused on efficiency and production of goods was creating a mindless class of workers that lacked any sense of imagination.  A number of commentators have said that Marcuse’s influence on American college campuses may have been the precursor of what now is happening.

This was a faculty member who had little influence on the campus beyond the class he taught.  In any event, I took Marcuse’s ideas with a grain of salt and was not proselytized by them.  The climate on college campuses today is much different than it was when I attended Penn.  Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt documented many of these changes in their book:  The Coddling of the American Mind.  Both of these authors point out how for the past 8 years the concept of free speech took a reversal when students from various “minorities” complained to faculty and administrators about triggering remarks made by their peers.  These comments were labeled as “microaggressions” and were censured by administrative staff that carried the mantle of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI).  An example of a microaggression would be when a White student tells a fellow Black student: “I didn’t know you were so smart.”  And, he may add: “I didn’t know Blacks were that smart.”  Often statements such as these are inadvertent, meant to be compliments, but are taken as put-downs.  

Comments, such as the above, are censured by an administrative staff that are hired to enforce speech codes that protect minorities. Furthermore, elite campuses, such as Harvard and Penn, have created “safe spaces” where the DEI designated minorities can stay where no such speech would be allowed.  Rather than fostering a climate where students could learn how to tolerate their differences, administrators have reinforced their potential discomforts in interacting with one another by protecting them.  Here is where the double-standard became apparent vis-a-vis the testimony of the three university presidents:  Free speech applies when the targets are Jews because the latter are not protected by DEI.  Thus, it’s acceptable for students to chant from the “river to the sea” that implies the extinction of Israel, but, microaggressions that are of much less severe content to protected minorities, should be sanctioned.

The result of the congressional hearing has resulted in several affluent alumni of these institutions threatening to withhold donations to these universities.  Moreover, there is talk of Jewish students now being considered a group that could fall under DEI protection.  If this occurs, the only group that will not be afforded DEI protection will be White males.  Neither of these trends are healthy.  Wealth of donors should not dictate what behaviors are appropriate or not on college campuses.  

Perhaps the uprising from the testimony of these three college presidents may result in some constructive changes in the way college life is presently conducted.  A good start would be to dismantle the bureaucracy involved in the DEI.  Reinforcing a victim mentality teaches students to avoid rather than face the everyday challenges that life may present.  On this note, I would hope that Jews don’t become a part of DEI.   Here I go along with that famous quote from Groucho Marx: “I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.”

To end on a positive note, I hope that the national visibility of contemporary campus life will lead to more open forums and open discussion where controversial topics are voiced and speech becomes less constrained.

Know Your Place   

The recent passing of the billionaire, Charles T. Munger, the partner of Warren Buffet, inspired me to write this essay.  A week ago, I had dinner with a friend I’ve known for many years.  He told me of the time in his life when he had been close to homeless having to live from paycheck to paycheck.  As he told me how he achieved what he had, presently, a high paying job in software, it was clear that he had made certain career choices to become more financially stable.  I told him that many people struggle all their lives with the issue of whether or not they will have financial security.  Whereupon he told me of a relative he had, not lacking in intelligence in any way, that was having difficulty making ends meet.  Regarding this individual, he commented that some people, for no apparent reason, simply do not do well in their lives.

My friend’s observation caused me to ponder how some of us struggle throughout our lives.  Some can have all the accoutrements of success, such as looks and intelligence, but can’t find themselves in their journey, and they remain lost for much if not their entire lives.  I was reminded of this a few days ago when I saw some movie clips of Judy Garland in her youth.  As a child, like so many other children, I was hypnotized by her performance as Dorothy Gale, in The Wizard of Oz.  In one of these clips, I learned that she helped Gene Kelly, who appeared with her in his first movie performance, adjust his acting style to the camera.  Prior to this movie, Kelly had been a star on Broadway. Ms. Garland’s early film stardom had the unfortunate consequence of resulting in her choosing to ignore her health by abusing drugs in a lifelong effort to stay thin.  Sadly, she lost the battle and died at the early age of 47. Though her failure in life appeared so incongruous with how she had once appeared, Ms. Garland is hardly alone in suffering this type of tragic ending. 

All of us, at some point in our lives, come across people, like Judy Garland, that have this strange, but not so uncommon proclivity, to make the wrong choices for themselves repeatedly.  Despite the fact that they live in a free society that allows them the wider range of opportunities not offered in a more restricted non-democratic society, they lack the social skills necessary to fit in with others.

Here I need confess, that although I was never hurting financially, there were times that it seemed incredibly hard to see in what direction I was heading.  My sense of life was freighted with the negative.  I saw the world through my distorted lens, and I am embarrassed to say I had contempt for those within my surroundings.  It very well may have stemmed from my hypersensitive self not knowing how to handle the everyday jests made toward me and others like me.  I had this weird subtle feeling that my slightest gesture toward others would result in some kind of unknown pain. I harbored an anger and resentment making me question humanity’s worth that resulted in an inner sense of nihilism.   Fortunately, I abandoned this nihilistic view of reality as I began to sharpen my career goals and reconnect my inner self with what I needed to do to go forward.

Perhaps we all go through these phases of life, where we question ourselves, but then begin to pull things together and find a comfortable place to be.  And of course, a place to be has to do with our understanding of who we are that will serve us as a compass for the social ties that will become so important in the future.  Let me emphasize that finding our place is not a passive event that society imposes on us.  Rather it is an active set of choices that we, as individuals make, to create a sense of worth and purpose that is an ongoing process.  For some, the goal might be to stay where they are.

When I was a Psychology Trainee at a V.A. Hospital, I remember meeting a Philippine doctor whose candor toward me, a young man in my early 20’s, surprised me.  He told me his friends and relatives wanted him to do more for himself by starting his own private practice.  They were convinced he would be successful and make more money than he was presently.  He told me he rather enjoyed where he was in life helping the patients he tended to at the V.A.  I respected him, not only for his decision, but his honesty in sharing such an important part of his life with someone like me who was just beginning my professional life.   He appeared to me to have found his own niche in life that best suited him.

This brings me back to Mr. Munger.  Though many of us have heard of the great investor, Warren Buffet, my bet is that few of us would be familiar with Mr. Munger.  When he was interviewed shortly before he died, he said the following that appeared in his obituary:

“I didn’t mind at all playing second fiddle to Warren.  Ordinarily, everywhere I go I am very dominant, but when somebody else is better, I’m willing to play second fiddle.  It’s just that I was seldom in that position, except with Warren.  But I didn’t mind it at all.” 

Some may think that Mr. Munger should have acted as the outspoken brilliant leader at all times to show how he could excel, but Mr. Munger found his place where he could serve as both a leader and a supporter.  Although it may appear counterintuitive, success and happiness are not always the product of fame and fortune.

American Jew or Jewish American

In the early 1980’s, in the incipient stages of developing a private practice in psychology, Paramount Community Psychiatric Hospital (no longer exists), in the Long Beach Area, had invited me to be on staff with admitting privileges.  I was invited to a dinner for new staff members like me, whereupon, I saw a familiar face, an Egyptian psychiatrist who I had met at the hospital, who like me was just starting his private practice. He beckoned me to come join him at the table that he was sitting where one seat remained.  Upon introducing myself, the others informed me they had come from other Arab countries in the Middle East.   When they heard my name, they asked me if I was Jewish.  When I replied in the affirmative, they then proceeded to ask me how I felt about Israel.

When I voiced my support for Israel, however, adding I did not support all of its policies, the conversation at the table became dicey.  Upon hearing my response, I suddenly was assaulted from all sides about the evil Israel had cast on the entire Middle East.  As they continued non-stop, I realized that anything I said in support or in defense of Israel would have given them more ammunition to fire back in my direction.  Although I was no expert in the Middle East, I did know that a few years earlier Egypt and Israel had signed a peace accord when Jimmy Carter was in the White House.  Unfortunately, this had little bearing on the Egyptian psychiatrist, as he readily sided with his friends that appeared more like his family.   As I bid my colleagues farewell, the introduction to the hospital, along with the dinner, left a bad taste in my mouth. 

The above example stressed my identity foremost as a Jew rather than an American.  However, for the greater part of my life, I have regarded being American, as my primary identity, with my being Jewish though certainly an intrinsic part of my background.  Thus, I have viewed myself more as an American Jew than a Jewish American.  Moreover, I am quite sure most Jews in America would identify with this perspective.  Then came October 7th in which the world witnessed the murder of 1200 Israelis and kidnapping of about 240 others by Hamas’ forces.

Rather than express their contempt for the incident, several students from Harvard wrote a letter essentially backing what Hamas had done.  In effect, they were condoning the mass murder of Jews.  The initial response of other academic centers of “higher” learning was in the same vein.  Only after alumni from these universities responded with letters and the threat of withholding their gifts, did these same universities back off and condemn what Hamas had done.  Suddenly Jewish students on these college campuses felt imperiled by rife antisemitic acts such as pro-Palestinian groups tearing down posters of kidnapped Jewish children. The result of all this has been the open intimidation of Jewish students.  I do not consider this type of protest emblematic of what we Americans regard as Free Speech, a right protected by the First Amendment.

I can draw some sad ironies to all of what has occurred on October 7th and subsequently.  The first is that few of the people slain on that day were members of the Israeli military, some of whom were not even Jewish but rather Arab Israelis.  Some Jews that were killed had been working with Palestinians to achieve a better understanding among them and Jews with the ultimate goal being peace between the two peoples.

The second irony is that most of the Jewish population in American vote democratic and believe in progressive causes often voiced on college campuses.  Suddenly these same Jewish students have found themselves on the receiving end of much hostility and anger by their so-called politically aligned comrades.

The third irony is the divergent origins of the antisemitism currently being expressed today.  The political left, rampant on elite college campuses, and in much of the news and social media, accuse Israel and its followers (i.e., Jews) as the oppressors with Palestinians being the oppressed.  Here Jewish people are regarded in the same camp as white supremists.  Movements extant today, such as Jews for Color, clearly point to the diversity of the Jewish people.  Furthermore, we know Israel has helped Ethiopians, who claim a Jewish background, to migrate to Israel. Finally, it is unclear how American Jews of mixed ethnicity will be treated in this most recent spread of antisemitism.     

The last variant of antisemitism, though more illogical than ironic, comes from Elon Musk, said to be the richest man on earth, who recently endorsed a post on X (his company) espousing baseless antisemitic conspiracy theories that Jewish people are promoting “hatred against whites.”  This idea originates from the belief that the Jewish aim is to “replace whites” with minorities or people of color, a trope that white nationalists and antisemites have trumpeted for years.

In one case Jews are said to be too white, whereas in the other case they are not white enough. The rampant antisemitism expressed by both the Left and the Right is so absurd that it is almost comical.  However, one cannot laugh at the danger it may augur for those of the Jewish faith.  Let us hope that the antisemitic actions occurring here in the United States, the home of the free, do not lead to the violence wreaked on the Israelis by the Hamas on October 7th.  Here I congratulate President Biden for taking the controversial approach of standing up for Israel as both an important and enduring ally of the United States.  We, as Jews and Americans, need to hope and pray that the current chaos in the Middle East ultimately will resolve itself in a peaceful resolution between Israelis and Palestinians.