Stan Lee: A Life is the epic tale of one of the world’s most important creative icons. With Spider-Man, the Avengers, Black Panther, and countless other Marvel superheroes he co-created, Stan introduced heroes that were complex and fallible – just like all of us. Championing Marvel for parts of ten decades, Lee revolutionized global culture.
Read more50 Years Ago -- The Avengers!
Avengers #94, December 1971
-- I used to love the way the colors popped on the covers, like a breath of fresh air. That feeling of walking into a comic book shop (though for me, it was initially hand-me-downs and two interesting places to buy comic books…a pharmacy/magazine shop and a hyper-local hardware store!!).
It seemed in the 1970s that teen collectors were willing to swap and trade regularly. I got early 1970s comic books from these older kids.
And, check out Vision standing watch as part of the logo!
Writer: Roy Thomas
Penciller: John Buscema, Neal Adams
Cover Artist: Neal Adams
Avengers #94
John Updike: Pennsylvania Roots on the Updike Podcast
John Updike was born in Pennsylvania in 1932. Much of his early work, including the famed Rabbit novels and many critically acclaimed short stories were set in the state. Examining Updike's PA roots is important in understanding his development as a writer and how that output shaped his "writerly" life.
I share snippets of a 1983 Updike speech in which he discusses many of these Pennsylvania connections and why he chose to dedicate his artistic life to "middles."
On another note...
I am incredibly honored to feature the fantastic piano piece, called "Swing Of The Hip," written and performed by Evan Palazzo. Evan is the band leader and pianist of The Hot Sardines, the group he and front woman, singer extraordinaire Elizabeth Bougerol created to play the great jazz classics of a century ago, as well as their own original recordings. If you love jazz, you should be listening to The Hot Sardines. Or, once live music kicks off again, see them at one of their many global tour stops. I guarantee seeing THS live is a concert experience you will never forget! For my money, The Hot Sardines are simply the best jazz band playing today!
For more information about The Hot Sardines, visit them online at www.hotsardines.com or at Facebook or Instagram where many thousands of followers gather to get the latest news, music, and information about the band.
New Podcast -- John Updike: American Writer, American Life
Over the course of his six-decade career stretching from the 1950s to 2000s, great American writer and novelist John Updike received praise from countless critics, including Christopher Hitchens, who called his scope “rather breathtaking,” and from Michiko Kakutani of the New York Times, who said that Updike “established himself as a major and enduring critical voice; indeed, as the preeminent critic of his generation.”
This Anchor podcast tackles many of the most urgent questions facing literature and pop culture in contemporary America and where culture goes from here. Some episodes will feature interviews with readers, critics, scholars, academics, and other interested in the life and times of John Updike.
Sometimes the show will be funny, other times, sad, but across the board, it will be informative as we interrogate, examine, and analyze the great American author John Updike.
Click on the URL to listen to “John Updike: American Writer, American Life”
Crisis Communications Basics -- 5 "Different" Messaging Strategies During the Coronavirus Crisis
A famous Warren Buffett quote claims that it takes 20 years to build a reputation and 5 minutes to ruin it. Importantly, Buffett explains, “If you think about that, you’ll do things differently.”
“It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you’ll do things differently.”
-- Warren Buffett
“Differently” during a crisis is a challenge—exactly the right move, but countered by the fact that people hate change. Crises are centered on change and uncertainty. Most leaders are not going to want to respond differently when they don’t have a clear indication of what is happening now, let alone later.
What COVID-19 is proving by the minute is that communications is more important now than ever before, even though up until a week or so ago (at least in the US), most people probably assumed that we had more communications than ever before in human history.
Having all the communications channels in the world doesn’t matter if no one is paying attention to the message.
5 things to do “differently” during this crisis:
Be compassionate – Real people (including you) are facing unprecedented transformation.
Be authentically empathetic – Given the uncertainty, be authentic in representing the situation and its consequences for your organization, business, community, and society.
Be direct – No time for sugarcoating or platitudes. Tell your communities—and your employees—what you know and what they need to know as new information becomes available.
Be flexible – All we know for certain is that the scope is extraordinary. Rethink what you assumed and try to keep the first point in mind, these are human beings you’re communicating with.
Be attentive – In the recent past, record numbers of people have rallied to charitable causes in times of crisis. Look for (safe) ways to help. What is the opposite of hoarding toilet paper? Do that…
Organizations spend an incredible amount of time, effort, and person hours creating relationships with all their stakeholders. It is paramount to create “different” communications and marketing efforts now as the world truly begins an era that may call for the complete overhaul of humankind’s foundational principles and beliefs.
Only 10 Days Until 100th Anniversary of Prohibition!
Only 10 Days Until 100th Anniversary of Prohibition!
On January 17, 2020, the nation went dry...at least legally!
Media Alert: 100th Anniversary of Volstead Act Implementation Centennial of Law that Launched Prohibition and the Roaring Twenties, Rampant Lawlessness, American citizens transformed into Criminals
This is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to examine the day the nation went dry and the tremendous consequences it had on the rest of American history.
What: The Volstead Act, enacted into law on October 28, 1919, defined the parameters of the Eighteenth Amendment. By passing the Volstead Act, Congress formally prohibited intoxicating beverages; regulated the sale, manufacture, or transport of liquor; but still ensured that alcohol could still be used for scientific, research, industrial, and religious practices.
When: Congress voted to overrule President Woodrow Wilson’s veto, passing the Volstead Act on October 28, 1919. Legal enforcement of Prohibition began on January 17, 1920.
Why: Chaos reigned in the early twentieth century. In America, the tumultuous era included millions of immigrants streaming into the nation, and then a protracted war that seemed apocalyptic. The backlash against the disarray sent some forces searching for normality. Liquor was an easy target. Supporters of dry law turned the consumption of alcohol into an indicator of widespread moral rot.
Bob Batchelor, author of The Bourbon King: The Life and Crimes of George Remus, Prohibition’s Evil Genius (Diversion Books) is available for commentary and discussion of Prohibition and the Roaring Twenties. The Bourbon King is the epic tale of “Bootleg King” George Remus, who from his Gatsby-like mansion in Cincinnati, created the largest illegal liquor ring in American history. In today’s money, Remus built a bourbon empire of some $5 to $7 billion in just two and a half years.
People all over the world know the name “Al Capone,” but without George Remus and his pipeline of Kentucky bourbon, there may never have been a Capone. Although largely forgotten today, Remus was one of the most famous men in American in the 1920s, including the shocking murder of his wife Imogene and subsequent high-stakes trial that set off a national sensation.
QUOTES:
George Remus: “My personal opinion had always been that the Volstead Act was an unreasonable, sumptuary law, and that it never could be enforced.”
George Remus: “I knew it [the Volstead Act] was as fragile as tissue paper.”
F. Scott Fitzgerald: “America was going on the grandest, gaudiest spree in history…The whole golden boom was in the air—its splendid generosities, its outrageous corruptions and the tortuous death struggle of the old America in prohibition.” From the essay “Early Success” (1937)
Bob Batchelor: “Prohibition turned ordinary citizens into criminals. Media attention turned some criminals into Jazz Age icons. At the top of the heap stood those few, like George Remus, who took advantage of the new illegal booze marketplace to gain untold power and riches.”
Bob Batchelor: “During Prohibition, ‘bathtub gin’ often contained substances that were undrinkable at best and deadly at worst. A band of rumrunners selling ‘Canadian’ whiskey were actually peddling toilet bowl cleaner. Tests on booze obtained in one raid revealed that the liquor contained a large volume of poison.”
Bob Batchelor: “Remus may have been singularly violent and dangerous, but his utter disregard for Prohibition put him in accord with how much of American society felt about the dry laws. Within the government, the lack of resolve for enforcing Prohibition started at the top with President Warren G. Harding and his corrupt administration.”
“Bob Batchelor’s The Bourbon King: The Life and Crimes of George Remus, Prohibition’s Evil Genius might as well be the outline of a Netflix or HBO series.”
– Washington Independent Review of Books
Two interviews that provide an overview conducted with national, well-respected interviewers:
https://www.iheart.com/podcast/53-history-author-show-27301458/episode/bob-batchelor-the-bourbon-king-49050931/
https://soundcloud.com/leonard-lopate/bob-batchelor-on-his-book-the-bourbon-king-about-infamous-bootlegger-george-remus-9319
ABOUT BOB BATCHELOR
C-SPAN 2’s Book TV:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?464406-1/the-bourbon-king
Bob Batchelor is a critically-acclaimed, bestselling cultural historian and biographer. He has published widely on American history and literature, including books on Stan Lee, Bob Dylan, The Great Gatsby, Mad Men, and John Updike. Bob earned his doctorate in English Literature from the University of South Florida. He teaches in the Media, Journalism & Film department at Miami University (Oxford, Ohio) and lives in Blue Ash, Ohio.
ABOUT THE BOURBON KING
Critics have called The Bourbon King "riveting," "definitive," and "rollicking," among other accolades. This is THE story of Jazz Age Criminal mastermind George Remus!
“The fantastic story of George Remus makes the rest of the ‘Roaring Twenties’ look like the ‘Boring Twenties’ in comparison. It’s all here: murder, mayhem—and high-priced hooch.”
—David Pietrusza, author of 1920: The Year of the Six Presidents
“Guns, ghosts, graft (and even Goethe) are all present in Bob Batchelor’s meticulous account of the life and times of the notorious George Remus. Brimming with liquor and lust, greed, and revenge, this entertaining book might make you reach for a good, stiff drink when you’re done.”
—Rosie Schaap, author of Drinking with Men
“The Bourbon King is a much-needed addition to the American mobster nonfiction bookshelf. For too long, George Remus has taken a backseat to his Prohibition-era gangster peers like Lucky Luciano and Al Capone. Read here about a man who intoxicated the nation with a near-endless supply of top-shelf Kentucky bourbon, and then got away with murder.”
—James Higdon, author of The Cornbread Mafia: A Homegrown Syndicate’s Code of Silence and the Biggest Marijuana Bust in American History
“Al Capone had nothing on George Remus, the true king of Prohibition. His life journey is fascinating, a Jazz Age cocktail that Bob Batchelor mixes for readers within these pages. Remus went from pharmacist to high-profile defense attorney to bourbon king to murderer.”
—Tom Stanton, author of Terror in the City of Champions: Murder, Baseball, and the Secret Society That Shocked Depression-Era Detroit
92 Years Ago Today -- George Remus Murders Imogene in Cincinnati's Eden Park
92 years ago in 1927, George Remus murdered his wife Imogene in Eden Park, just outside Cincinnati.
The gunshot that indian summer morning capped a tumultuous period of mayhem, betrayal, and embezzlement. The subsequent trial would be followed by millions worldwide!
The accompanying February 1928 insanity trial transcripts provide insight into what Remus thought about his wife and the murder.
Below is a portion of the February 1928 insanity hearing transcript. Remus answers questions about his early days with Imogene and admits that they engaged in “illicit relations.”
February 1928 insanity hearing transcript — George Remus answers questions about his early days with Imogene — “illicit relations”
Remus admits that he hoped to catch Imogene and Franklin Dodge together — so he could kill them both!
Remus admits that he hoped to catch Imogene and Franklin Dodge together — so he could kill them both!
George claimed he married Imogene to bring her up from poverty…and that she owed him as a result. The betrayal with Dodge was too much. The affair and that it became common knowledge in the criminal underworld, disgraced him, and — in his mind — forced action.
George claimed he married Imogene to bring her up from poverty…and that she owed him as a result. The betrayal with Dodge was too much…
Given his ability to manipulate juries, Remus declared he would defend himself, giving him direct access to the 12 people who held his life in their hands.
Given his ability to manipulate juries, Remus declared he would defend himself, giving him direct access to the 12 people who held his life in their hands.
Loving (and Hating) Rolling Stone
Rolling Stone is awesome and awful.
In the 1980s, growing up anywhere outside a major city meant limited -- or virtually zero -- access to things deemed cool. Rolling Stone provided a much-needed spiritual link to the world outside suburban or rural America, then dominated by cookie-cutter record stores and mainstream culture crafted in corporate boardrooms. Many small towns would not even allow MTV onto the ultra-conservative cable systems run by characters quite similar to John Lithgow in Footloose.
In a world of stifling conformity, Rolling Stone brought culture to the hinterlands in a big, oversized package. It served as a lifeline. The magazine not only covered popular culture, but actually defined culture in those pre-web days. Rolling Stone felt like contraband, passed around and through various high school cliques. That glimpse into the larger world seemed priceless.
Looking back, Rolling Stone provided culture-starved readers two things they could not get anywhere else: a portrait of artists as human beings, and because the covers and photographs were so good, the power of visual culture. We learned about R.E.M. and U2 via Rolling Stone and waited for the “Yearbook” and “Hot” issues to relish in the joys of the best photography we had ever seen.
In college, all these kids passing around Rolling Stone were tacking covers up on walls. Many images grew into iconic photos representing the age -- nearly naked Janet Jackson in black and white or the Nirvana album cover announcing a new sheriff in town about to wipe out hair metal and its inauthentic excesses.
Hating Rolling Stone is tough.
As an adult, reading Matt Taibbi on the Iraq War, its insider coverage of Great Recession wrongdoings, or historian Sean Wilentz’s celebrated takedown of President George H.W. Bush as the worst to ever hold the office provided new insight into the most important topics the nation faced. At the same time, though, these pieces and many more like them seemed to have little or no dent on the national conversation.
Back in all those small towns, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and conservative talk radio won the hearts and minds by railing against the kinds of things Rolling Stone seemed to embody. The magazine continued to preach to people already onboard with its agenda, its readers willingly surrendered the media battlefield to conservative forces. Rolling Stone did not rally people to stand up to the other side, which aggressively fought for the middle of the nation.
Losing relevance is one thing, but the many high-profile scandals takes Rolling Stone loathing to a different level. “A Rape on Campus,” published in November 2014 set off a nationwide uproar regarding sex crimes on college campuses, and sparked a much-needed dialogue. As a result, countless institutions set up new systems for reporting and dealing with these challenges. Yet, over the next several months, the story unraveled as The Washington Post and Charlottesville police determined that the gang rape never occurred. The hoax, which seems to have been an elaborate catfishing plot by the accuser, forced Rolling Stone to retract the story and apologize. The fabrication also set off a series of lawsuits that will keep the magazine in the news for all the wrong reasons for years to come.
Although lurching from 18 months of bad publicity, Rolling Stone again hit a nerve when it allowed actor/activist Sean Penn to secretly meet with and interview notorious fugitive/drug lord Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzmán. After a fierce gunfight, drug officials caught El Chapo prior to the long article running in Rolling Stone, but its seemingly empathetic tone thrust the magazine back into the negative spotlight.
The interview lit up social media, with heavy doses of mockery for Penn and the magazine, while journalists and journalism scholars debated the magazine’s willingness to run the piece and the ethical implications. The latter centered on Rolling Stone editors allowing El Chapo to approve the piece before publication, a violation of one of journalism’s most sacred tenets. Editor/publisher Jann Wenner seems to dismiss such criticism, despite the bad consequences he and the magazine he co-founded in 1967 faces.
Though not as nefarious as the big scandals, there is another reason to frown on the magazine’s influence on modern American journalism – the Rolling Stone-style profile. The RS “formula” is almost instantly recognizable: a mix of insider portrait/anecdote, gossip, astute observation, and snarky commentary. The pervasiveness of the too-cool-for-school voice is a stalwart of entertainment reporting. My reaction to the model is that it can be either a.) somewhat humorous, or b.) provoke an I-just-threw-up-a-little-in-my-mouth moment.
"The Rolling Stone-style profile. The RS “formula” is almost instantly recognizable: a mix of insider portrait/anecdote, gossip, astute observation, and snarky commentary. The pervasiveness of the too-cool-for-school voice is a stalwart of entertainment reporting."
Rolling Stone’s coverage of David Bowie following his recent death provides good examples of the RS formula. For example, Brian Hiatt’s “The Final Years,” begins with an on-the-scene portrait of Bowie seemingly experiencing his first major health crisis, the 2004 heart attack while on stage in Prague. This kind of breathless insider info, even covering the profile’s internal thinking (“he found himself struggling for breath”), is now routine in entertainment pieces. We see this in the almost mandatory description of where the reporter and interviewee met for lunch and what he or she ate and wore.
Mikal Gilmore’s profile of Bowie’s life and influence is even more formulaic, bouncing between solid criticism and too-smart-by-half interjections purposely designed to establish the writer’s superiority over the uncultured, unknowing reader. In discussing the singer’s The Man Who Sold the World (1970), Gilmore astutely explains it “was a strange, paranoid and philosophical album. Bowie was now working largely in electric rock & roll -- hard and dissonant, and not quite like anybody else’s.”
However, the RS formula necessitates that commercial success be downplayed at the expense of “artistic” work. Gilmore calls Bowie’s post-Let’s Dance (1983) global superstardom “a confusing creative trail” that resulted in “indifferent-sounding albums…that met with little esteem.” For Gilmore, the singer redeems himself after Black Tie White Noise (1993), which led to “a series of ambitious, occasionally brilliant, albums.”
The conundrum seemingly always on hand for Rolling Stone writers is how to tone down the thing that makes an entertainer popular, which is the reason they are being profiled, while also balancing the insider snapshots and snarky criticisms. Because the magazine gained wide popularity in the 1960s and 1970s, when many journalism professors studied or were working professionals, they have passed this formula down to two generations of writers. The result is a wildfire of mechanical pieces all within the Rolling Stone guise. Very little is gained or learned, because the formula demands little of the writer or subject. It’s not writing; it’s patchwork. Unfortunately, the formula is now at the center of all entertainment -- we see it in reality television and many mainstream films and novels. There is little to challenge the audience, because the formula is ubiquitous.
Rolling Stone stands at a crossroad for many readers. Is it possible to stay in love with a magazine that meant so much, but now seems to be slipping out of touch? For countless readers, Rolling Stone helped create and construct a worldview and provided something that at one time seemed exotic and exciting. Perhaps it is time to throw it out with the nostalgic bathwater.