Monday, January 02, 2017

Benchley Tonight: Inspiration for the new year in "A Little Sermon on Success"

>

As I mentioned right before Christmas, in this Holiday-Plus Season I've had it mind to bring back to bring back some of the treasure collection of pieces I presented way back when in the "Thurber (et al.) Tonight" series. As I pointed out, although last year I did in fact resurrect two pieces, both by the great Robert Benchley, "How to Get Things Done" in June and "Comedy Tonight: 'Why We Laugh -- or Do We?': Another 'Benchley Tonight' Resurrection" (in August), not only did we not get to any Thurber, we didn't even get to what's probably my all-time favorite Benchley piece, "A Little Semon on Success." Let's at least plug that gap tonight! -- Ken



Benchley made a bunch of these wacky short films, a number of which I'm pleased to see have turned up on YouTube.


"I take Life as it comes, and although I grouse a great deal and sometimes lie on the floor and kick and scream and refuse to eat my supper, I find that taking Life as it comes is the only way to meet it. It isn't a very satisfactory way, but it is the only way. (I should be very glad to try any other way that anyone can suggest. I certainly am sick of this one.)"
-- Robert Benchley, in "A Little Sermon on Success"

BACK IN 2011 I WROTE BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION: Following our initial foray last night into the, shall we say, singularly dimensioned world of Robert Benchley, "The Five (or Maybe Six) Year Plan," we have now his -- and perhaps, I think, anyone's -- definitive statement on the subject of success, or rather Success, and even disposing (as you can see in the bit I've extracted above) of Life. This is another of those pieces I've spent ages trying to cherry-pick or synopsize or paraphrase. It just doesn't work, though. The piece really needs to be, as it were, swallowed whole. -- Ken

Read more »

Labels: ,

Saturday, December 24, 2016

Just in time for the holidays: Your comprehensive-ish guide to "Thurber (et al.) Tonight" (the whole dang series)

>

Including Woody Allen, Robert Benchley, Bob and Ray, Will Cuppy, Wolcott Gibbs, Ring Lardner, S. J. Perelman, Jean Shepherd, and E. B. White Tonight


All I asked Santa for was a better picture of the great Will Cuppy; the one I've been using looks like it was taken clandestinely while he was in the Witness Protection program. However, given my lack of faith in the fat phony, I wasn't optimistic that he'd come through, so I went searching on my own once again, and once again my Google Images search for "Will Cuppy" yielded the swell pix of Will Rogers and Ring Lardner which somehow always turn up, and once again I had to decide, with heavy heart, that no, they wouldn't really fill the gap better than what we've got. But then the above image turned up, and I figured that since it purports to be part of a book cover, the chap portrayed therein must actually be our Will. I have to say, though, that this pic creeps the dickens out of me, and so I don't think I'll be popping it into the Will Cuppy slot below. I think I'm actually going to be trying to forget I ever saw it. Sheesh!

by Ken

You look around and see all those decked halls, then close your eyes and hear all that fa-la-la-la-la-ing, and almost instantly you know something's up, am I right? Or else you read Noah's post last night, "Profiles In Cowardice: The Electoral College," and noticed that it's also Part 1 of his annual, er, tribute to the outgoing year, this time out: "2016: America Off The Rails."

That's right, it's the Holiday Season!

Okay, okay, I know it's been going on since about Columbus Day, if not Labor Day, and tonight is already Christmas Eve, for Bill O'Reilly's sake! I believe in letting the damned thing sneak up on me, so sneakily that with any luck it's almost past before it announces its presence. In a week or so we'll be ushering in a new year, and then begins the Countdown to Inauguration Day. And then we're on to wishing for a minimum of four more good years for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

So in the holiday spirit, or at least what passes for it hereabouts, I'm looking to slip into the DWT schedule some of what Tom and Ray Magliozzi, the Car Talk guys, liked to bill as "encore presentations" of memorable shows, which they hastened to explain were really things they pulled more or less randomly out of a box of old tapes. Naturally I never believed they were chosen entirely at random -- after all, there had to be some reason why those particular tapes were in that particular box, right? 


And I'm not going to be choosing entirely randomly either. On the theory that along about now we could all use a few laughs, and also because it's one of the things i'm proudest of having done, I'm planning to dig into the "Thurber (et al.) Tonight" series I did here way back in some previous century.

Earlier this year I did perform a couple of resurrections from the series. There was a June post called "Having trouble getting things done? Learn from the master, the great Robert Benchley," which brought back a piece I think of just about every day, "How to Get Things Done." (Short version: "The psychological principle is this: anyone can do any amount of work, provided it isn't the work he is supposed to be doing at that moment.") Then in August I felt the itch again, and again it was a Benchley piece I had to bring back, in a post called "Comedy Tonight: 'Why We Laugh -- or Do We?': Another 'Benchley Tonight' Resurrection."

And I didn't even get (back) to what may be my very favorite Benchley piece, "A Little Sermon on Success." (As noted in the comprehensive-ish listing below -- "comprehensive-ish" in that I can't help feeling that I've missed an instance or two here or there -- you can find it here.) Not to mention the sublime "My Five- (or Maybe Six-) Year Plan." And . . . .

And no Thurber encore presentations at all! Yikes!

So I've cooked up this scheme for the holiday season (and perhaps the January slump season as well) to find post slots where I can slip in some especially cherished posts from these revered masters, and maybe some suggested "must reads" from among the stuff of theirs that was previously presented, at least until Howie cries out, "Please stop already!"

But, first things first (not my usual practice, as readers may be aware), I thought we would start with the comprehensive-ish listing itself. This is essentially unchanged from the version to which I have been providing a link since time immemorial. The one change I contemplated was to be able to pop in, finally, a better picture of Will Cuppy, but as noted in the photo caption above, that project came to a creepier-than-dead end.


And so, without further ado, excepting one tiny click-through --


Read more »

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, August 28, 2016

Comedy Tonight: "Why We Laugh -- or Do We?": Another "Benchley Tonight" resurrection

>


Benchley attempts to introduce a man "who needs no introduction," in The Sky's the Limit.


"Incidentally, by the time you have the 'humor' analyzed, it will be found that the necessity for laughing has been relieved."
-- Robert Benchley, in "Why We Laugh -- or Do We?"

by Ken

Somehow the idea has gotten around that we're living in a Golden Age of Comedy -- sometimes known, I gather, as the Age of Apatow, not just in movies but on TV (cf. the abominable Grrlz). As far as I can tell, the overriding principle of comedy in this golden age is that it's never funny. It never seems to obligate, or even prompt, the audience to laugh, or even smile just a little. Take a shower, perhaps, but laugh, not so much.

Okay, you got me, I watched three or four episodes of Vice Principals before shaking loose. But I really don't want to write about that experience, at least not just now. It's bound to lead to the hurling around of words like "abomination," and that's no more fun for me than it would be for you. Maybe it would be therapeutic to note that actual comedy, of the time-honored funny sort, hasn't entirely disappeared. In fact, as I've rewatched selected episodes of CBS's Life in Pieces, I've been appreciating them more fully because funny as a lot of it always seemed, a lot of it becomes that much funnier the better you know the characters. (Imagine, a comedy that's character-driven! In a DVD commentary for The Mary Tyler Moore Show, co-creator Allan Burns explained that in the creation and running of the show, this was a major sticking point with the network people, who couldn't grasp the idea of a show that instead of jokes relied on comedy that developed out of the characters and the situations they were put in.)

Not long ago I found myself dialoguing after a fashion with quite a well-known writer who was advancing the proposition that "farts are funny." Not, mind you, as I would be happy to agree, that under certain circumstances it's possible that a fart could be funny. No, the announced principle was, simply: Farts are funny. In the same online, er, discussion, another theorist of comedy announced that it's about shock, which would explain once and for all why we so often use the word "shocking" as a synonym for "funny."

And that leads me straight to the Robert Benchley piece I'm resurrecting today, 'Why We Laugh -- or Do We?" A couple of months ago I did another resurrection from my long-running "Comedy Tonight" series, which began, reflecting my personal comedic pantheon, as "Thurber Tonight," and came to include, listed alphabetically, Woody Allen, Bob and Ray, Will Cuppy, Wolcott Gibbs, Ring Lardner, S. J. Perelman, Jean Shepherd, and E. B. White and that too was a Benchley piece, the sublime "How to Get Things Done" ("Having trouble getting things done? Learn from the master, the great Robert Benchley") I would note, by the way, that among these worthies, the laff-riot subject of farting rarely came up, the possible exception being Jean Shepherd, who however would certainly have insisted on the, um, situationality of the laugh, since Jean's comic genius was compulsively situational -- anyone who listened to any of his radio programs knows how fanatically -- and hilariously -- he worked to set up the situations he proceeded to uncork.

It's probably just a coincidence that it's Benchley who's once again calling out to me amid the raging of the non-comedy wars, but there we have it. It's impossible to dabble in theories of comedy without acknowledging that Benchley's been there, done that. And so, without further preamble, I re-offer this "Benchley Tonight" post from Jan. 23, 2011.

Again, the master listing for "THURBER TONIGHT (now including BENCHLEY TONIGHT)" can be found here.

"Why We Laugh -- or Do We?" (1937) is another Benchley piece I've quoted from and/or tried to paraphrase about a million times, especially the "five cardinal rules" we have to "check up on" before "giving in" to a joke, like "(3) It must be about something. You can't just say, 'Here's a good joke' and let it go at that. (You can, but don't wait for the laugh.)." Note: Max Eastman's 1936 book Enjoyment of Laughter was the proximate "inspiration" for this piece. -- Ken

Why We Laugh—or Do We?

(Let's Get This Thing Settled, Mr. Eastman)

IN ORDER TO LAUGH at something, it is necessary (1) to know what you are laughing at, (2) to know why you are laughing, (3) to ask some people why they think you are laughing, (4) to jot down a few notes, (5) to laugh. Even then, the thing may not be cleared up for days.

Read more »

Labels: ,

Wednesday, June 22, 2016

Having trouble getting things done? Learn from the master, the great Robert Benchley

>

Harking back to our comedy nights with Benchley plus James Thurber, Woody Allen, Bob and Ray, Will Cuppy, Wolcott Gibbs, Ring Lardner, S. J. Perelman, Jean Shepherd, and E. B. White


"The secret of my incredible energy and efficiency in getting work done is a simple one. I have based it very deliberately on a well-known psychological principle and have refined it so that it is now almost too refined. I shall have to begin coarsening it up again pretty soon.

"The psychological principle is this: anyone can do any amount of work, provided it isn't the work he is supposed to be doing at that moment."

-- Robert Benchley, in "How to Get Things Done"

by Ken

Today, a long-delayed labor of love: the resurrection of a series that was itself a prolonged labor of love, running here in the late-night slot -- for which, in fact, the late-night slot was invented -- over a long and fondly remembered period. It started with Thurber but then went on to include all the names you see above. And in resurrecting it, the name that has crowded to the forefront of my consciousness is that of the great Robert Benchley, specifically in the form of the piece we're about to revisit: "How to Get Things Done," which was first published in the Chicago Tribune in 1930 and first appeared here as a "Benchley Tonight" post in January 2011.

Lately I've been trying to get bits of my life in order, or at any rate a bit more in order, and have had frequent occasion to talk about this as well, frequently with other people trying to do the same thing with their lives. As a result, I've had frequent occasion to try to synopsize this all-but-definitive treatise on how really and truly to get things done -- the secret, as our Bob puts it, to "how I manage to get so much work done and still keep looking so dissipated." By the way, I tried unsuccessfully to track down a picture of our Bob "riding to hounds" or "going to fancy-dress balls disguised as Louis XIV"; there don't seem to have been photographers present on these occasions.

So there was no question in my mind that of all the thousands of sublime pieces that appeared in this series, "How to Get Things Done" is the one for which present-day readers are likely to have the most urgent need. The master list for the series, by the way, can still be found here.



Now let's get down to business -- or, rather, business Benchley-style.


How to Get Things Done

by Robert Benchley

A GREAT MANY PEOPLE have come up to me and asked me how I manage to get so much work done and still keep looking so dissipated. My answer is "Don't you wish you knew?" and a pretty good answer it is, too, when you consider that nine times out of ten I didn't hear the original question.

But the fact remains that hundreds of thousands of people throughout the country are wondering how I have time to do all my painting, engineering, writing and philanthropic work when, according to the rotogravure sections and society notes I spend all my time riding to hounds, going to fancy-dress balls disguised as Louis XIV or spelling out GREETINGS TO CALIFORNIA in formation with three thousand Los Angeles school children. "All work and all play," they say.

The secret of my incredible energy and efficiency in getting work done is a simple one. I have based it very deliberately on a well-known psychological principle and have refined it so that it is now almost too refined. I shall have to begin coarsening it up again pretty soon.

The psychological principle is this: anyone can do any amount of work, provided it isn't the work he is supposed to be doing at that moment.

Read more »

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, July 11, 2015

Three views of success -- from Dilbert's Wally, Tyrell Wellick (of "Mr. Robot"), and the great Robert Benchley

>

DILBERT by Scott Adams
July 9: "Hard Work Is Necessary For Success"


[Click to enlarge.]

"I take Life as it comes, and although I grouse a great deal and sometimes lie on the floor and kick and scream and refuse to eat my supper, I find that taking Life as it comes is the only way to meet it. It isn't a very satisfactory way, but it is the only way. (I should be very glad to try any other way that anyone can suggest. I certainly am sick of this one.)"
-- Robert Benchley, in "A Little Sermon on Success"

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. But give a man a bank and he can rob the world."
-- Tyrell Wellick (Martin Wallström), interim CTO of
E Corp., in last week's episode of USA's Mr. Robot

by Ken

As I think I've made abundantly clear, Dilbert's Wally is for me both a cultural hero and a role model. (See "Long-Run Planning Watch: Finally somebody asks, 'What is this "long run" people keep harping about?'," March 19, and "Dilberft Watch: The fall and rise of Wally -- When one door closes, maybe some crazy window opens?," March 28.) Now, suddenly, coming almost out of nowhere, we have Wally on Success.

As suggested, it didn't come quite out of nowhere. Thursday's strip came out of Wednesday's, with poor clueless Asok demonstrating his cluelessness by listening to Wally on . . . well, on pretty much anything.

July 8: "Attendance Strategy"

[Click to enlarge.]

If there's any consolation, it's that poor Asok would be paralyzingly unlikely to be able to take any real advantage of advice way better than this.


(2) TYRELL WELLICK FROM MR. ROBOT



Our second authority on success is Tyrell Wellick (Swedish actor Martin Wallström) from USA Network's Mr. Robot, who as suspected (see my Tuesday "TV Watch" post, "Mr. Robot brings us yet another of those fiendishly world-conquering villains from Scandinavia") came into his own in Wednesday's Episode 3. Tyrell himself describes the mot I've quoted at the top of this post as "a bit of a sillly expression," a bit "reductive." Even so, he likes it.
To me it means that power belongs to the people that take it. Nothing to do with their hard work, strong ambitions, or rightful qualifications, no. The actual will to take is often the only thing that's necessary.
Noted, Tyrell, noted.


AND FINALLY: (3) THE GREAT ROBERT BENCHLEY

Some time ago I did a fairly long-running nightly series devoted to great American comic writing, which grew out of an extensive "Thurber Tonight" project. The "Thurber (et al.) Tonight" series eventually came to include Woody Allen, Robert Benchley, Bob and Ray, Will Cuppy, Wolcott Gibbs, Ring Lardner, S. J. Perelman, Jean Shepherd, and E. B. White, and I wish I had figured some way of enabling it to live, because a serious chunk of my soul went into those pieces (the index is here) -- and nothing in the series more than the pieces by the great Robert Benchley.

Among the more than a dozen Benchley pieces included, with all due respect to the sublime "My Five- (or Maybe Six-) Year Plan" and "How to Get Things Done" -- and, oh yes, "Why We Laugh -- or Do We?" -- there's no Benchley piece I treasure more than "A Little Sermon on Success."

In presenting it, I wrote:
Following our initial foray last night into the, shall we say, singularly dimensioned world of Robert Benchley, "The Five (or Maybe Six) Year Plan," we have now his -- and perhaps, I think, anyone's -- definitive statement on the subject of success, or rather Success, and even disposing (as you can see in the bit I've extracted above) of Life. This is another of those pieces I've spent ages trying to cherry-pick or synopsize or paraphrase. It just doesn't work, though. The piece really needs to be, as it were, swallowed whole.
Again, you can read the whole piece here. For our purposes, though, I can say that eventually our Bob spins one of literature's most peculiar fables, concerning "a very, very brave Knight who had a very, very definite yen for a beautiful Princess who lived in a far-away castle (very, very far away, i mean" and "a Magician who could do wonders with a rabbit" -- and also, eventually, the Princess's not-previously-mentioned husband ("who, it must be admitted, was a little disappointed at the way things had turned out").

Beyond that, you'll have to read the thing for yourself, and I can't encourage you heartily enoough to do so. The point is . . . well, let's let Master Robert explain it:
Now, this little fable shows us that Success may be one of two things: first, getting what we want; and, second, not getting what we want. [Emphasis added. -- Ed.]

It was Voltaire who is reported to have said: "Plus ça change -- plus ça reste," meaning, "There isn't much sense in doing anything these days." Perhaps it wasn't Voltaire, and perhaps that isn't what the French means; but the angle is right.

Can you say the same of yourself?
I don't know about you folks, but I sure can't, Bob (if I may).
#

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Wolcott Gibbs Tonight: "Robert Benchley: In Memoriam"

>


by Ken

Last night we got a glimpse of one of The New Yorker's most important -- and yet today little-known -- writers and editors, Wolcott Gibbs, and I promised that at some point we would get more than last night's brief sampling of his own voice. I've picked out a piece called "The Mantle of Comstock," about the way self-styled guardians of morality go about imposing their often-crackpot views, which he wrote in his capacity as theater critic of The New Yorker. For tonight I thought we would back up a bit, to the piece he wrote for the New York Times following the death of Robert Benchley (yes, our own Robert Benchley), whom he had succeeded as New Yorker theater critic in 1938.

For starters I've picked out a piece called "The Mantle of Comstock," about the actual mechanics by which religiously inspired self-appointed guardians of public morality do their dirty work of attempting to impose their phony-baloney "morality" on normal people. Since it was written in Gibbs's capacity as New Yorker theater critic, I thought for tonight we would back up and look at a piece he wrote on the occasion of the passing of his predecessor in the job. I love this piece, if only for the opening anecdote.


TO READ GIBBS'S "ROBERT BENCHLEY:
IN MEMORIAM," CLICK HERE



SUNDAY in WOLCOTT GIBBS TONIGHT: "The Mantle of Comstock"


THURBER TONIGHT (including BENCHLEY TONIGHT,
WILL CUPPY TONIGHT, and now WOLCOTT GIBBS TONIGHT):
Check out the series to date

#

Labels: ,

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Benchley Tonight: "One Set of French Dishes"

>

"I don't suppose that anyone would be sending me a bbl. of beer, because it is pretty well known around France that I don't drink. Certainly not French beer."
-- Benchley, in "One Set of French Dishes"

In our first "Benchley Tonight" piece, "My Five- (or Maybe Six-) Year Plan," I recalled the line from Thurber's "Preface to a Life" (the preface to My Life and Hard Times) in which he includes among possible crippling worries for a writer of his sort "the suspicion that a piece he has been working on for two long days was done much better and probably more quickly by Robert Benchley in 1924."

We've already had Thurber's "Joyeux Noël, Mr. Durning," one of my very favorite Thurber pieces, his record of the increasingly mad correspondence that ensued after he and his wife received notification from U.S. Customs of seizure of "(1) bottle -- 1/5 gal. size -- Alc. Liqueur" sent to them in innocence of the flagrant legal breach by their onetime Russo-French vacation cook and gardener on the French Riviera, Maria and Olympy Sementzoff, fondly remembered from Thurber's chronicle of the famous "Ride With Olympy." I can't help thinking that even as Thurber was contemplating re-creating and assembling the raw materials of "Joyeux Noël, Mr. Durning," somewhere in the back of his head there was a recollection of this Benchley piece, "One Set of French Dishes." -- Ken

One Set of
French Dishes

Last summer when I was in France, doing my bit with the other American visitors to create ill-will among the natives and hasten the outbreak of the Big Franco-American War, I bought a set of dishes. They were just simple earthenware dishes, such as used to have '"For a Good Dog" lettered on them, but as they were made in a little town up back in the mountains near the Mediterranean, they seemed to be rather smart. They cost something like three cents apiece and were a bright blue. I now think that we made a mistake in buying them.

As there were perhaps forty pieces in all, including a large bowl which the old man said was for soup, it seemed impractical to try to jam them all in a trunk with the rest of the knickknacks and even less practical to carry them in our hands with our umbrellas and everything. So we asked the old man if he would think up some way of putting them in a barrel and sending them to America by freight. He said "Oui, oui!" which we figured out to mean that he would. And he evidently did.

That was three months ago. Today I got a notice from the Custom House saying that there was a bbl. on the good ship "Hannoy" for me. The only bbl. that I can think of which would take a ship like the "Hannoy" is a bbl. of dishes. I don't suppose that anyone would be sending me a bbl. of beer, because it is pretty well known around France that I don't drink. Certainly not French beer. The notice said for me to put my things right on and come down to the dock and claim my goods, otherwise they couldn't answer for what would happen to the bbl. But somehow I don't think that I will.

For in the same mail came a big, official-looking sheet, colored orange, with lots of stamps on it and about six hundred and fifty thousand French words closely printed. It says at the top "Compagnie Française de Navigation à Vapeur" and that means, according to a very hasty translation which I have thrown together, "French Company of Navigation to Steam." These French are very quick at picking up new inventions and here is Robert Fulton scarcely cold in his grave before we find them navigating to steam. The rest of the document is not so clear.

The only typewritten words on the sheet are "Hannoy" and "1 caisse poterie rustique." This evidently means my dishes. But the rest of the reading-matter is rather cryptic. There is so much of it, in the first place, and, at the bottom, it says that "le chargeur" (which must be I, unless it is the old man in Biotte) declares to have taken cognizance of the clauses printed above and accepts them. (All this is in French, mind you, but I get that part all right.) I am not so sure, however, that I want to accept the clauses printed above.

In the first place, as I read it over, the whole thing seems to be a threat. I have evidently placed myself under suspicion by shipping a bbl. of "poterie rustique" to America. Spelling out the words in my rough, untutored way, I seem to detect a great many penalties. I don't know whether the French penalize you merely for shipping goods to another country, but I wouldn't put it past them. Mind you, I think that the Germans treated the French very badly in 1914 and I never had any use for the Kaiser, but I would not put it past the French to slip in a dirty penalty now and then if they got a chance. And on this orange bill-of-lading of mine, I seem to detect a slight plot to have my head cut off in the Place de la Concorde.

Under a paragraph marked "Clause penale" I make out several words which lead me to believe that if I go down to the dock to claim my goods I make myself liable to life-imprisonment and the amputation of one leg. This may be wrong, but that's the way I translate it. I am not so sure about its being a leg that I am to have amputated, and I am not so sure that, if it is a leg, I am to have it amputated, but it sounds like that. Now I am not going down to any dock just for a bbl. of dishes and run into anything like that. And I am certain about the other phrase being "life-imprisonment." That is enough in itself.

The word "fret" keeps occurring in practically every sentence, and, while I am not silly enough to think that it really means what the English word "fret" means, it has an ugly sound nevertheless. According to this document, my fret has to be examined and, if it doesn't suit the fret-examiners, the Tribune de Commerce de Marseille will meet in a body and decide what to do with it. As I make it out they can take my fret and either (a) burn it, (b) drown it or (c) eat it themselves. This is going to make it very awkward for me, not even knowing what my fret is. Furthermore, I can't be running over to Marseilles and back every few days just to answer questions for their old Tribune de Commerce. If they want to examine my fret, they can come over here and do it. I am a busy man.

There seem to be other clauses in my bill-of-lading which would indicate that I would just be a fool to go anywhere near the freight dock after those dishes. Under the head of Litiges, which ought to mean something about litigation, I find that a lot of talk is made about an item called "avaries." In case there happens to be an avarie in your fret you are in for all kinds of trouble and may possibly have to live on the second floor of the Custom House all the rest of your life. At least, that is what the French would seem to say.

Now I don't know what avaries are, but it looks to me as if they were either misers or bird-houses. By a process of elimination we may decide that there probably wouldn't be any misers in a shipment of goods from Southern France, not because there aren't any misers in Southern France but because they most likely could not be induced to get into a crate for such a long trip. So we may safely say that avaries are not misers. (It would be just the way things work out now for me to get down to the dock and find a whole bunch of misers hidden in among my dishes.) But it is much more likely that avaries are bird-houses, with birds in them. And if anyone is so unfortunate as to have a bird-house discovered in his bill of goods, he is, according to this paper, as good as in chains right there.

I have no reason to suppose that the old man in Biotte slipped any bird-houses in my pottery when he was packing it, but how am I to know? He was a pretty nasty old man and didn't like me at all. I remember now that when I asked him if the tea-cups were to hang in the window with ferns in them, he gave me a very dirty look and I thought at the time, "If there is anything that Grandpa can do to make things hard for you, he is going to do it." Now what would be simpler than for him to have put a bird-house right in with that big soup-tureen, knowing very well that it would cause me trouble? All French potters who use marine freight at all must know this orange-colored sheet backward and must know that anyone caught with a bird-house (or miser) in his shipment is going to be subjected to all the indignities which the Code de Procédure Civile can think up. He could have fitted the bird-house with a set of love-birds or parrakeets which would be very noisy and call attention to themselves the minute the fret-investigators came anywhere near them. He might even have put in a parrot which would scream out, "Look, look! Here I am!" or "Avarie! avarie!" He could have done anything, and the more I think about the way he looked at me the more I think that he probably did.

So I think that I will just tuck the orange sheet and the notice from the freight office in the back of my drawer and forget about them. The men on the dock can probably find some use for my dishes, although I doubt if they would like them so blue. We really have enough dishes at home already and another set would not be worth all the penalties that I would be liable to by claiming them. I have several more years left before I have to start walking with a cane, and I don't want to spend them on the second floor of the Marseilles Custom House or languishing in a French jail.

Just for curiosity's sake, however, I must look up and see whether avaries are misers or bird-houses.


TOMORROW and SATURDAY NIGHTS: Sunday Classics previews -- Valerie Masterson et al. sing from Gounod's Faust

SUNDAY NIGHT: Well, that would be telling


THURBER TONIGHT (including BENCHLEY TONIGHT):
Check out the series to date

#

Labels: ,

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Benchley Tonight: "Ask That Man"

>

I guess that there are a great many men
who share my dislike for it.

"The man's dread is probably that of making himself appear a pest or ridiculously uninformed. The woman's insistence is based probably on experience which has taught her that anyone, no matter who, knows more about things in general than her husband."
-- Benchley, in "Ask That Man"
I don't know how we haven't gotten yet to "Ask That Man" in "Benchley Tonight." It's sort of the quintessential Benchley piece. -- Ken

"Ask That
Man"

THIS IS WRITTEN FOR THOSE MEN who have wives who are constantly insisting on their asking questions of officials.

For years I was troubled with the following complaint: Just as soon as we started out on a trip of any kind, even if it were only to the corner of the street, Doris began forcing me to ask questions of people. If we weren't quite sure of the way: "Why don't you ask that man? He could tell you." If there was any doubt as to the best place to go to get chocolate ice-cream, she would say, "Why don't you ask that boy in uniform? He would be likely to know."

I can't quite define my aversion to asking questions of strangers. From snatches of family battles which I have heard drifting up from railway stations and street corners, I gather that there are a great many men who share my dislike for it, as well as an equal number of women who, like Doris, believe it to be the solution of most of this world's problems. The man's dread is probably that of making himself appear a pest or ridiculously uninformed. The woman's insistence is based probably on experience which has taught her that anyone, no matter who, knows more about things in general than her husband.

Furthermore, I never know exactly how to begin a request for information. If I preface it with, "I beg your pardon!" the stranger is likely not to hear, especially if he happens to be facing in another direction, for my voice isn't very reliable in crises and sometimes makes no intelligible sound at all until I have been talking for fully a minute. Often I say, "I beg your pardon!" and he turns quickly and says, "What did you say?" Then I have to repeat, "I beg your pardon!" and he asks, quite naturally, "What for?" Then I am stuck. Here I am, begging a perfect stranger's pardon, and for no apparent reason under the sun. The wonder is that I am not knocked down oftener.

My voice isn't very reliable in crises.

It was to avoid going through life under this pressure that I evolved the little scheme detailed herewith. It cost me several thousand dollars, but Doris is through with asking questions of outsiders.

We had started on a little trip to Boston. I could have found out where the Boston train was in a few minutes had I been left to myself. But Doris never relies on the signs. Someone must be asked, too, just to make sure. Confronted once by a buckboard literally swathed in banners which screamed in red letters, "This bus goes to the State Fair Grounds," I had to go up to the driver (who had on his cap a flag reading "To the State Fair Grounds") and ask him if this bus surely went to the State Fair Grounds. He didn't even answer me.

So when Doris said, "Go and ask that man where the Boston train leaves from," I gritted my teeth and decided that the time had come. Simulating conversation with him, I really asked him nothing, and returned to Doris, saying, "Come on. He says it goes from Track 10."

Eight months later we returned home. The train that left on Track 10 was the Chicago Limited, which I had taken deliberately. In Chicago I again falsified what "the man" told me, and instead of getting on the train back to New York we went to Little Rock, Arkansas. Every time I had to ask where the best hotel was, I made up information which brought us out into the suburbs, cold and hungry. Many nights we spent wandering through the fields looking for some place that never existed, or else in the worst hotel in town acting on what I said was the advice of "that kind-looking man in uniform."

From Arkansas, we went into Mexico, and once, guided by what I told her had been the directions given me by the man at the news-stand in Vera Cruz, we made a sally into the swamps of Central America, or whatever that first republic is on the way south. After that, Doris began to lose faith in what strange men could tell us. One day, at a little station in Mavicos, I said, "Wait a minute, till I ask that man what is the best way to get back into America," and she said sobbing, "Don't ask anybody. Just do what you think is best." Then I knew that the fight was over. In ten days I had her limp form back in New York and from that day to this she hasn't once suggested that I ask questions of a stranger.

The funny part of it is, I constantly find myself asking them. I guess the humiliation came in being told to ask.


TOMORROW -- BENCHLEY TONIGHT: "One Set of French Dishes"


THURBER TONIGHT (including BENCHLEY TONIGHT):

Labels:

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Benchley Tonight: "The Sunday Menace"

>

I really have no remedy for Sunday afternoons.

"Personally, a little slump in business would not be too great a price for me to pay for having Sunday fall on Saturday, but I don't suppose that I could sell the idea to many of you money-mad Americans. I may have to be a lone pioneer in the thing and perhaps be jeered at as Fulton was jeered at. All right, go ahead and jeer."
-- Benchley, in "The Sunday Menace"

"The Sunday Menace" was written long before the NFL took over America's Sunday afternoons, which in a way kind of proves the point. First, look how many decades of operation it took for the NFL to become a force on Sunday. Second, consider that all this time Sunday afternoon was there to be taken over -- and still is, for people who aren't football fans, and for that matter all for all those other Sundays the rest of the year. -- Ken

The Sunday
Menace

I am not a gloomy man by nature, nor am I easily depressed. I always say that, no matter how much it looks as if the sun were never going to stop shining and no matter how long the birds carry on their seemingly incessant chatter, there is always a good sleet storm just around the corner and a sniffly head cold in store for those who will only look for it. You can't keep Old Stepmother Nature down for long.

But I frankly see no way out of the problem of Sunday afternoon. For centuries Sunday afternoon has been Old Nell's Curse among the days of the week. Sunday morning may be cheery enough, with its extra cup of coffee and litter of Sunday newspapers, but there is always hanging over it the ominous threat of 3 P.M., when the sun gets around to the back windows and Life stops dead in its tracks. No matter where you are -- in China, on the high seas, or in a bird's nest -- about 3 o'clock in the afternoon a pall descends over all the world and people everywhere start trying to think of something to do. You might as well try to think of something to do in the death house at Sing Sing, however, because, even if you do it, where does it get you? It is still Sunday afternoon.

The Blue Jeebs begin to drift in along about dessert at Sunday dinner. The last three or four spoonfuls of ice cream somehow lose their flavor and you begin crumbling up your cake instead of eating it. By the time you have finished coffee there is a definite premonition that before long, maybe in 40 or 50 minutes, you will be told some bad news, probably involving the death of several favorite people, maybe even yourself. This feeling gives way to one of resignation. What is there to live for, anyway? At this point, your dessert begins to disagree with you.

On leaving the dining room and wandering aimlessly into the living room (living room, indeed; there will be precious little living done in that room this afternoon), everyone begins to yawn. The drifts of Sunday papers on the floor which looked so cozy before dinner now are just depressing reminders of the transitory nature of human life. Uncle Ben makes for the sofa and promptly drops off into an unattractive doze. The children start quarreling among themselves and finally involve the grownups in what threatens to be a rather nasty brawl.

"Why don't you go out and play?" someone asks.

"Play what?" is their retort, and a good one, too.

This brings up the whole question of what to do and there is a half-hearted attempt at thinking on the part of the more vivacious members of the party. Somebody goes to the window and looks out. He goes back to his chair, and somebody else wanders over to another window and looks out there, pressing the nose against the pane and breathing absent-mindedly against the glass. This has practically no effect on the situation.

In an attempt to start conversation, a garrulous one says, ' 'Heigh-ho!" This falls flat, and there is a long silence while you look through the pile of newspapers to see if you missed anything in the morning's perusal. You even read the ship news and the book advertisements.

"This life of Susan B. Anthony looks as if it might be a pretty good book," you say.

"What makes you think so?" queries Ed crossly. Ed came out to dinner because he was alone in town, and now wishes he hadn't. He is already thinking up an excuse to get an early train back.

There being no good reason why you think that the life of Susan B. Anthony might be interesting, you say nothing. You didn't really think that it might be interesting, anyway.

A walk is suggested, resulting in groans from the rest of the group. The idea of bridge arouses only two out of the necessary four to anything resembling enthusiasm. The time for the arrival of Bad News is rapidly approaching and by now it is pretty fairly certain to involve death. The sun strikes in through the window and you notice that the green chair needs reupholstering. The rug doesn't look any too good, either. What's the use, though? There would be no sense in getting a lot of new furniture when everyone is going to be dead before long, anyway.

It is a funny thing about the quality of the sunshine on a Sunday afternoon. On other days it is just sunshine and quite cheery in its middle class way. But on Sunday afternoon it takes on a penetrating harshness which does nothing but show up the furniture. It doesn't make any difference where you are. You may be hanging around the Busy Bee lunch in Hongkong or polishing brass on a yacht in the North sea; you may be out tramping across the estate of one of the vice-presidents of a big trust company or teaching Indians to read in Arizona. The Sunday afternoon sunlight makes you dissatisfied with everything it hits. It has got to be stopped.

When the automobile came in it looked as if the Sunday afternoon problem was solved. You could climb in at the back door of the old steamer and puff out into the country, where at least you couldn't hear people playing "Narcissus" on the piano several houses away. (People several houses away are always playing "Narcissus" on the piano on Sunday afternoons. If there is one sound that is typical of Sunday afternoon, it is that of a piano being played several houses away.) It is true, of course, that even out in the country, miles away from everything, you could always tell that it was Sunday afternoon by the strange behavior of the birds, but you could at least pick out an open field and turn somersaults (first taking the small change out of your pockets), or you could run head-on into a large oak, causing insensibility. At least, you could in the early days of automobiling.

But, as soon as everybody got automobiles, the first thing they did naturally was to try to run away from Sunday afternoon, with the result that every country road within a hundred miles of any city has now taken the place of the old-time county fair, without the pleasure of the cattle and the jam exhibits. Today the only difference between Sunday afternoon in the city and Sunday afternoon in the country is that, in the country, you don't know the people who are on your lap.

Aside from the unpleasantness of being crowded in with a lot of strangers on a country road and not knowing what to talk about during the long hours while the automobiles are waiting to move ahead, there is the actual danger of an epidemic. Supposing some one took a child out riding in the country on Sunday and while they were jammed in line with hundreds of thousands of other pleasure riders the child came down with tonsilitis. There she would be, a carrier of disease, in contact with at least two-thirds of the population, giving off germs right and left and perhaps starting an epidemic wbich would sweep the county before the crowds could get back to their homes and gargle. Subways and crowded tenements have long been recognized as breeding grounds for afflictions of the nose and throat. Are country roads on Sunday afternoons to be left entirely without official regulation?

I really have no remedy for Sunday afternoon, at least none that I have any confidence in. The only one that might work would be to rearrange the week in your own mind so that Sunday afternoon falls on Saturday. Now, Saturday afternoon is as cheery as Sunday afternoon is depressing. Perhaps we might try taking a day from some week, let us say a Wednesday which wouldn't matter, then Saturday would be Sunday, and Sunday would be Monday. This would do away with all that problem of what to do on Sunday afternoon, because there are always plenty of things to do on Saturday. And you would get the benefit of Saturday afternoon sunshine, which is really delightful. Sunday afternoon sunshine would then wreak its havoc on Monday afternoon and you would be working anyway and might not notice it.

Of course, this system would be complicated unless everybody else would agree to make the same rearrangement in the week, and that might take quite a long time to bring about. If you were making a date for, let us say, Friday morning, you would have to say, "That would be Thursday morning of your week," and perhaps people would get irritated at that. In fact, word might get around that you were a little irresponsible and your business might drop off. Personally, a little slump in business would not be too great a price for me to pay for having Sunday fall on Saturday, but I don't suppose that I could sell the idea to many of you money-mad Americans. I may have to be a lone pioneer in the thing and perhaps be jeered at as Fulton was jeered at. All right, go ahead and jeer.

But, until the thing is in good running order, there will have to be some suggestions as to what to do on Sunday afternoon as we have it now. I can do no more than hint at them, but if there is one among them which appeals to you in outline, I will be glad to take it up with you in more detail.

First, I would suggest setting fire to the house along about 1130 P.M. If the fire were nursed along, it would cause sufficient excitement to make you forget what day it was, at least until it was time to turn on the lights for the evening. Of you might go down into the cellar right after dinner and take the furnace apart, promising yourself to have it put together again by supper time. Here, at least, the sunlight couldn't get at you. Or you could rent a diver's suit and go to the nearest body of water and spend the afternoon tottering about under the surface, picking sea anemone and old bits of wreckage.

The method which I myself have tried with considerable success and little expense, however, is to buy a small quantity of veronal at the nearest druggist's, put it slyly in my coffee on Saturday night, and then bundle off to bed. When you wake up on Monday morning you may not feel crisp, but Sunday will be over.

And that, I take it, is what we are after.


TOMORROW -- BENCHLEY TONIGHT: "Ask That Man"


THURBER TONIGHT (including BENCHLEY TONIGHT):

Labels:

Monday, February 14, 2011

Benchley Tonight: "The Bathroom Revolution"

>

My old blue towelling bathrobe would never fit in
with any room shown in the catalogue.

"Just as a detail, but one which is quite important to a successful bathroom regime, I should like to know what provision is made in these luxurious and sensual bath palaces for such minor items as the recovery of lost tooth paste tube caps. If they have solved this problem, they may justify themselves."
-- Benchley, in "The Bathroom Revolution"


The Bathroom
Revolution

A firm of what purport to be plumbers (but whom I suspect of being royalist propagandists trying to get the Bourbon kings back into power again) has just issued a catalogue showing how to make your bathroom look like the Great Hall at Versailles -- or I guess the best way to go about it would be to make the Great Hall at Versailles look like a bathroom. No one would have a room that size in his house to start with. And, as an old bathroom lover, I resent the tone of this pamphlet.

According to these so-called "plumbers" (or French royalists, more likely, and where is our state department to allow such open agitation against a friendly government?), they will come trooping into your new house -- it would have to be a new house, for you never could get it into your old one -- and will install there a "Diocletian bath" (page 4 of the catalogue) which, judging from the colored illustration, is a room about the size of the tapestry room in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It has a sunken bathtub, and great mirrors stretch from floor to ceiling, while over a Roman bench is draped a blue robe suitable for wrapping up an emperor in.

Or, for milady, there is the "Trianon bath" (page 5) which resembles one of those French interiors we used to see in the old Biograph pictures when the movies were young. The bathtub in the "Trianon" arrangement is so cleverly concealed that a person might go pattering about with his towel for days among the silk hangings and rococo furniture without ever finding it at all.

On page 7 we have the "Recamier bath," which is evidently intended for formal minuet parties and possibly a royal levee during the season, but which bears no resemblance to what used to be known as "the bathroom" in old-fashioned houses of the 1920-'29 period.

The "Petti Palace bath" and the "Flamingo bath," on pages 8 and 9, I will not attempt to describe, as you would not believe me. Suffice it to say that the "Petti Palace" bathtub could be used either for bathing in large groups or for a small naval engagement between ships of the third class.

Now this elaboration of the bathroom is all very well in its way, provided it does not make us effete as a nation and does not get us into other old Roman customs of lolling about on couches at our meals and holding bunches of grapes up over our heads, but, since a revolution in bathrooms is evidently well on its way, let us hope that too much will not be sacrificed to magnificence and that taking a bath will be made such a formal ritual that it can be indulged in only by those who can trace their ancestry back to the Merovingan kings and have inherited robes of silk and gold to dress the part in. I know very well that my old blue towelling bathrobe would never fit in with any room shown in this catalogue. Rather than enter one of them in my straw slippers and flannel pajamas I would just take a quick sponge bath in my own room and let it go at that.

In the first place, it is going to be hard to heat one of these great halls, and a bathroom which is not piping hot had better be used to store trunks in. The only way that I can see to get the "Diocletian bath" fit for human occupancy on a cold winter's morning would be to have an army of serfs dragging in monster logs and piling them in a blazing heap in a fireplace right beside the tub. And who wants an army of serfs popping in and out of the bathroom when he is bathing? It is difficult enough as it is now to make people keep the bathroom door shut on a cold morning, without bringing in a lot of strangers.

And, even with a huge fire blazing, the only part of you to be kept warm would be the side toward the fireplace, and what good will it do you to have10-foot mirrors lining the walls of your bathroom, if, when you get out of your bath, you are going to have to look at yourself turning blue under your very eyes? I am not crazy about the mirror idea, anyway, even in summer. I would prefer to forget, if possible.

The only advantage that I can see to the ballroom-size bathroom on a cold morning (provided some way can be found to heat it) would be that one would have more space in which to dress. In the old-fashioned 10-by-12 bathroom there is always a little difficulty in finding a place to put one's clothes after the mad dash from the cold bedroom with an armful of the day's garments.

Of course, some of the smarter ones undress in the bathroom the night before and have time to leave their clothing in neat piles where it can be easily reached the next morning, but even this foresight does not cover the getting of clean shirts out of the bureau (a process at which several people already have frozen to death this winter) or the problem of keeping the trousers in press overnight. You can't expect trousers to look like much after they have been draped over a bathtub or left hanging from the medicine closet door all night.

In the "Petti Palace bath," I must admit, there is room for a complete wardrobe in which a dozen suits may be hung and a row of bureaus containing enough clean shirts and under-garments to last the winter. In fact, if you had the "Petti Palace bath" in your house you could rent the rest of the rooms out to lodgers and just live in there (and the adjoining bedroom) until spring came.

One big item which is likely to be overlooked in these monster bathrooms, however, is the upkeep. The week they are installed they may be impressive, but it would take a corps of interior decorators to keep them so, especially if there are children in the family. In a house where there are small children the bathroom soon takes on the appearance of the Old Curiosity Shop. In even one small bathroom, when there are children in the house, one finds rocking horses, milk heaters, tin soldiers, enormous rubber ducks, odd books, overshoes, and skates, and, once in a while, reefers and stocking caps belonging to neighbors' children. Sometimes even the neighbors' children themselves.

Can you imagine what would happen in the "Flamingo bath" with its great stretches of red lacquer tiling if a family of children were given the run of it? A man with some idea of taking a bath would have to climb over miles of electric train tracks and under railroad switches. He most likely would have to cope with submarines and rubber whales in the tank-like tub and would be lucky if he got out without a nasty fall on a slippery floor which had been prepared, and used, as a skating rink. Instead of a stray tin soldier now and then, he would probably step on a complete brigade of bayonets, the bath mat being temporarily used as a tent with an American flag flying from it.

Of course, it may be argued, a house with room enough in it for a "Flamingo bath" would also be likely to contain a nursery, but, unless children have changed a lot in the last two or three days, they prefer the bathroom to the nursery any day as a scene for their activities. And, unless parents have changed a lot in the same space of time, what the children want, they get.

The grownups, too, would contribute to the chaos of the decor. How long would the "Recamier bath" look like Mme. Recamier after daddy had changed his razor blades six or seven times and had used up all but a third each of five tubes of tooth paste? There seems to be a common strain of miserliness in the American people when it comes to throwing away tooth paste tubes which have a little left in the bottom. I have seen bathroom shelves piled high with two-thirds used tubes (all without caps), and a bottle of mouth wash, with maybe an eighth of an inch of liquid showing, has been known to keep its place beside a fresh bottle until the fresh bottle is down to an eighth of an inch and, in turn, takes its place beside a new one. It is only when the door of the medicine closet refuses to shut, or the whole shelfful of old aluminum topples over into the wash basin that a general cleaning out is instigated. (I am not speaking of my own bathroom shelf. That is kept very neat. I refer to the bathroom shelves in other houses.)

Just as a detail, but one which is quite important to a successful bathroom regime, I should like to know what provision is made in these luxurious and sensual bath palaces for such minor items as the recovery of lost tooth paste tube caps. If they have solved this problem, they may justify themselves. The fact that so many capless tubes are seen lying about in people's bathrooms is due to the fact that the caps are, at that moment, lodged in the spout of the wash basin. I don't know what the capacity of the average spout for tube caps is, but I know, by actual count, that there are nine in mine right now. I used to claw them up after they had slipped out of my hand and gone down the vent. I could see them peeking up at me, just about a quarter of an inch below the rim, and have sometimes spent 15 or 20 minutes trying to hook them out with a tooth brush or razor blade (razor blades are not to be recommended as tube cap hooks, however, owing to the danger of leaving a piece of finger in the spout with the cap).

But I am older now, and more cynical, and, after the first frantic manoeuvres to catch the cap before it rolls out of sight, I give the whole thing up and go on calmly brushing my teeth. I have other things to do. But it does seem as if these royalist plumbers who have gone to such lengths to make the bathroom a menace to our homespun civilization at least might have worked out some way of avoiding this common catastrophe.

Just one more word about the menace of these patrician pools. What will be their logical effect on guest towels? If, in our modest little white tile bathrooms, it has been necessary to make the guest towel a semirigid, highly glazed bit of vivid tapestry in order to impress the guests, what will have to be done to make it show up in a room which is already a treasure chamber of bijouterie and a royal riot of color? The ordinary towels for family use will have to be at least as elaborate and showy as guest towels are today. What is there left in magnificence for guest toweling? Nothing, that I can see, but spun gold with ermine fringes, or perhaps small sheets of strung jewels glittering in the light of a concealed and highly colored bulb. Well, no one will ever use them anyway, any more than they do today.

If I ever do succumb to the Louis XIV instinct in me (and make enough money) and do have one of the "Diocletian baths" installed in that great big new house I shall build, there will be a secret door, hidden behind a rare tapestry, to which I alone will have the key. Behind it I will have built a nice, small, warm, white tiled bathroom, with good brown coarse towels and a sponge, and a tub into which I can get and read with comfort. Any kings or princes or motion picture actors that I have out for the week-end may use the other.


TOMORROW -- BENCHLEY TONIGHT: "The Sunday Menace"


THURBER TONIGHT (including BENCHLEY TONIGHT):

Labels:

Sunday, February 13, 2011

Benchley Tonight: "Down With Pigeons"

>

Pigeons walking in at my window and sneering at me

"Anyone walking across the Yard (Campus to you, please) was beset by large birds who insisted on climbing up his waistcoat and looking about in his wallet for nuts or raisins or whatever it is you feed pigeons (bichloride would be my suggestion, but let it pass)."
-- Benchley, in "Down With Pigeons"

As you will gather, if you haven't already, Benchley and pigeons didn't get on together. It's a subject that came up more than once; somewhere there's a Benchley piece in which the besieged author reports being tormented by a "bull pigeon." In "Down With Pigeons" we get perhaps closest to the source of his animus. -- Ken


Down With
Pigeons

ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI (unless I am getting him mixed up with St. Simeon Stylites, which might be very easy to do as both their names begin with "St.") was very fond of birds, and often had his picture taken with them sitting on his shoulders and pecking at his wrists. That was all right, if St. Francis liked it. We all have our likes and dislikes, and I have more of a feeling for dogs. However, I am not against birds as a class. I am just against pigeons.

I do not consider pigeons birds, in the first place. They are more in the nature of people; people who mooch. Probably my feeling about pigeons arises from the fact that all my life I have lived in rooms where pigeons came rumbling in and out of my window. I myself must have a certain morbid fascination for pigeons, because they follow me about so much -- and with evident ill-will. I am firmly convinced that they are trying to haunt me.

Although I live in the middle of a very large city (well, to show you how large it is -- it is the largest in the world) I am awakened every morning by a low gargling sound which turns out to be the result of one, or two, or three pigeons walking in at my window and sneering at me. Granted that I am a fit subject for sneering as I lie there, possibly with one shoe on or an unattractive expression on my face, but there is something more than just a passing criticism in these birds making remarks about me. They have some ugly scheme on foot against me, and I know it. Sooner or later it will come out, and then I can sue.

This thing has been going on ever since I was in college. In our college everybody was very proud of the pigeons. Anyone walking across the Yard (Campus to you, please) was beset by large birds who insisted on climbing up his waistcoat and looking about in his wallet for nuts or raisins or whatever it is you feed pigeons (bichloride would be my suggestion, but let it pass).

God knows that I was decent enough to them in my undergraduate days. I let them walk up and down my back and I tried to be as nice as I could without actually letting them see that I was not so crazy about it. I even gave them chestnuts, chestnuts which I wanted myself. I now regret my generosity, for good chestnuts are hard to get these days.

I tried to be as nice as I could.

But somehow the word got around in pigeon circles that Benchley was antipigeon. They began pestering me. I would go to bed at night, tired from overstudy, and at six-thirty in the morning the Big Parade would begin. The line of march was as follows: Light on Benchley s window sill, march once in through the open window, going "Grumble-grumble-grumble" in a sinister tone. Then out and stand on the sill, urging other pigeons to come in and take a crack at it.

There is very little fun in waking up with a headache and hearing an ominous murmuring noise, with just the suggestion of a passing shadow moving across your window sill. No man should be asked to submit to this all his life.

I once went to Venice (Italy), and there, with the rest of the tourists, stood in awe in the center of St. Mark's Piazza, gazing at the stately portals of the church and at the lovely green drinks served at Florian's for those who don't want to look at the church all of the time.

It is an age-old custom for tourists to feed corn to the pigeons and then for the pigeons to crawl all over the tourists. This has been going on without interruption ever since Americans discovered Venice. So far as the records show, no pigeon has ever failed a tourist -- and no tourist has ever failed a pigeon. It is a very pretty relationship.

In my case, however, it was different. In the first place, the St. Mark's pigeons, having received word from the American chapter of their lodge, began flying at me in such numbers and with such force as actually to endanger my life. They came in great droves, all flying low and hard, just barely skimming my hat and whirring in an ugly fashion with some idea of intimidating me. But by that time I was not to be intimidated, and, although I ducked very low and lost my hat several times, I did not give in. I even bought some corn from one of the vendors and held it out in my hand, albeit with bad grace. But, for the first time in centuries, no pigeon fell for the corn gag. I stood alone in the middle of St. Mark's Square, holding out my hand dripping with kernels of golden corn, and was openly and deliberately snubbed. One or two of the creatures walked up to within about ten feet of me and gave me a nasty look, but not one gave my corn a tumble. So I decided the hell with them and ate the corn myself.

Now this sort of thing must be the result of a very definite boycott, or, in its more aggressive stage, an anti-Benchley campaign. Left to myself, I would have only the very friendliest feelings for pigeons (it is too late now, but I might once have been won over). But having been put on my mettle, there is nothing that I can do now but fight back. Whatever I may be, I am not yellow.

Here is my plan. I know that I am alone in this fight, for most people like pigeons, or, at any rate, are not antagonized by them. But single-handed I will take up the cudgels, and I hope that, when they grow up, my boys will carry on the battle on every cornice and every campus in the land.

Whenever I meet a pigeon, whether it be on my own window sill or walking across a public park, I will stop still and place my hands on my hips and wait. If the pigeon wants to make the first move and attack me, I will definitely strike back, even to the extent of hitting it with my open palm and knocking it senseless (not a very difficult feat, I should think, as they seem to have very little sense).

If they prefer to fight it out by innuendo and sneering, I will fight it out by innuendo and sneering. I have worked up a noise which I can make in my throat which is just as unpleasant sounding as theirs. I will even take advantage of my God-given power of speech and will say, "Well, what do you want to make of it, you waddling, cooing so-and-sos?" I will glare at them just as they glare at me, and if they come within reach of my foot, so help me, St. Francis, I will kick at them. And the next pigeon that strolls in across my window ledge when I am just awakening, I will catch with an especially prepared trap and will drag into my room, there to punch the living daylights out of him.

I know that this sounds very cruel and very much as if I were an animal hater. As a matter of fact, I am such a friend of animals in general that I am practically penniless. I have been known to take in dogs who were obviously impostors and put them through college. I am a sucker for kittens, even though I know that one day they will grow into cats who will betray and traduce me. I have even been known to pat a tiger cub, which accounts for my writing this article with my left hand.

But as far as pigeons go, I am through. It is a war to the death, and I have a horrible feeling that the pigeons are going to win.


TOMORROW -- BENCHLEY TONIGHT: "The Bathroom Revolution"


THURBER TONIGHT (including BENCHLEY TONIGHT):

Labels:

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Benchley Tonight: "Announcing a New Vitamin"

>


If we've learned anything about Benchley, it's that not working suited him better than working. So who better to turn to to learn How to Take a Vacation? Unfortunately, our clip contains just a tease, but again, if we've learned anything about these Benchley shorts, it's that our schemer's schemes never work out the way he has them worked out in his head.


"According to the Department of Agriculture's figures for 1931 (April-September), practically every amateur gardener in the country was in some sort of fix or other, mostly due to a bumper crop of radishes. We therefore decided that radishes must contain a lot of Vitamin F, since they contain nothing else, unless possibly a corky substance which could be used only in the manufacture of life preservers."
-- Robert Benchley, in "Announcing a New Vitamin"


Announcing
a New Vitamin

Dr. Arthur W. Meexus and the author of this paper take great pleasure in announcing the discovery of vitamin F on August 15, 1931. We ran across it quite by accident while poking through some old mackerel bones, trying to find a little piece of fish that we could eat.

"By George," exclaimed Dr. Meexus, "I think this is a vitamin!"

"By George," I said, examining it, "it is not only a vitamin, but it is vitamin F! See how F it looks!" And, sure enough, it was vitamin F all over, the very vitamin F which had been eluding Science since that day in 1913 when Science decided that there were such things as vitamins. (Before 1913 people had just been eating food and dying like flies.)

In honor of being the first vitamin to be discovered, this new element was called vitamin A, and a very pretty name it was, too. From then on, doctors began discovering other vitamins—B, C, D, and E, and then vitamin G. But vitamin F was missing. It is true vitamin G looked so much like vitamin B that you could hardly tell them apart, except in a strong light, and vitamin E was, for all practical purposes, the same as vitamin A (except a little more blond), but nobody seemed able to work up any discovery by which a vitamin F could be announced.

The sad suicide of Dr. Eno M. Kerk in 1930 was laid to the fact that he had just got a vitamin isolated from the E class and almost into the F, when the room suddenly got warm and it turned into a full-fledged vitamin G. The doctor was heartbroken and deliberately died of malnutrition by refusing to eat any of the other vitamins from that day on. If he couldn't have vitamin F, he wouldn't have any. The result was a fatal combination of rickets, beriberi, scurvy, East Indian flagroot, and all other diseases which come from an undersupply of vitamins (most of them diseases which nice people up North wouldn't have).

First in our search for a vitamin which would answer to the name of F, we had to figure out something that it would be good for. You can't just have a vitamin lying around doing nothing. We therefore decided that vitamin F would stimulate the salivary glands and the tear ducts. If, for instance, you happen to be a stamp licker or envelope sealer, or like to cry a lot, it will be necessary for you to eat a great deal of food which is rich in vitamin F. Otherwise your envelopes won't stay stuck, or, when you want to cry, all you can do is make a funny-looking face without getting anywhere.

For research work we decided that the natives of one of the Guianas (British-French, or French-British, or Harvard-Yale) would present a good field, so we took a little trip down there to see just what food values they were short of. Most of the food in the Guianas consists of Guiana hen in its multiple variants, with a little wild Irish rice on the side to take away the taste. The natives reverse the usual order of tribal eating, placing the hen and rice outside a large bowl and getting into the bowl themselves, from which vantage point they are able to pick up not only the food but any little bits of grass and pebbles which may be lying on the ground beside it. This method of eating is known as hariboru, or "damned inconvenient."

Naturally, a diet consisting entirely of Guiana hen and wild Irish rice is terribly, terribly short on vitamin F, with the result that the natives are scarcely able to lick their lips, much less a long envelope. And when they want to cry (as they do whenever anyone speaks crossly to them) they make a low, grinding noise with their teeth and hide their eyes with one hand to cover up their lack of tears. We played them "Silver Threads Among the Gold" one night on our ukuleles, with Dr. Meexus singing the tenor, and although every eye in the house was dry, the grinding sound was as loud as the creaking timbers on an excursion boat. (As loud, but nothing like.)

We played them "Silver Threads Among the Gold"
one night, with Dr. Meexus singing the tenor.

The next thing to do was to discover what foods contain vitamin F. Here was a stickler! We had discovered it in a mess of mackerel bones, so evidently mackerel bones contain it. But you can't tell people to eat lots of mackerel bones.

Now, from a study of vitamins A, B, C, D, E, and G, we knew that all one really needs to have, in order to stock up on any one of these strength-giving elements, is milk. Milk and cod-liver oil. Milk has vitamin A, vitamins B, E, and G -- so it is pretty certain to have vitamin F. For all we knew, it might also contain vitamin F sharp. So we picked milk as the base of our prescribed diet and set about to think up something else to go with it.

Then it occurred to Dr. Meexus that he had a lot of extra radishes growing in his garden, radishes which he was sure he had not planted. He had planted lots of other vegetables, beans, peas, Swiss chard, and corn, but radishes were the only things that had come up in any quantity. He was radish poor. And he figured out that practically six million amateur gardeners were in the same fix. Where you find one amateur gardener in a fix, you are pretty likely to find six million others in the same one. And, according to the Department of Agriculture's figures for 1931 (April-September), practically every amateur gardener in the country was in some sort of fix or other, mostly due to a bumper crop of radishes.

We therefore decided that radishes must contain a lot of Vitamin F, since they contain nothing else, unless possibly a corky substance which could be used only in the manufacture of life preservers. "Milk and radishes" was selected as the slogan for vitamin F.

We figured it out that our chief advantage over the other vitamin teams was in the choice of conditions which our vitamin would cure. The vitamin B group had taken over beriberi, but who wants to have beriberi for a disease to be avoided? Vitamin D is a cure for rickets, but most of our patients ought to know by now whether they are going to have rickets or not. (We planned to cater to the more mature, sophisticated Long Island crowd, and, if they haven't had rickets up until now, they don't care much. If they have had them, it is too late anyway, and you can always say that your legs got that way from riding horseback.)

Vitamin C is corking for scurvy, but, here again, scurvy is not in our line.

In fact, I don't know much about scurvy, except that it was always found breaking out on shipboard when sailing vessels went around the Horn. But Dr. Hess, one of the discoverers of vitamin C, has pointed out that scurvy need not always be present in cases demanding vitamin C.

According to Hess (you must always call doctors who discover something by their last names without the "Dr."), the frequency among children in which irritability can be cured by vitamin C is proof that it has more uses than one.

This was pretty smart of Hess to pick on such a common ailment as irritability among children, for, up until the discovery of vitamin C, the only cure for this had been a good swift smack on the face.

However, it looks now as if we were stuck with a perfectly good vitamin and nothing for it to cure. Licking stamps and crying aren't quite important enough functions to put a vitamin on its feet. We have announced its discovery, and have given to the world sufficient data to show that it is an item of diet which undoubtedly serves a purpose. But what purpose? We are working on that now, and ought to have something very interesting to report in a short time. If we aren't able to, we shall have to call vitamin F in, and begin all over again.


SUNDAY -- THURBER TONIGHT: Part 1 of "The Bloodhound and the Bug," and "The Cat in the Lifeboat" (from Further Fables for Our Time)


THURBER TONIGHT (now including BENCHLEY TONIGHT):
Check out the series to date

#

Labels: