When Cigarette Companies Used Doctors to Push Smoking

When I was very young, smoking was still considered glamorous. Movie stars of years gone by were seen smoking. Cigarettes were fashionable, almost like an accessory.  

My parents didn't smoke, but my chic aunt, always dressed to the nines, did. And she used a long black cigarette holder. My uncle smoked, so did my grandfather. 

When my parents had parties, my sister and I could smell the cigarette smoke that wafted to the second floor. My mom had beautiful ash trays placed throughout the living room. 

That was such a different time. But is it any surprise smoking was so popular when no one suspected it caused any harm, aside from a little throat irritation? Also, doctors were pushing smoking on an unsuspecting public. Take a look at the article below from History.com, "When Cigarette Companies Used Doctors to Push Smoking."

What cigarette do doctors says causes less throat irritation? In the 1930s and 40s, tobacco companies would happily tell you it was theirs. Doctors hadn’t yet discovered a clear link between smoking and lung cancer, and a majority of them actually smoked cigarettes. So in cigarette ads, tobacco companies used doctors’ authority to make their claims about their cigarettes seem more legitimate.

To the modern-day reader, the pitching of cigarettes as healthy (even to youth and pregnant moms) and the use of doctors’ endorsements may appear horrifying. Yet before 1950, there wasn’t good evidence showing that cigarette smoking was bad for you.

“People started to get worried in the ‘40s because lung cancer was spiking; the lung cancer death rate was going through the roof,” says Martha Gardner, a history and social sciences professor at Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences. “People noticed that and were worried about it, but that didn’t mean they knew it was cigarettes.”

Yes, cigarettes did cause coughing and throat irritation. But companies used this to their advantage to promote their product as better than the competition. It wasn’t all cigarettes that gave you problems—it was just those other ones.

The first cigarette company to use physicians in their ads was American Tobacco, maker of Lucky Strikes. In 1930, it published an ad claiming “20,679 Physicians say ‘LUCKIES are less irritating’” to the throat. To get this number, the company’s ad agency had sent physicians cartons of Lucky Strike cigarettes and a letter asking if they thought Lucky Strikes were “less irritating to sensitive and tender throats than other cigarettes,” while noting “a good many people” had already said they were.

FROM THE COLLECTION OF STANFORD RESEARCH INTO THE IMPACT OF TOBACCO ADVERTISING

1937 PHILIP MORRIS ADVERTISEMENT CLAIMING THEIR BRAND CLEARED UP IRRITATION OF THE NOSE AND THROAT.

Unsurprisingly, many doctors responded positively to this biased, leading question, and Lucky Strike ads used their answers to imply their cigarettes must be medically better for your throat. In 1937, the Philip Morris company took that one step forward with a Saturday Evening Post ad claiming doctors had conducted a study showing “when smokers changed to Philip Morris, every case of irritation cleared completely and definitely improved.” What it didn’t mention was that Philip Morris had sponsored those doctors.

Philip Morris continued to advertise “studies” it sponsored through the 1940s, the decade that saw the introduction of penicillin. “The American public is thinking about medicine in such a positive way and science in a positive way,” says Gardner, who co-authored an American Journal of Public Health article about doctors in cigarette ads. “So framing it that way seems like it’ll help appeal to people.”

To this end, the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company created a Medical Relations Division and advertised it in medical journals. Reynolds began paying for research and then citing it in its ads like Philip Morris. In 1946, Reynolds launched an ad campaign with the slogan, “More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette.” They’d solicited this “finding” by giving doctors a free carton of Camel cigarettes, and then asking what brand they smoked.

FROM THE COLLECTION OF STANFORD RESEARCH INTO THE IMPACT OF TOBACCO ADVERTISING

1946 CIGARETTE ADVERTISEMENT LAUNCHED BY R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY.

By the mid-1950s, when tobacco companies had to confront good evidence that their products caused lung cancer, advertising strategies started to shift. “What happens is, all the different cigarette companies kind of work together to try to promote the idea that…we don’t know yet if it’s harmful,” Gardner says. In 1954, these companies released “A Frank Statement to Cigarette Smokers” arguing that research showing a link between cancer and smoking was alarming but not conclusive. Therefore, the companies were forming a research committee to investigate the issue.

After this, cigarette ads stopped featuring doctors because this was no longer a convincing tactic. Doctors were coming out against cigarettes, culminating in 1964 with the U.S. Surgeon General’s report that smoking causes lung cancer, laryngeal cancer and chronic bronchitis.

Still, tobacco companies continued to maintain, through their research committee, that there was still a “controversy” over whether cigarettes were unhealthy until 1998. That year, the Tobacco Institute and the Committee for Tobacco Research (as it was then known) disbanded in accordance with a lawsuit settlement.

Read the remainder of the article here. Nowadays all the ill effects of smoking are widely known to the public and anyone who chooses to smoke is well aware of the risks. Was any of this information new to you?

Thanks for visiting and have a great week!

Where Love Has Gone

I must thank my Goodreads friend Damon Evans for inspiring this post! It's an oldie but a goodie originally posted back in May of 2021.

It's said that truth is stranger than fiction. So perhaps that translates to a fictional work becoming a sensational bestseller, or a movie becoming a spectacular box office smash, when based on a true story. 

I've posted previously about the scandalous account of mobster Johnny Stompanato's death. He was the abusive boyfriend of Lana Turner, who ended up dying at the hands of her fourteen year old daughter, Cheryl Crane.

That murder transpired in 1958.  By 1962, Harold Robbins had penned the novel, Where Love Has Gone, loosely based on the Turner /Stompanato scandal. By 1964, a feature film was released under the same title, starring grand dame Bette Davis, tempestuous Susan Hayward and sultry Joey Heatherton.

The plot is a little more involved than the scandal it's actually based on, but you have to have something to fill up the pages of a book, or the time on the big screen! I haven't seen Where Love Has Gone, but it is now on my to watch list!

Courtesy of Wikipedia, here's the plot:

The film begins with headlines stating that 15-year-old Danielle Miller (Joey Heatherton) has murdered a man, Rick Lazich, who was the latest lover of her mother Valerie Hayden (Susan Hayward). Dani's father, Luke Miller (Mike Connors) describes the events that led to the tragedy.

Near the end of World War II, Army Air Forces hero Miller is in San Francisco for a parade in his honor, and meets Valerie Hayden at an art show where one of her works is being exhibited. He is invited to dinner by Valerie's mother, Mrs. Gerald Hayden (Bette Davis), who offers him a job and dowry as an enticement for him to marry Valerie. He storms from the house but is followed by Valerie who says she is unable to go against her mother's wishes but that she admires him for having refused her. A relationship develops and the two marry, although a former suitor, Sam Corwin (DeForest Kelley) predicts that the marriage will fail.

As time passes, Luke Miller becomes a successful architect and refuses another offer of employment from his mother-in-law, however the influential and vindictive Mrs. Hayden uses her contacts in the banking industry to ensure that Miller is refused loans to help him build his business. He relents and accepts a position in Mrs. Hayden's company. 

Their daughter, Dani, is born but the relationship of the couple begins to deteriorate with Miller declining into alcoholism, and Valerie indulging in a promiscuous lifestyle. The marriage ends when Miller actually finds her having sex with another man and Mrs. Hayden insists she divorce him. Years pass and Dani eventually becomes her mother's rival for the same man.

Back in the present, Dani claims that she was defending Valerie against attack, and when the case is brought to court, a verdict of justifiable homicide is ruled. An investigation into where to place Dani begins, but neither investigator Marian Spicer (Jane Greer) nor psychiatrist Dr. Jennings (Anne Seymour) can persuade Dani to open up about her feelings. When Mrs. Hayden petitions for custody of Dani and she still refuses to reveal herself, Valerie reveals that Dani was trying to kill her, and that Rick was only killed when he tried to defend Valerie. Valerie returns home and commits suicide, and after her death Luke Miller tries to help Dani rebuild her life.

I'm looking forward to watching! Are you?

Thanks for visiting and have a great week! 

The History of April Fool's Day

It's April 1st, aka April Fool's Day. I have a cousin whose birthday is today. But whenever she tells anyone it's her birthday, no one believes her because they think she's joking! 

This morning, I heard a couple of news stories that seemed so outlandish I thought the commentators were joking, but they weren't. I won't mention those stories because I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. However, I will delve into the history of April Fool's Day. 

I heard the origin discussed on the radio this morning, so I thought I'd post an article here. Take a look at what I found on History.com:

April Fools’ Day—occurring on April 1 each year—has been celebrated for several centuries by different cultures, though its exact origins remain a mystery. April Fools' Day traditions include playing hoaxes or practical jokes on others, often yelling “April Fools!” at the end to clue in the subject of the April Fools' Day prank. While its exact history is shrouded in mystery, the embrace of April Fools' Day jokes by the media and major brands has ensured the unofficial holiday’s long life.

Origins of April Fools' Day

Some historians speculate that April Fools' Day dates back to 1582, when France switched from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar, as called for by the Council of Trent in 1563. In the Julian Calendar, as in the Hindu calendar, the new year began with the spring equinox around April 1. 

People who were slow to get the news or failed to recognize that the start of the new year had moved to January 1 and continued to celebrate it during the last week of March through April 1 became the butt of jokes and hoaxes and were called “April fools.” These pranks included having paper fish placed on their backs and being referred to as “poisson d’avril” (April fish), said to symbolize a young, easily caught fish and a gullible person.

Hilaria in Ancient Rome

Historians have also linked April Fools' Day to festivals such as Hilaria (Latin for joyful), which was celebrated in ancient Rome at the end of March by followers of the cult of Cybele. It involved people dressing up in disguises and mocking fellow citizens and even magistrates and was said to be inspired by the Egyptian legend of Isis, Osiris and Seth.

There’s also speculation that April Fools’ Day was tied to the vernal equinox, or first day of spring in the Northern Hemisphere, when Mother Nature fooled people with changing, unpredictable weather.

History of April Fools' Day

April Fools' Day spread throughout Britain during the 18th century. In Scotland, the tradition became a two-day event, starting with “hunting the gowk,” in which people were sent on phony errands (gowk is a word for cuckoo bird, a symbol for fool) and followed by Tailie Day, which involved pranks played on people's derrieres, such as pinning fake tails or “kick me” signs on them.

I hope you found that information as amusing as I did! For the complete article, click here. Were you familiar with any of this information?

Thanks for visiting and have a great week!

Easter Symbols and Traditions

Easter is this coming Sunday, March 31. Several years ago I found an Easter egg dye kit stuffed in the back of my pantry. At the time, it was pretty old because my kids had outgrown it long ago. Way back when, they enjoyed dying the eggs, but never ate them. 

In addition to leaving behind the fun of dying Easter eggs, they left behind the myth of the Easter Bunny. And now that they're adults, they don't even enjoy eating Easter candy anymore. All those traditions were fun while they lasted.

Ever wonder how those traditions came about? Here are some fascinating facts from History.com:

The Easter Bunny
The Bible makes no mention of a long-eared, short-tailed creature who delivers decorated eggs to well-behaved children on Easter Sunday; nevertheless, the Easter bunny has become a prominent symbol of Christianity’s most important holiday. The exact origins of this mythical mammal are unclear, but rabbits, known to be prolific procreators, are an ancient symbol of fertility and new life. According to some sources, the Easter bunny first arrived in America in the 1700s with German immigrants who settled in Pennsylvania and transported their tradition of an egg-laying hare called “Osterhase” or “Oschter Haws.” Their children made nests in which this creature could lay its colored eggs. Eventually, the custom spread across the U.S. and the fabled rabbit’s Easter morning deliveries expanded to include chocolate and other types of candy and gifts, while decorated baskets replaced nests. Additionally, children often left out carrots for the bunny in case he got hungry from all his hopping.

Easter Eggs
Easter is a religious holiday, but some of its customs, such as Easter eggs, are likely linked to pagan traditions. The egg, an ancient symbol of new life, has been associated with pagan festivals celebrating spring. From a Christian perspective, Easter eggs are said to represent Jesus’ emergence from the tomb and resurrection. Decorating eggs for Easter is a tradition that dates back to at least the 13th century, according to some sources. One explanation for this custom is that eggs were formerly a forbidden food during the Lenten season, so people would paint and decorate them to mark the end of the period of penance and fasting, then eat them on Easter as a celebration.

Easter Candy
Easter is the second best-selling candy holiday in America, after Halloween. Among the most popular sweet treats associated with this day are chocolate eggs, which date back to early 19th century Europe. Eggs have long been associated with Easter as a symbol of new life and Jesus’ resurrection. Another egg-shaped candy, the jelly bean, became associated with Easter in the 1930s (although the jelly bean’s origins reportedly date all the way back to a Biblical-era concoction called a Turkish Delight). According to the National Confectioners Association, over 16 billion jelly beans are made in the U.S. each year for Easter, enough to fill a giant egg measuring 89 feet high and 60 feet wide. For the past decade, the top-selling non-chocolate Easter candy has been the marshmallow Peep, a sugary, pastel-colored confection. Bethlehem, Pennsylvania-based candy manufacturer Just Born (founded by Russian immigrant Sam Born in 1923) began selling Peeps in the 1950s. The original Peeps were handmade, marshmallow-flavored yellow chicks, but other shapes and flavors were later introduced, including chocolate mousse bunnies.

For more great facts regarding the signs and symbols of Easter, click here.

Happy Easter in advance! Is any of this information new to you?

Thanks for visiting and have a great week!

Sharon Black's Going Against Type

 

Sharon Black

It was St. Patrick's Day yesterday, so today I'm republishing a guest post by Irish author Sharon Black. Her novel Going Against Type was inspired by an American movie classic! 

Going Against Type is a romantic comedy, set against the backdrop of Dublin newspapers. It’s the story of two rival columnists, who write under pen names, and who fall in love, each not knowing that they are dating the enemy!

I worked as a journalist for national newspapers in Ireland – that’s my background. Which made it easier to set the book in newspapers. But my inspiration was an old Hollywood film, Woman of the Year, starring Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy. 

In Woman of the Year, Hepburn plays a high brow newspaper pundit, who rubbishes sport. Tracy is a sports columnist who leaps to its defense and attacks Hepburn. In the film, they are forced to work together, and quickly fall in love.

Going Against Type, I turned the stereotypes on their head, so my heroine, Charlotte, is a sports reporter and a bit of a tomboy. My hero, Derry, is a fashion writer and gossip columnist, and he starts the war of words and wit, when he attacks Charlotte’s column Side Swipe, after she slags off footballers who get involved with promoting big brand fashion. So the fun begins!

EXCERPT

'Sweetheart, you can't ask Derry to fly solo in a room full of couples.'
Fiona turned to smile at him.
'I'm going to invite Charlotte, my old school friend.'
'The sports writer? Yep, I can see Derry really going for her!'
'I'm not asking Derry to sail off into the sunset with her,’ Fiona said mildly. ‘She’s a smart, down-to-earth girl. And gorgeous looking!’
‘I don’t think Derry needs any help finding a girl,’ Jack said. ‘Look, don’t you get it? Derry’s ideal woman is an underwear model with the mental agility of an obtuse snail.’
Fiona couldn’t help laughing.
‘I’m not doing this just for Derry. Charlotte’s a tomboy, sure. She doesn’t suffer fools. But there’s a thin line between self-contained and lonely. Derry might rattle her cage. Shake her up a little.’

Many thanks to Sharon! Such a great story line--I love how she reversed the Tracy and Hepburn roles! To find out more about Sharon, visit her blog, sharonblackauthor.blogspot.com, and author page, Sharon Black Author Page. Thanks for visiting and have a great week!

Writing Tips From James Patterson

James Patterson

I love a good thriller, and one of my absolute favorite thriller writers is James Patterson. I admit, sometimes there's a little too much blood and violence, but he always tells such a great story I can overlook those things and just enjoy a great thrill ride!

Patterson novels are hard to put down because, not only are they exciting, they're extremely fast paced and filled with unexpected twists and turns.  

Today I thought I'd share a few tips from Patterson on writing commercial fiction found in this Publisher's Weekly article by one of his co-authors, Mark Sullivan.

According to Patterson, "We are in the business of entertainment, not edification or enlightenment...We are interested in giving the reader an intelligent thrill ride populated by outsized people we feel for.” Characters, especially heroes and villains, Sullivan explains, have to be thought about carefully. They have to be human, above all, and subjected to terrible ordeals that take them to the brink of their capacities and beyond.

“To do that," Patterson says, "our villains must be worthy opponents...The reader has to believe that the bad guy is fascinating enough, clever enough, and bad enough to defeat our hero.” Research, Sullivan learned, is the basis of great villains. It's also the basis of hero, plot, and believability. Sullivan says that Patterson is extremely well read, and his statements about writing are often peppered with references to specific authors, books, or films. In one villainous discussion, Sullivan said Patterson urged me to read the poetry of Louise Glück to get a better feel for a lacerating voice. In another they discussed the novel Perfume.

Mark Sullivan

With Patterson, exposition was severely limited. Sullivan says, "The old adage—show, not tell—was critical, and the element of surprise was paramount. Each chapter in Private Berlin had to deepen a character, advance the plot, or turn the tale on its head. You began every scene with the end in mind; and the end had better blow the reader’s mind or it would be revised or tossed."

Patterson told Sullivan at their first meeting, “What most people who attempt commercial fiction don’t understand is that you have to write the way people talk...You can’t make the prose rigid or dense and expect the normal, busy reader to turn the page, much less stick with you to the very end.”  Sullivan says that Patterson advised him to imagine an entertaining bon vivant in a bar telling our stories in a language that would appeal to every Tom, Dick, and Mary in the place. Humor helped. So did a flare for the dramatic. So did a pared-down style. Sullivan says that Patterson has been criticized for the "short chapters and the ultra-lean prose, but don’t think for a minute that it is without purpose beyond a quick read for a harried reader."

Patterson said to Sullivan, “Most writers will tell you five to 10 things about a character or a setting or an action...Fine for literature. But our approach is to pick the one or two or three that really count and discard the rest. It not only creates pace but it leaves images in the reader’s mind that are concrete and unequivocal.”

In conclusion, Sullivan says, "The sum of this advice was to sacrifice all for the story and the characters. Outlines were trusted navigational charts, yet we were free to sail in other directions as the novel evolved. But if you were going to change something, it had to be a terrific change."

"We’re after terrific, fascinating, and smart,” Patterson said. “We’re after a story that the reader can’t put down and can’t forget when they’re done, the kind people talk about to their friends.”

Don't we all wish we could write something that our readers can't put down? Do you like thrillers? If so, who's your favorite thriller writer?

Thanks for visiting and have a great week! 

Pilot Bessie Coleman

I just learned about this fascinating aviatrix while looking for a story to post for the end of Black History Month. Take a look at some of her story from Wikipedia:

Bessie Coleman was born in Atlanta, Texas, in 1892 and grew up in a family of 13 children. 

In 1915, at the age of 23, Coleman moved to Chicago, Illinois, where she lived with her brothers. In Chicago, she worked as a manicurist at the White Sox Barber Shop, where she heard stories of flying during wartime from pilots returning home from World War I. She took a second job as a restaurant manager of a chili parlor to save money in hopes of becoming a pilot herself. American flight schools of the time admitted neither women nor black people, so Robert S. Abbott, founder and publisher of the Chicago Defender newspaper, encouraged her to study abroad. Abbot publicized Coleman's quest in his newspaper and she received financial sponsorship from banker Jesse Binga and the Defender.

Bessie Coleman took a French-language class at the Berlitz Language Schools in Chicago and then traveled to Paris, France, on November 20, 1920, so that she could earn her pilot license. She learned to fly in a Nieuport 564 biplane with "a steering system that consisted of a vertical stick the thickness of a baseball bat in front of the pilot and a rudder bar under the pilot's feet."

On June 15, 1921, Coleman became the first black woman and first self-identified Native American to earn an aviation pilot's license and the first black person and first self-identified Native American to earn an international aviation license from the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale. Determined to polish her skills, Coleman spent the next two months taking lessons from a French ace pilot near Paris and, in September 1921, she sailed for America. She became a media sensation when she returned to the United States.

She used her platform to do events, like parachute jumps, and give lectures, all with the aim of opening an African-American flying school. Coleman would only perform for desegregated crowds. 

On April 30, 1926, Coleman was in Jacksonville, Florida. She had recently purchased a Curtiss JN-4 (Jenny) in Dallas. Her mechanic and publicity agent, 24-year-old William D. Wills, flew the plane from Dallas in preparation for an airshow and had to make three forced landings along the way because the plane had been so poorly maintained. Upon learning this, Coleman's friends and family did not consider the aircraft safe and implored her not to fly it, but she refused. On take-off, Wills was flying the plane with Coleman in the other seat. She was planning a parachute jump for the next day and was unharnessed as she needed to look over the side to examine the terrain.

About ten minutes into the flight, the plane unexpectedly went into a dive and then a spin at 3,000 feet above the ground. Coleman was thrown from the plane at 2,000 ft (610 m), and was killed instantly when she hit the ground. Wills was unable to regain control of the plane, and it plummeted to the ground. He died upon impact. The plane exploded, bursting into flames. Although the wreckage of the plane was badly burned, it was later discovered that a wrench used to service the engine had jammed the controls. Coleman was 34 years old.

Such an accomplished woman! Tragic that she died so young. For her complete story, click here. Had you ever heard of Bessie Coleman?

Alexander Pushkin: Little Known Facts

 

Portrait of A. Pushkin by Konstantin Somov

In honor of Black History Month, today I'm featuring Russian novelist Alexander Pushkin. Some are surprised to find out he has African ancestry. Though he lived a short life, it was one of great accomplishment!

Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin (1799 –1837) was a Russian author of the Romantic era and is considered the greatest Russian poet and founder of modern Russian literature.  Pushkin was born into the Russian nobility in Moscow and published his first poem at age fifteen.  He was widely recognized by the literary establishment by the time he graduated from the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum.

On June 6, 1999, Russia celebrated the 200th anniversary of Pushkin's birth. A London Times headline read, "Pushkin Mania rages: Russians cash in on bicentenary of their poet's birth". Reporting from Moscow, Anna Blundy noted: "Russia has been swept by Puskhinmania in preparation for tomorrow's bicentenary of the poet's birth...Russians all know long tracts of Pushkin's work by heart, and Sunday's festival is the dominant theme of most television, and radio broadcasts, newspaper articles and advertising campaigns."

In Russia, Pushkin seems to be a combination of Shakespeare and Mozart rolled into one. As Shakespeare is to the English language, Pushkin is to Russian literature.  

But, regardless of Pushkin's greatness, according to Selwyn Cudjoe, "at the beginning of the 19th century, Pushkin's Africanness was an issue. Throughout his life, his pronounced African features-thick lips, dark skin and kinky hair-remained an issue and Pushkin was acutely aware of them. Yet, he always took pride in his African ancestry."

Pushkin's great-grandfather was Abram Petrovich Gannibal (1696–1781), a Black African page raised by Peter the Great (see more on him in last week's post, or check out the link that follows). This information is from Cudjoe's article Pushkin: Russian African Genius:

...Pushkin suffered from a sense of his own "ugliness" and the taunts of his classmates. At the lycee where he studied when he was 12, he was nicknamed "monkey". However some of his school friends called him "the Frenchman" because they thought he was a "mixture of a monkey and a tiger".

This "stain" of his blackness remained with him. In 1827, he returned to his family mansion in Mikhaylovskoe where he began his unfinished novel, The Negro of Peter the Great, based on the life of his great grandfather. In this highly fictionalized account of his ancestor Grannibal, Pushkin centered his story on "a Negro's wife, who is unfaithful to her husband, gives birth to a white child and is punished by being shut up in a convent". Even as he tells this gripping story, the sexual prowess of the black man in a white world assumes much importance.

Perhaps, it is wise that Pushkin did not finish telling this story. It would have had to come up against the scurrilous attacks of those who preferred to believe that he came from a slave background. In fact, he was forced to defend Abram's honor against the calumny of Fruddy Bulgarin, a crusading journalist. Putting the question in verse, Pushkin said: "Filyarin says he understands/That my black granddad, Gannibal/ Bought for a bottle of rum, once fell/Into a drunk sea captain's hands." To this, he responded: "My grandfather, so cheaply bought,/ The Tsar himself treated with trust/And gave him welcome at his court./ Black, but never again a slave."

Pushkin died young.  Notorious about defending his honor, he fought a total of twenty-nine duels.  Though rumored to be a womanizer, when it was reported that his wife's brother-in-law, Georges-Charles de Heeckeren d'Anthès had made attempts to seduce Pushkin's wife, Pushkin challenged d'Anthès to a duel.  Pushkin died two days later, having been shot through the spleen.  He was 37.

Are any of these facts new to you? Also, have you read any Pushkin? Thanks for visiting and have a great week! 

Frederick Douglass' Irish Book Tour

It's the middle of Black History Month and many, including me, wonder why the month of February was chosen to celebrate it. Well, it's because the birthdays of the great black abolitionist Frederick Douglass and President Abraham Lincoln fall during this month.

Speaking of Frederick Douglass, I found an interesting article in The Irish Examiner that discussed his lecture tour in Ireland back in 1845 to promote his autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. I never imagined him going on a book tour, let alone to Europe! 

Irish author Colum McCann used this part of Douglass' life in his novel TransAtlantic, a National Book Award Winner. Here's more from The Irish Examiner:

The renowned Irish novelist Colum McCann emigrated to the United States in the mid-1980s. He spent almost two decades publishing big, imaginative novels about characters like ballet dancer Rudolf Nureyev as well as the high-wire artist Philippe Petit in his masterpiece Let The Great World Spin before returning to write about Ireland and its history in his novel, TransAtlantic.

At the heart of TransAtlantic is Frederick Douglass’s story. Douglass visited Ireland for several months on a lecture tour to promote his best-selling autobiography Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave, and to raise awareness and money for the abolitionist movement in the United States. The timing of his visit is noteworthy – Douglass arrived in Ireland in autumn 1845, just as the Great Famine was sweeping through the country.

“I thought it was an incredible story – and one we needed to hear, especially in Ireland,” says McCann about the spark for his novel. “Here was the story of a man, 27 years old, a visionary, an abolitionist, yet still a 'slave', arriving in Ireland just as the Famine began to unfold. He had already published his memoir but there was an Irish edition forthcoming. And he landed among the gentry of Ireland, largely the Anglo-Irish. He toured around the country. His few months in Ireland were among the happiest in his life. ‘I breathe,’ he said, ‘and lo! the chattel becomes a man.’ ”

Douglass, who was born in 1818, escaped a live of slavery in Maryland by making a break for the north where he became an anti-slavery activist. Interestingly in later life, he was on the ticket as a vice-presidential nominee for one of the candidates in the 1872 US presidential election race, a century and a half before Kamala Harris became the first person of colour to get the job.

His Irish lecture tour was a success: he spoke to packed crowds in several cities, including Belfast, Cork, Dublin, Limerick and Waterford. 

In Cork, he spoke at the Imperial Hotel to an audience that included John Francis Maguire, the founder of this newspaper (The Irish Examiner). The hotel has a plaque commemorating his visit. Douglass did not, however, critique the handling of the Famine during his lectures, which is perhaps a surprise given he was a human rights activist.

“At first I was surprised that he did not speak out about the Famine and the conditions that the Irish were forced to suffer under British rule,” says McCann. “He remained largely silent about it. But gradually I began to understand why – he was in Ireland in order to further the cause of the three million of his people still enslaved in the United States."

For the complete article click here:

I found this fascinating! Did you know Frederick Douglass toured Europe to promote his autobiography? Thanks for visiting and have a great week! 

What Inspired The Exorcist?

With all the evil that's coming out of the shadows right now, I'm reminded of the movie The Exorcist, about the exorcism of a demonic spirit from a young girl. That movie was released in 1973 when I was in sixth grade. I certainly didn't see it then, and I have no plans to see it today. I am too much of a wimp to sit through something that scary. 

Nowadays I'm wondering what world leaders involved politics, economics, or healthcare could stand a good exorcism. I digress. The movie was based on the novel The Exorcist by William Peter Blatty. But what inspired his novel? An actual exorcism. Take a look at this article, "Inside the Harrowing Exorcism of Roland Doe," featured on Allthatinteresting.com:

Public DomainRoland Doe, the pseudonym of Ronald Hunkeler, the boy whose harrowing exorcism in 1949 later inspired The Exorcist.

In the picturesque Bel-Nor neighborhood of St. Louis, Missouri, sits a beautiful, Colonial-style house on Roanoke Drive that was once the home of a boy called Roland Doe, a.k.a. Robbie Mannheim or Ronald Hunkeler.

It looks normal on the outside, with an all-brick exterior and white shutters framing the windows. Huge trees and neatly manicured bushes dot the yard. Yet one of the most extraordinary horror stories in American history transformed this house into a landmark for the macabre and provided the true story of The Exorcist.

Discovery via Getty ImagesThe St. Louis house once home to “Roland Doe” as seen in 2015.

The story began in January 1949 in Washington, D.C., where 13-year-old Ronald Hunkeler, a.k.a. Roland Doe began exhibiting disturbing behavior that left his parents baffled and terrified. He was calm and normal during the day, but at night, he would suddenly erupt into screaming fits and other wild outbursts. Meanwhile, he would enter a trance-like state, make sounds in a guttural voice, and break out in scratches and red lines all over his body.

After getting nowhere with doctors, his horrified parents brought him to where their relatives lived in St. Louis and called in Jesuit priests to carry out a harrowing series of exorcisms. As they desperately tried to wrest the demons from his body, they claimed that the boy’s bed moved on its own, slid violently across the room, and knocked them over.

Finally, on April 18, the priests laid holy relics and crucifixes upon Ronald, shouting at Satan and telling the demon that St. Michael would battle him for the boy’s soul.

Seven minutes later, Ronald came out of his trance and told them simply, “He’s gone.”

The true story behind The Exorcist begins in the late 1940s in suburban Washington, D.C., with a German-American family.

Their 13-year-old, believed to be named Ronald Hunkeler (later referred to pseudonymously as “Roland Doe” or “Robbie Mannheim”), was despondent over the loss of his beloved Aunt Harriet. Harriet was a spiritualist who’d taught him many things — including how to use a Ouija board.

Wikimedia CommonsFather E. Albert Hughes, the first priest who attempted to perform an exorcism on Roland Doe   

In early January 1949, shortly after Harriet’s death, Ronald Hunkeler began to experience strange things. He heard scratching sounds coming from the floors and walls of his room. Water dripped inexplicably from pipes and walls. Most troubling of all was that his mattress would suddenly move.

Disturbed, Ronald’s family sought the help of every expert they knew. The family consulted doctors, psychiatrists, and their local Lutheran minister, but they were no help. The minister suggested that the family seek the assistance of the Jesuits.

Father E. Albert Hughes, the local Catholic priest, asked his superiors’ permission to perform an exorcism on the teenager in late February of 1949. The church granted Hughes’ request.

For the exorcism, Hughes strapped the boy to the mattress and began his recitations. But he had to stop the rite when Ronald broke off a piece of mattress spring and slashed the priest across his shoulders, leaving the exorcism unfinished.

A few days later, red scratches appeared on Roland Doe. One of the scratches formed the word ‘LOUIS,’ which indicated to Ronald’s mother that the family needed to go to St. Louis, where the Hunkelers had relatives, to find a way to save their son.

Public DomainWilliam Bowdern, one of two priests who performed the St. Louis exorcism of Roland Doe

A cousin of the family was attending St. Louis University at the time of Ronald’s struggles. She put the Hunkelers in touch with Father Walter H. Halloran and Rev. William Bowdern. After consulting with the university’s president, these two Jesuits agreed to perform an exorcism on young Ronald with the help of several assistants.

The men gathered at the residence on Roanoke Drive in early March of 1949. There, the exorcists witnessed scratching on the boy’s body and the mattress moving violently. These were the same types of things that had happened in Maryland when the first exorcism failed.

Amid these bizarre happenings, Bowdern and Halloran, according to their reports, noticed a pattern in Ronald’s behavior. He was calm and normal during the day. But at night, after settling in for bed, he would exhibit strange behavior, including screaming and wild outbursts.

Ronald would also enter a trance-like state and start making sounds in a guttural voice. The priests also said they saw objects mysteriously flying in the boy’s presence and noted that he would react violently when he saw any sacred object presented by the attending Jesuits.

All of these details from the true story of The Exorcist made it into the film. But there were more that didn’t. 

For the complete article, click here.

Have you ever seen The Exorcist? Thanks for visiting and have a great week!