Showing posts with label Bronson L. "Bo" Parker. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bronson L. "Bo" Parker. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

RIP Bronson L. "Bo" Parker





I have just heard about the death of Bronson Parker, known to many of us as "Bo." My heart is broken. Bo contributed many thought provoking pieces to Meanderings and Muses over the years. He was there from the beginning. He was always, ALWAYS, in my corner - even when I didn't deserve him there. He was always available as a sounding board, a shoulder to cry on, a cheerleader when things went well and always someone to discuss books and authors with. We shared a love of many of the same authors and finally got to meet up face to face a few years ago in Raleigh when Don and I went to one of Margaret Maron's book launch/signings at Quail Ridge Books. Bo published his PROVIDENCE OF DEATH in 2010, and the 2nd in the series, THE WEIGHT OF EMPTINESS, published just this past June. RIP Bo, I will miss you, my friend.






Saturday, October 11, 2014

Bronson L. "Bo" Parker Talks About The Pledge of Allegiance


As to biographical information, i. e., who I am; well I'm still trying to figure that one out. For more than half a century, I've hidden behind words, first as a news and sports reporter with a BS in Journalism from UT-Knoxville, my hometown.

Following that career, a quarter century was spent writing historical non-fiction.  So, it was with a lot of naiveté and way too much self confidence that I decided some five years ago to write a novel, a mystery. I managed to get a well-known mystery writer with some forty books published to review my first manuscript.  He sent me an eleven-page, single spaced letter. The first page and a half told me what I had done correctly.  The other nine and a half pages listed the things I needed to learn. I am still learning.


THE PROVIDENCE OF DEATH can be ordered as a POD trade paperback through Amazon, B&N or your local book stores, as well as an ebook for your Kindle.

The Pledge of Allegiance to the US flag is a popular subject. Ask Amazon for a list of books. The response will be over 75,000 titles. There is an adage that the more books and articles written on a historical subject; the higher will be the number of differences regarding facts. Research on the Pledge proved the truth of that adage. For what follows below, original documents or quotes from sources I deemed reputable, were used to separate fact from fiction.

Speaking of fiction: to those of you among Kaye’s readers who’ve asked about the second Joe McKibben novel, I can only say that a few of life’s surprises, including an unanticipated move to Raleigh, North Carolina, have created a longer delay than planned. I’m at that stage where Dorothy Parker (no relation) said, “I can’t write five words but that I change seven.”






The thirty-one-words in the Pledge probably represent America’s most widely known and most often recited phrase. However, what is not as well known is how the Pledge became a part of our culture. The original version, nine words shorter than the current version, first appeared in a Boston magazine titled The Youth’s Companion on September 8, 1892.

At this time in our history, less than three decades after the end of the Civil War, there were no state or federal regulations at to where the American flag could be displayed, or how it could be used. It has been written that beyond military bases, the flag was seldom seen at public venues.

Daniel Sharp Ford, owner and editor of the magazine want to change this through the publication’s premiums department.  For some time, one of the heavily promoted premiums had been the sale of the American flag to schools. The ultimate goal was to sell a flag to every school.  The Pledge and its proposed use was a logical next step in this plan.

Every morning, as envisioned by the magazine, students at each school would stand and recite the pledge as the flag was raised. To further involve students in the daily ritual, the magazine published what it called the pledge salute, to be performed by students while reciting the words. Instructions on performing the pledge included these directions.

“At the words, ‘to my Flag,’ the right hand is extended gracefully, palm upward, toward the Flag, and remains in this gesture till the end of the affirmation; whereupon all hands immediately drop to the side.”




The first “official” use of the Pledge and salute would to be on opening day of the World’s Columbian Exposition, scheduled to open in Chicago in October 1892. It would an event to honor the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’s arrival in America.

Officials at the magazine, led by the owner’s nephew by marriage, James Upham, and Francis Bellamy, a minister who had joined the magazine’s staff, began a campaign among national educators and politicians to gain support for the plan. It won the backing of the National Education Association, and President Benjamin Harrison who issued Presidential Proclamation 335.

It reads, in part, as follows:  “Now, therefore, I, Benjamin Harrison … do hereby appoint Friday, October 21, 1892, the four hundredth anniversary of the discovery of America by Columbus as a general holiday for the people of the United States.”

[Note: In 1492, when Columbus recorded in his ship’s log that America had been reached on October 12th, the Julian Calendar (O.S.) was still in use.  The Gregorian Calendar (N.S.) had become the standard calendar used throughout most of the world at the time the proclamation was written. On the Gregorian calendar (N.S.), which dropped some dates, added a plan for leap years, and changed the beginning of the New Year, the 21st  (N.S.) aligns with the 12th  (O.S.). That seems to be the logic used to select the date for the proclamation.]


But construction at the expo site fell behind. The Chicago Historical Society offers this explanation. “Although dedication ceremonies were held on October 21, the fairgrounds were not opened to the public until May 1, 1893.”  Francis Bellamy is quoted as saying he heard the Pledge for the first time on the 21st when “4,000 high school boys in Boston roared it out together.”


The Pledge of Allegiance took the nation by storm, receiving overwhelming public acceptance and usage. Ford and his staff celebrated their success with a special edition of the magazine.





The first dispute regarding the Pledge focused on its authorship, a question that was not settled until 1957. In accordance with magazine policy, the author had not been identified when the Pledge was first published. However, it was a common assumption that Francis Bellamy wrote both the pledge and instructions for the salute.

After James Upham’s death in 1905, his family discovered documents that were presented to the public as proof that he, not Bellamy, wrote the pledge. In 1939 the United States Flag Association appointed a committee to heard arguments from the Bellamy and Upham families. The committee ruled that Bellamy was the author.

In 1956, when the question of authorship once again arose, the Library of Congress joined the fray. It appointed a panel to review the issue. A year later, the Library of Congress Legislative Reference Service issued a 148-page report, which in part was published in the Congressional Record for Sept. 11, 1957.

 “It is the opinion of the members of this committee that the author of the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag was Francis Bellamy of Rome, New York, and not James B. Upham of Malden, Massachusetts.”

In addition to the debate of authorship, other groups began in 1923 to “refine” the wording of the Pledge This action is described in an abstract written under the sponsorship of the Smithsonian Institution.

A National Flag Conference, presided over by the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution, ordained that ‘my flag’ should be changed to ‘the flag of the United States,’ lest immigrant children be unclear just which flag they were saluting.” The following year, the Flag Conference put a finer point of clarification on the issue further by adding “of America” after United States.

As the nation moved through the 1920s and into the 1930s, a national controversy arose¾not with the Pledge itself, but with the salute. Mussolini’s National Fascist Party in Italy, and later Hitler’s Nazi party in Germany, adopted the “Saluto Momano,” a salute used by leaders during the Roman Empire. Scenes showing this salute became a part of newsreels in American theatres.



The visual similarity became a point for debate in the public eye. Newspapers took sides. Some made the debate more contentious by publishing pictures of children giving the salute without the flag being shown. This was pointed to as proof that the salute showed support for the Nazi cause.




It was at this point in the Pledge’s history that the Jehovah’s Witnesses became part of the story. The group had been in existence since the 1870s, but events of the 1930s moved them front and center in the debate regarding the Pledge and the salute.

In 1933, Adolf Hitler ordered that Jehovah Witnesses in Germany be banned for their refusal to participate in saluting Nazi flags in schools and other events. Two years later, the leader of the Jehovah Witnesses in America denounced all flag salutes. He urged his followers to refuse compliance.

Later that year, in the fall of 1935, in Minersville, Pennsylvania, two students from a Jehovah’s Witness family refused to stand and say the pledge. The local school board expelled the students. Their parents sued, and won decisions in lower courts.

But the school district fought the battle up the judicial ladder to the U. S. Supreme Court. In 1940, the court agreed to hear Minersville School District v. Gobitis (“a printer's error enshrined a misspelling of the Gobitas family name in constitutional case law”). The court ruled in favor of the school district by an 8-1 margin. Yes, students could be required to stand and recite the pledge.

Jehovah Witnesses ignored the court’s ruling. Their continued refusal to stand and recite the pledge was based on their beliefs that forbade a pledge of allegiance to anything but God. What followed during the days after the Court decision led parts of the country into a dark moment in the nation’s history.

In a report to the Justice Department, the American Civil Liberties Union documented the violence. At least 1,500 Witnesses were physically attacked or harassed in over 300 locations, mostly in small rural towns. The report also included the following.

A mob of 2,500 burned the Kingdom Hall in Kennebunkport, Maine. In Litchfield, Illinois, police jailed sixty Witnesses, “ostensibly protecting them from their neighbors.”  In Parco, Wyoming, Witnesses were tarred and feathered.

American Legion posts organized to join the protest. Legion members “forced Witnesses from a trailer camp in Jackson, Mississippi and escorted them across state lines to Louisiana where they were passed from county to county, finally winding up in the vicinity of Dallas, Texas."

Others were “jailed for sedition, for distributing literature, for holding a parade, and for canvassing without a license.” There was one report of castration, but no documentation that any Witnesses were killed. However, as newspapers across the country carried reports on the acts of violence, a public backlash against the Supreme Court grew among the general population.

In 1943, the court found a way to end the national furor it had created. It agreed to hear the case entitled West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. By a 6-3 margin, the 1940 ruling was reversed. Students could not be punished for refusing to stand and recite the pledge. But the Court left many of the details regarding usage of the Pledge to individual states.

The issue of the “Saluto Momano” salute was put to rest on Dec. 22, 1942. Congress, through Federal legislation, commonly called the Flag Law, added the following language. The salute would be “standing with the right hand over the heart” during the recitation. The arm raising involved in the original salute was eliminated.

Adding “under God” to the Pledge became a controversial issue that has been debated to this day. An attorney, a chaplain in the Illinois Society of the Sons of the American Revolution, is given credit for first adding the phrase to the Pledge in the 1940s. The National Society of the Daughters of the American Revolution officially recognized him as the originator with an Award of Merit.

The Board of Directors of the Knights of Columbus made the change official within its organization. In 1951, it adopted a resolution stating that “under God” would be a part of the pledge used to open KoC meetings.

Then began the campaign to make the change official via federal legislation. All efforts failed until Congress, with the urging of President Eisenhower, passed a bill adding “under God” to the Pledge. The president signed the bill on Flag Day, June 14, 1954.


Leaving details of administering the Pledge to individual states and adding the words “under God,” have fueled debates, disagreements, and lawsuits that are ongoing regarding the Pledge’s role in public schools. The headlines from a series of ten articles, published since 2011, in one publication, The Huffington Post, reflects the polarization of opinion that exists.

 “Make Recitation of Pledge of Allegiance Mandatory as an Educational Tool” (December 6, 2013)
 “Teacher Suspended For Making Student Say The Pledge Of Allegiance” (November 7, 2013)
 “School's Pledge Of Allegiance Canceled Because... Government Shutdown” (October 16, 2013)
 “Stand Up for Liberty by Sitting Out the Pledge of Allegiance” (June 3, 2013)
 “Ariz. Bill Requires Students To Swear Oath To Constitution Under God To Graduate” (January 28, 2013)
 “Michigan House Passes Pledge Of Allegiance, Flag Mandate” (September 18, 2012)
 “Nebraska To Require Public Schools To Allocate Time For Pledge Of Allegiance” (August 14, 2012)
 “State Senate Backs Bill Requiring Pledge Of Allegiance In Schools” (January 12, 2012)
 “Why One Group Wants This Out Of Schools” (November 8, 2011)
 “One Nation Under God?” (May 25, 2011)

While there appears to be no end in sight regarding differences of opinion as to the Pledge’s place in our public educational system, there is one important fact to remember. What started as an idea published in a magazine as a sales promotion has survived for 123 years without a single serious effort to seek the Pledge’s total elimination.

POSTSCRIPTS

Columbus Day

Differences of opinion surrounding the Pledge also extend to Columbus Day. It did not become a federal holiday until 1937. But on October 12, 1899, “New York City’s Italian population organized a celebration of the discovery of America.” In 1907, Colorado became the first state to formally adopt October 12 as Columbus Day. The city has held a parade on that date since 1909 according to the parade organization’s website.
 
An area’s history determines on what date and how the day is observed. The official day varies between the 8th and the 14th, except one. Our forty-ninth state ignores Columbus Day to celebrate “Alaska Day” on October 18, the date in 1867 when Russia formally ceded the land to America.

Others bow to local history for a name.  Hawaii calls it “Discovers’ Day” to commemorate the Polynesian discovers of the islands. In South Dakota, it is called “Native American Day.” In California, some cities have hedged their bets by not taking sides. In Berkeley, Sebastopol, and Santa Cruz, it’s “Indigenous People’s Day.”

The Youth’s Companion

There is a bit of historical trivia associated with the name of the Boston firm that published the magazine, The Perry Mason & Co. This company name was a fictitious one, which may have been the reason it later became well known among fans of Earle Stanley Gardner. He has been quoted as saying that the magazine was a favorite of his when he was a small boy. Later, as a writer, he used the publishing company’s name for his now famous fictional character.











Saturday, July 6, 2013

North Carolina, The Friendly State

As to biographical information, i. e., who I am; well I'm still trying to figure that one out. For more than half a century, I've hidden behind words, first as a news and sports reporter with a BS in Journalism from UT-Knoxville, my hometown.

Following that career, a quarter century was spent writing historical non-fiction.  So, it was with a lot of naiveté and way too much self confidence that I decided some five years ago to write a novel, a mystery. I managed to get a well-known mystery writer with some forty books published to review my first manuscript.  He sent me an eleven-page, single spaced letter. The first page and a half told me what I had done correctly.  The other nine and a half pages listed the things I needed to learn. I am still learning.



THE PROVIDENCE OF DEATH can be ordered as a POD trade paperback through Amazon, B&N or your local book stores, as well as an ebook for your Kindle.




 












 



First, I must say thanks to Kaye for letting me again be a part of Meanderings and Muses. As her list of guests dwindles, it is truly an honor to remain among the annual contributors.

 

 

North Carolina, The Friendly State
by Bronson L. "Bo" Parker
 

I know an argument could be stirred up by saying this, but I now live in one of the friendliest states in the union. I’ve not spent time in all fifty, but to my way of thinking, there simply cannot be one where the folks are friendlier than in North Carolina.

 

Not too long after I arrived the week after Thanksgiving last year, I made the comment to my son how friendly I found everyone. He response? “Now you know why I moved down here twelve years ago.” He was born and raised in Hampton, Virginia, the family home for nearly fifty years.

 

He continued by saying. “Down here, even the clerks in the stores are so friendly you feel guilty if you don’t thank them.”

 

These are two personal opinions. What have others said about the state?

 

Warren Bull, who grew up in Rock Island, Illinois, enjoyed a career as a licensed psychologist before becoming a full time, award-winning author of more than twenty published short stories, as well as memoirs, essays, and a novel.

Part of his graduate training in psychology was at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. He still speaks fondly of his experiences from more than thirty years ago. “I remember moving to a small town in North Carolina and learning to slow down the speed of my speech and practice more politeness.”

Warren also said he loved the local sayings. He passed on one example. “Cute as a speckled puppy barking in the rain.” Let that roll off your tongue a time or two, and it’s impossible to not smile at the image.

 

Beyond personal opinions, at least one institution of higher learning weighed in on the subject. Researchers at England’s Cambridge University determined several years that North Carolina was one of the “friendliest and most dutiful” states in the union.

 

That study resulted in this reaction from Jason Tomberlin, North Carolina Research and Instruction Librarian at the Louis Round Wilson Special Collections Library. He suggested that in addition to nicknames such as The Tar Heel State, The Old North State, and Land of the Longleaf Pine, the state could be called “The Friendly State.”

 

The Cambridge study prompted the state’s governor at the time to give this quote to the Raleigh News and Observer. “I’m happy to see that others are learning what we have known for a long time—that nothing could be finer than to live in North Carolina.”

 

That last line was a reminder of a song that been around for the better part of a century, one of the first songs I can remember hearing as a small child.

 

CAROLINA IN THE MORNING

Nothing could be finer than to be in Carolina in the morning,

No one could be sweeter than my sweetie when I meet her in the morning.

Where the morning glories

Twine around the door,

Whispering pretty stories

I long to hear once more.

Strolling with my girlie where the dew is pearly early in the morning,

Butterflies all flutter up and kiss each little buttercup at dawning,

If I had Aladdin's lamp for only a day,

I'd make a wish and here's what I'd say:

Nothing could be finer than to be in Carolina in the morning.

 

What is going on in North Carolina to create this state of friendliness? I have learned that is does not come from its native-born citizens alone. Some of the people who give the state this quality were born elsewhere, including our own Kaye Barley who was born in Maryland. To my way of thinking, she is the epitome of what my word cobbling is about.

 

So, how do the citizens of North Carolina achieve this level of friendliness? I found this as a quote in a state magazine. It had no attribution. But maybe it contains the answer in amongst what some might call fighting words.

 

 “It has been written of North Carolina that when the essential unpretentiousness of its citizenry is contrasted with the vanity displayed by Richmond aristocracy to the north and the haughtiness manifested by Charleston gentry to the south, the state can be viewed as “a vale of humility between two mountains of conceit.”

 

#################################

 

One final comment on another subject.

 

To the many folks who have been asking about the next Joe McKibben book, I can tell you the second one is nearing the point where I’ll be looking for test readers who want to be a part of the process. A wee bit of physical inconvenience got in the way.

 

It’s the story of how the retired detective handled, or mishandled, certain issues in his life during the year after he tracked down the man who killed Whitey Wheeler; a fellow retired detective and his close friend since academy days.

 

 It was a time during which Joe quit smoking after fifty years; become what some would call a wealthy man; and for a short period of time, experienced the feeling of being a suspect in a homicide. Last but not least, he and Marsha Fielding, the widow he met in Kent County, Maryland, moved past their long-distance, platonic relationship

 

 

Sunday, September 4, 2011

What Do We "See" When We Read a Novel? by Bronson L. "Bo" Parker

As to biographical information, i. e., who I am; well I'm still trying to figure that one out. For more than half a century, I've hidden behind words, first as a news and sports reporter with a BS in Journalism from UT-Knoxville, my hometown.

Following that career, a quarter century was spent writing historical non-fiction.  So, it was with a lot of naiveté and way too much self confidence that I decided some five years ago to write a novel, a mystery. I managed to get a well-known mystery writer with some forty books published to review my first manuscript.  He sent me an eleven-page, single spaced letter. The first page and a half told me what I had done correctly.  The other nine and a half pages listed the things I needed to learn. I am still learning.



THE PROVIDENCE OF DEATH can be ordered as a POD trade paperback through Amazon, B&N or your local book stores, as well as an ebook for your Kindle.




 



















WHAT DO WE "SEE" WHEN WE READ A NOVEL
by Bronson L. "Bo" Parker






Once again Kaye has shown her kindness to let a dandelion sprout up within her rose garden. When looking at the names that have preceded me, and those yet to come, the question becomes, “What the hell am I doing here?” The best answer is that it’s a chance to talk about what has happened since last year, and what has been learned.

It’s been an interesting year for an old codger who was born some two months after Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected to his third term as President. Word cobbling has been a part of life for half a century, first as a journalist and then a writer of historical non-fiction. 
 
One would think, with that background, a writer would know what he had written. That was the belief about THE PROVIDENCE OF DEATH until the feedback began after its publication.

The book was written as a mystery. And it is, technically. But the reading pubic has said it’s something more.  The plan was never to write a book on grief, how it affects every-day life, or how one manages to continue living after it becomes a part of one’s existence.

There are no complaints about this. There is a good feeling associated with knowing that people have gotten something more than a few hours of enjoyment from reading a book. And the truth be told, this unexpected perception has led to increased book sales, according to those who tend to such matters. But the reader feedback is another example that proves creative writing is an unpredictable process. How this happens is something that was learned in a rather serendipitous manner.

WHAT DO WE "SEE" WHEN WE READ A NOVEL?

Among the unexpected but favorable feedback to PROVIDENCE came the comment, “I didn’t get it.” No serious thought was given to the why behind this specific reaction until after a conversation with the surgeon who performed surgery on both my eyes this past spring.

That conversation whetted my curiosity to the point that it led to the discovery of what strikes me as fascinating, but at the same time, an interesting challenge to writers of novels. The process we call vision, “the perceptual experience of seeing,” involves more than merely data the brain receives from the eyes at any given moment (as when reading a novel). It involves a process that starts at birth, or maybe before.

There seems to be no disagreement among experts that every experience from the moment of birth, including the emotional reaction associated with it, is filed away in the brain’s memory cells. Some experts even suggest that prenatal memories can exist. [Many mothers-to-be support this theory. There are a bazillion websites extolling the benefits using light and various sounds, including music, to stimulate the baby in the womb.]
 
This database of experiences and emotions in the memory cells, continuously growing with age, becomes the key to “vision.” All new incoming data is processed through this file of prior experience, looking for matches.  Some experts call this process of matching “prior probability.”

The term “qualia” is also used to describe the process. The Dictionary of Philosophical Terms gives this definition. “The intrinsic phenomenal features of sense data. What it is like to see green grass, to taste salt, to hear birds sing, to have a headache, to feel pain, etc.”

It works like this. A person is walking down a city street when a large bomb explodes several blocks ahead.  All the senses detecting the explosion instantaneously transmit data to the brain in the form of a question. “What was that?” The brain processes this incoming data, matches it with stored memories of prior experiences, and answers, “That was a very large explosion.”

Or the reverse can happen. A person is walking through dark woods.  Suddenly there is something afoot nearby, large enough to snap tree limbs as it moves. A sound of heavy breathing and a strange odor fills the air. “What is that?” is the sensory question. A match for the incoming data is not found in the memory cells. “I don’t know,” is the answer. The experts tell us that this answer is what triggers the feeling of fear, called an “evolutionarily adaptive mechanism.”  That’s when goose bumps form and hairs stand on end.

This process also explains the old adage, “Different people simply see things differently.” A number of people witness a crime or accident. But their recollection as to what happened and the description of the people involved can vary greatly. The same data being received from different angles, through individual sensory receptors of varying quality, can be an influence. But a major factor for the difference is the data being processed through personal memories.

And so it is when reading a novel, except it is a more gradual and collective process. As the reader moves through the novel, the writing style, the settings, the plot, and the characters all become data transmitted to the reader’s memory cells for possible matches with past experiences and emotions relating to them.

To illustrate what can be the possible result, the following conversation has been created among three people who read the same book, a crime novel about murders committed in a barn.


“Mary, I want to thank you for that book you gave me. I thoroughly enjoyed it.”

“Well, Charles, I’m glad you did. The writing style was okay. But I didn’t much care for the rest of it. Especially that cop, the main character.”

“Why didn’t you like him?”

“The way he kept treating people, the way he talked to them. And that whole part about the barn was icky.”

 “The cop was just doing his job. And I enjoyed the part about the old barn. What about you, Anne? You read it, didn’t you?”

“Yes. I guess the writing was okay, but I really couldn’t get into it. I never did understand what the cop was trying accomplish. And I’ve never been inside a barn. Never even seen one except in pictures.”

Charles, a newspaper reporter whose interest in writing does not go beyond the basic journalistic style, is a veteran police beat reporter. His experience told him the book was an accurate, favorable portrayal of a cop.  And, having been raised on a farm, he also has many fond memories of playing in and around the family barn.

Mary, now a copywriter for an ad agency with an eye for the written word, was a wild child in her younger years. She experienced several run-ins with the law, which left her thinking all cops are bullies with no understanding about a young person’s need to experiment with life’s offerings. Her only experience relating to a barn came on a single visit as a child to an aunt’s farm where she discovered the unpleasant combination of chicken poop and bare feet.

Anne, an orphan, was raised in a Catholic orphanage, and is now a nun. She has no experience as to how cops operate, not even from watching TV shows. Always a city girl, she has never visited a farm, or a barn.

Three people read the same book. The same words are processed through three different databases of memories, resulting in three different reactions, one positive, one negative, and one indifferent. Obviously the goal of authors of novels is to achieve the largest possible number of reactions like that of Charles. But therein lies the conundrum.

Learning how the favorable reactions among readers takes place is only half of the equation. Learning how, as an author, to MAKE favorable reactions to take place is the second half of the equation.


[NOTE: Since this was written, I’ve had the opportunity to read David Rosenfelt’s ON BORROWED TIME. It’s a spine-tingling story of what happens to a news reporter when his memory process is disrupted. He struggles to figure out what is happening to him as the gap between what he thinks he knows and what he knows to be reality grows. This book would be a rewarding reading experience for those who find the memory process an intriguing subject.]