Unholy

About two years ago, an on-line journal that shall remain unnamed said it would be putting this up as soon as it had the mix right with which to include it.
I’d forgotten all about it until I was scanning one of my folders. So while the general public is waiting, so sense delaying things for my ardent fans any longer…

Making Them Like They Used To
Boy, they set the bar for screenplays low. Take “The Unholy Three” (1925), a Tod Browning-directed silent film.
The premise – three ex-circus performers form a jewel-robbery ring – is fine. The cast is solid. Victor McLaglen, who will win a Best Actor Oscar for “The Informer” a decade later, plays Hercules, the strongman. Three-foot, three-inch Harry Earles, best known as the cuckolded Hans, in Browning’s landmark, though near career-destroying “Freaks” (and less well-known as a member of the Lollipop Guild in “Wizard of Oz”), is the midget Tweedledee. And Lon (“The Man of a Thousand Faces”) Chaney stars as Echo, the ventriloquist.
Chaney was a major talent, who dominated screens with the ability to convey a poignant inner self trapped within a powerful, often twisted, commanding physical presence. He had already appeared in over 140 films. In jus6t the prior three years, his portrayals had included a tragic clown, two mad scientists, a cripple, the Hunchback of Notre Dame, a blind pirate, and Fagin in “Oliver Twist. Browning was a talented, if clinically disturbed, cinematic trailblazer. (“Dracula,” with Bela Lugosi, was probably his finest work.) But you have to wonder how Louis B. Mayer, MGM’s head, kept from biting the end off his cigar when pitched the idea of a silent movie with a ventriloquist as its central character. (When Browning shot “Freaks,” Mayer’s patience finally snapped at the director’s fondness for the bizarre. Rather than expose the rest of his studio to the presence on the lot of a troupe that included carnival sideshow stalwarts such as Schnitzie, the Pin-head, Koo-Koo, the Bird-Girl, Johnny Eck, the Half-Boy, Prince Randian, the Living Torso, and the Siamese Twins, Diana and Violet Hilton, Mayer erected a separate-but-not-quite-equal commissary where they were required to eat and bussed them to their own hotel immediately after each day’s shooting concluded.)
The cast of “Three” also included Mae Busch as the pickpocket Rosie O’Grady, Chaney’s girl friend, and Matt Moore, as a shop clerk, Hector McDonald, who falls for her. Busch went on to a long run in Laurel and Hardy comedies as the latter’s shrewish wife. Moore appeared in over 200 films, and though his cinematic career is little remembered, two of his cats earned stars in the Hollywood Walk of Fame. Oh, I almost forgot. There is also a Giant Ape. It looks on close-up suspiciously like a chimpanzee; but you know what Chekhov said about having a Giant Ape on stage when the curtain rises on Act One.

The gang’s method-of-operation leaves something, imaginatively speaking, to be desired. Chaney, in white wig, shawl, and long dress, poses as “Mrs. O’Grady,” the owner of a pet store. Earles, in baby clothes, becomes her grandson, “Little Willie,” and McLaglen lumbers about as… I’m not sure what. The credits list him as “the son-in-law,” presumably the husband of Busch, who is also on the premises. But Busch’s character was an “O’Grady”before the gang formed, so Chaney’s sharing of her name means that, unless Busch is portraying a before-her-time, maiden name-retaining, liberated woman, both her relationship to McLaglen and Little Willie’s legitimacy is placed in question.
Anyway, aside from the ape, the store’s stock seems to consist entirely of amazingly verbal parrots. (Ventriloquist? Parrots? You may sense where this is going.) Sure enough, when the customers get the birds home, the damn things won’t talk. This requires Grandmother O’Grady to make house calls, to which she wheels Little Willie in his stroller. No one seems to wonder why he wasn’t left with Hercules or Rosie; nor does any police officer become suspicious of a string of robberies that occurred shortly after visits by an old woman with a child, and a succession of parrots who have been struck dumb.
During the only home-visit depicted, Chaney is called away to attend the silent bird while Earles is left unattended in the very room at the very moment a minor character is examining a valuable necklace. (Note that Earles is not required to do anything as subtle as observe the combination to a wall safe. He just spots the jewelry.) That is enough for he and McLaglen to return and steal it. Now anyone who has seen “Riffifi” or “Topkapi” would expect this heist to involve, at least, great strength on the part of McLaglen and great squirming through narrow apertures by Earles. But the entire escapade occurs off-screen, leaving one to wonder why the gang required a strongman, or why Busch – or even Rin Tin Tin – couldn’t have been left idling about to spot the necklace. (Rinty could have barked – or wagged – to note its existence.) For that matter, it’s unclear why Chaney didn’t masquerade as a grandfather. It certainly would have been less trouble.
Eventually, the thieves, as is their want, fall out. And here the ape obeys Chekhov. (Incidentally, its gargantuan size was established through early motion picture technical wizardry. At one point, the beast is seen standing next to Chaney, appearing to be his equal in height and breadth. Only it wasn’t Chaney. It was Earles, in a wig and shawl, photographed from the rear.) Two deaths seemingly result, though again the camera cuts away before any chests are crushed or windpipes shattered. The delicate sensibility behind this cutting may explain why fewer school children were slain by madmen overstimulated by media violence in 1925 than there are now, but it also makes for diminished dramatic impact.
None of this hurt “The Unholy Three” at the box office. It was so successful, it was remade as a talkie in 1930. Chaney and Earles reprised their roles. The chimp was replaced by a man in a gorilla suit.

What explains it? The novelty of seeing Chaney in drag? The miracle of Earles smoking a cigar like a normal-sized fellow? The horrifying ape, even though it was only three-feet tall? The lack of competition from TV and the Internet? Deficiencies in the public school system? I attribute it to the fact that the same audience that was spinning the turnstiles had elected as successive presidents Warren G. Harding, Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover and okayed Prohibition.
It may just be that H.L. Mencken had the intelligence of the American people nailed.

I just finished…

…”Voltaire in Love,” by Nancy Mitford. It’s a neat little book, a history that’s not a history, a bio that’s not a bio, a romance that’s not a romance. Maybe it’s a novel. Certainly it’s a work of art. It has humor and intelligence and perspective and courage. It’s a picture of artists and royalty in 17th century France, with excursions into German and Polish courts, as wecourse freshman yearll. It has lovers and mistresses and literary feuds galore. The character who grabbed me the most was the previously-unknown-to-me Mme du Chatelet, who was unaccountably omitted from my History of Western Civilization, though, while carrying on several affairs, and gambling away Louis upon Louis, she also translated Newtonian physics into French, upsetting Descartes’s apples.

Drought

My father had this joke, usually employed when my brother and I were stuck inside by the rain, being pests, complaining we had nothing to do. “Well,” he’d say, “you know what the Chinese do when it rains?”

They don’t, so I tell them.

My father, an early Jewish Buddhist.

“No, dad,” we’d say. “What’s that?”

“They let it rain.”

So when someone says to me, “What’re we going to do about this drought?”, I say, “You know what the Chinese do when it doesn’t rain?”

I just finished…

…”Inherent Vice, by Thomas Pynchon. It’s my fourth Pynchon and the most accessible. It’s pretty funny in parts and studded with passages of rich prose. About half-way thru, I decided to watch the movie on pay-per-view, whose release made me want to read it in the first place, since, as I recall, my friend Bud, not to be confused with my friend, Budd, whose areas of expertise are entirely different, hadn’t liked it much. Anyway, from what I knew of Pynchon, I figured seeing the movie wouldn’t spoil the plot and might even help.
The movie’s good too, but you’re better off with both, if you know your Raymond Chandler and done, even a little, drugs.

I just finished…

…”Insider Histories of Cartoonists,” by longtime fellow “Comics Journal” contributor and more recently pal, R.C. Harvey, who knows more about cartoonists than the entire populations of most stated. Here, in a dozen essays, Bob scrutinizes several of them, usually little known today, and raps generally about the art form. His knowledge is vast, his style welcoming, and his insights useful. Here is my favorite line, delivered about Bill Mauldin’s dogfaces,
Willie and Joe. “At least a score of his images are iconic, integrated every wrinkle and whisker intact into the cultural consciousness of America.” Note those repeating “i”s and “c”s and “w”s. Just beautiful.

A. Lange’s Zine

My latest is up at http://www.tcj.com/reviews/trim/

It begins:

When I was drinking at “Dirty Frank’s,” in the mid-60s, it was regularly observed within my fashionably depressed circle that no one ever moved to Philadelphia, unless it was from someplace smaller than Reading. Sure, things change in 50 years; but even now, learning that Aaron Lange, whose “great, funny stuff” Robert Crumb has celebrated, which, for a cartoonist like Lange, must have felt like Adam receiving the touch of God in DaVinci’s ceiling, had relocated there from Cleveland drew my attention. And Lange’s explanation that the reason for his migration was Philly’s being a “grungy, drug-infested, racist, violent shit-hole…,” doubled it.

I just finished…

…”Gun Crazy” by Eddie Muller. Muller is a fan of — and expert on — film noir, and this book is his tribute to a film admirers of the genre consider a classic. Me, I saw it a couple years ago on TCM and thought it stupid. But I liked the book. Muller did a terrific job researching it. He skillfully portrays many of the characters involved in the movie, from producers t bit players, and he uncovers lots of truths from lots of fictions. The accompanying photographs are smashing, and his case for the film’s excellence and significance seem the best that could be made.

I may even watch it again.

I just finished…

…”When Things Fall Apart” by Pema Chodron. It is always good to have some Buddhism around to assist one’s alignment. I keep “Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind” on my desk within arm’s reach for just such a purpose. I am unsure yet will this one will go. It was good but it will not displace the other.

I just finished…

…”The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks,” by Rebecca Skoot, which Adele’d picked off the FREE shelf at Café Bongo (not its real name). Probably you know all about it, so I won’t go into that. But I did think my reaction was unusual.

I was most interested in Skoot’s dealings with Lacks’s hostile, suspicious, feloniously inclined, and assortedly whacko descendants, whose cooperation she needed in order to write her book. I was drawn to shat she had to go through to write her book, but I sure wished she had been more honest about her reactions to these encounter and more inquisitive about her own motives in persisting with them. (Imagine if Janet Malcolm was writing this! I kept thinking.) It wasn’t until I reached the concluding chapter and it wasn’t about her and these people but about the “issue” of individuals’ proprietary rights in their body parts that I
realized how outside things I stood.

I just finished…

…Joshua Ferris’s “The Unnamed,” an Adele recommendation.

It took convincing, but she got me to read it. I am glad I did. It is imaginative and compelling, with my expectations, one after another, having the rug pulled from beneath them. I like that in s novel. It was deep too — and daring — and creative in its approach and execution. John Updike meets Samuel Beckett. A significant achievement.

My only disappointment which engaged Ferris about it. In fact, the reviews, while in quality places, were oddly mixed.

These reviews were wrong. Adele was right.