MICHAEL O. ALLEN

All Posts By

michael o. allen

Another inauguration morning

By HomepageNo Comments

Inaugural Poem, 20 January 1993

On the Pulse of the Morning
by Maya Angelou

A Rock, A River, A Tree
Hosts to species long since departed,
Marked the mastodon.

The dinosaur, who left dry tokens
Of their sojourn here
On our planet floor,
Any broad alarm of their hastening doom
Is lost in the gloom of dust and ages.

But today, the Rock cries out to us, clearly, forcefully,
Come, you may stand upon my
Back and face your distant destiny,
But seek no haven in my shadow.

I will give you no more hiding place down here.

You, created only a little lower than
The angels, have crouched too long in
The bruising darkness,
Have lain too long
Face down in ignorance.

Your mouths spilling words
Armed for slaughter.

The Rock cries out today, you may stand on me,
But do not hide your face.

Across the wall of the world,
A River sings a beautiful song,
Come rest here by my side.

Each of you a bordered country,
Delicate and strangely made proud,
Yet thrusting perpetually under siege.

Your armed struggles for profit
Have left collars of waste upon
My shore, currents of debris upon my breast.

Yet, today I call you to my riverside,
If you will study war no more. Come,

Clad in peace and I will sing the songs
The Creator gave to me when I and the
Tree and the stone were one.

Before cynicism was a bloody sear across your
Brow and when you yet knew you still
Knew nothing.

The River sings and sings on.

There is a true yearning to respond to
The singing River and the wise Rock.

So say the Asian, the Hispanic, the Jew
The African and Native American, the Sioux,
The Catholic, the Muslim, the French, the Greek
The Irish, the Rabbi, the Priest, the Sheikh,
The Gay, the Straight, the Preacher,
The privileged, the homeless, the Teacher.
They hear. They all hear
The speaking of the Tree.

Today, the first and last of every Tree
Speaks to humankind. Come to me, here beside the River.

Plant yourself beside me, here beside the River.

Each of you, descendant of some passed
On traveller, has been paid for.

You, who gave me my first name, you
Pawnee, Apache and Seneca, you
Cherokee Nation, who rested with me, then
Forced on bloody feet, left me to the employment of
Other seekers–desperate for gain,
Starving for gold.

You, the Turk, the Swede, the German, the Scot …
You the Ashanti, the Yoruba, the Kru, bought
Sold, stolen, arriving on a nightmare
Praying for a dream.

Here, root yourselves beside me.

I am the Tree planted by the River,
Which will not be moved.

I, the Rock, I the River, I the Tree
I am yours–your Passages have been paid.

Lift up your faces, you have a piercing need
For this bright morning dawning for you.

History, despite its wrenching pain,
Cannot be unlived, and if faced
With courage, need not be lived again.

Lift up your eyes upon
The day breaking for you.

Give birth again
To the dream.

Women, children, men,
Take it into the palms of your hands.

Mold it into the shape of your most
Private need. Sculpt it into
The image of your most public self.
Lift up your hearts
Each new hour holds new chances
For new beginnings.

Do not be wedded forever
To fear, yoked eternally
To brutishness.

The horizon leans forward,
Offering you space to place new steps of change.
Here, on the pulse of this fine day
You may have the courage
To look up and out upon me, the
Rock, the River, the Tree, your country.

No less to Midas than the mendicant.

No less to you now than the mastodon then.

Here on the pulse of this new day
You may have the grace to look up and out
And into your sister’s eyes, into
Your brother’s face, your country
And say simply
Very simply

With hope

Good morning.

 

A Mercy

By HomepageNo Comments

Nobel laureate and Pulitzer-prize winner Toni Morrison has a new book, “A Mercy,” out. I cannot wait to get my hands on it.

From a review in the village voice:

Seventy-seven-year-old Morrison sets her story down in primeval America in the 1680s, before slavery is institutionalized but when the law grants “license to any white to kill any black for any reason.” Any social comfort between laborers and landowners is crushed. Morrison’s opener—the confession of a slave girl—becomes the foundation for a creation myth: the genesis of racist America, with Adam and Eve played by the Anglo-Dutch trader Jacob Vaark and his mail-order bride, Rebekka, who arrives by boat, grateful to have escaped the squalor of London. Cast out of this new American Eden as unbelievers and orphans, they build a “family” of the unwanted: Lina, a Native-American servant who “cawed with birds” and whose village was decimated by smallpox; Sorrow, a “mongrelized” girl who had “never lived on land” and washes up on shore after a shipwreck; Will and Scully, indentured gay servants; and Florens, the confessor.

In August, she told New York magazine that:

“I really wanted to get to a place before slavery was equated with race,” says Morrison. “Whether they were black or white was less important than what they owned and what their power was.” She speaks from her home on the Hudson River in Rockland County, as an “inconvenient but exciting” summer thunderstorm rages outside. At 77 and preparing for her last year of teaching at Princeton, she has a high, soft, almost timid voice—perhaps the result of having just recorded the audio version of A Mercy (“three days of complete misery”). But her stated purpose—defining an America where race isn’t everything—couldn’t be clearer: “There is no civilization that did not rest on unpaid labor—not Athens, not Russia, not England, no one,” she says. “The exoticism came with race.”

(Photo by Timothy Greenfield-Sanders)

She read excerpts on NPR, which were presented in four podcasts in late October. Her reading voice is so beautiful and the poetry of her prose so transporting that I may have to buy the audio book as well (that is, if she read it). Here’s an excerpt of text that accompanied the podcasts:

A Mercy is a lyrical novel set in 17th century America. One of the central characters is a black slave girl whose mother gives her up to a stranger in the hope that she will have a better life. But the book also features white and Native American characters who are working in servitude.

Morrison says she wrote the novel in an effort to “remove race from slavery.” She notes that in researching the book, she read White Cargo by Don Jordan and Michael Walsh, and was surprised to learn that many white Americans are descended from slaves.

“Every civilization in the world relied on [slavery],” says Morrison. “The notion was that there was a difference between black slaves and white slaves, but there wasn’t.”

White slaves, called indentured servants, were people who traded their freedom for their passage to America.

“The suggestion has always been that they could work off their passage in seven years generally, and then they would be free,” says Morrison. “But in fact, you could be indentured for life and frequently were. The only difference between African slaves and European or British slaves was that the latter could run away and melt into the population. But if you were black, you were noticeable.”

First, Beloved, Morrison’s Pulitzer-prize winning novel, set off a minor civil war. Then, when she won the Nobel, all hell broke lose. Yet, she carries on. A singular voice that speaks truths some don’t want to hear.

The Guardian of London had a review in October:

In her essay ‘Playing in the Dark’, Toni Morrison looked back to the founding of America and observed: ‘What was distinctive in the New World was, first of all, its claim to freedom, and second, the presence of the unfree within the heart of the democratic experiment.’ This sentiment – that ideals of economic and political liberty were dependent on brutal enslavement – is the starting place of all her work, and this, her first novel for five years, is another distillation of it. In her essays and novels, she has pursued – and mostly won – the argument that the history and literature of America were predicated on the exclusion of the black part of its population, that the myths of nation-building contained an explicit or an unspoken ‘us’ and ‘them’. That this book will be published in the week before her nation may choose a President who for the first time could eclipse that divide, who could make ‘them’ ‘us’, lends it a fundamental resonance.

The subject of slavery is one that has vexed Ms. Morrison a long time. Michiko Kakutani, the chief literary critic at The New York Times, was the main champion of “Beloved.” In her Tuesday, Nov. 4 review of “A Mercy,” she praised the new book as a worthy addition to the earlier novel:

A horrifying act stood at the center of Toni Morrison’s 1987 masterwork, “Beloved”: a runaway slave, caught in her effort to escape, cuts the throat of her baby daughter with a handsaw, determined to spare the girl the fate she herself has suffered as a slave. A similarly indelible act stands at the center of Ms. Morrison’s remarkable new novella, “A Mercy,” a small, plangent gem of a story that is, at once, a kind of prelude to “Beloved” and a variation on that earlier book’s exploration of the personal costs of slavery — a system that moves men and women and children around “like checkers” and casts a looming shadow over both parental and romantic love.

Set some 200 years before “Beloved,” “A Mercy” conjures up the beautiful, untamed, lawless world that was America in the 17th century with the same sort of lyrical, verdant prose that distinguished that earlier novel. Gone are the didactic language and schematic architecture that hobbled the author’s 1998 novel, “Paradise”; gone are the cartoonish characters that marred her 2003 novel, “Love.” Instead Ms. Morrison has rediscovered an urgent, poetic voice that enables her to move back and forth with immediacy and ease between the worlds of history and myth, between ordinary daily life and the realm of fable.

This is how the review ends:

The main storyteller in this volume is Florens, who, abandoned by the blacksmith, feels herself “an ice floe cut away from the riverbank.” But her voice is just one in this choral tale — a tale that not only emerges as a heartbreaking account of lost innocence and fractured dreams, but also stands, with “Beloved,” as one of Ms. Morrison’s most haunting works yet.

Worth a try, right?

By HomepageNo Comments

You’ve got to give these folks credit for trying:

Victory in Iraq
On this November 22, 2008, join us in observing Victory in Iraq Day.

Let us honor the sacrifice, dedication and sheer determination of American, coalition and Iraqi troops who have brought freedom to the nation and people of Iraq.

Although our governments have chosen to not name any official day marking the end of this war, we the people have taken it upon ourselves to commemorate November 22, 2008 as the day of victory over the forces of tyranny, oppression and terror in Iraq.

And, of course, the raping and pillaging of our civil liberties and our national treasury really didn’t happen.

I say four years too late.

City for $ale*

By HomepageNo Comments
Alvaro Diaz-Rubio
I am a big fan of Wayne Barrett of the Village Voice. The past week ended without me hearing much about his piece exposing New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the seamy dealings he pulled to get the city’s money and political class to knuckle under and allow him to run for a third term as mayor.

This is the opening paragraph of The Transformation of Mike Bloomberg:
Mike Bloomberg is the best mayor—in fact, the best state or city chief executive—I’ve covered in 31 years at the Voice. He’s also the worst.
The piece then went on to describe how Bloomberg’s money and power has corrupted every institution and seeped into every fabric of city life, to the point where no one, hoping some of his largess would come their way, would dare oppose him on anything. This is how Barrett closed:
I remember in the early Bloomberg days—seizing any opportunity to observe, with pleasure—that his money had bought us a leader that was finally free of the circle of donors, lobbyists, and powerbrokers that consumed earlier mayors and confounded the public good.

His message, and it once was true, was that he owed nothing to anybody. He began parceling himself out in the 2005 campaign, when he did five contracts with unions that endorsed him and spent more of our money to re-elect himself than his own. And since his re-election was never in doubt, he dipped into his money and ours, it turned out, for vanity: It merely increased his margin of victory. Imagine how many own a piece of him now.

If you believe it’s worth all of this to get a savvy hand at the tiller in turbulent times, think back to what the Times wrote in 2001 when they endorsed his opponent: “Even within the annals of businessmen-candidates, he is ill-matched to the job he covets. His company has no stockholders and no unions. It is a brand-new business, its corporate culture and decision-making structure devised to suit his character. . . . Many of Mr. Bloomberg’s greatest talents would turn out to be utterly beside the point.” When the bursting collective bargaining, pension, and debt costs of the recent Bloomberg boom years are considered, the Times of old might have had a point. As it also had as recently as June 9, when it warned against a term-limits gambit and urged Bloomberg to seek another office: “We are wary of changing the rules just to suit the ambition of a particular politician.”

Bloomberg is so set on writing his own story that he decided to produce a memoir, set for release just as he left City Hall. He asked Margaret Carlson, who is on Bloomberg L.P.’s payroll, to collaborate on it. But he recently put it off, the Times said, because he was worried about its “boastful tone” possibly turning off voters. The book might have had other, related problems: A tell-all is fine for someone walking away from the game, but not for someone about to begin a new campaign. The claimed successes might have been an irresistible target for reporters, and the petty side of Mike may have led him to dish on people he now needs to seduce one more time. Obviously, most candidates would think that a bestseller in a campaign year, with a 300,000 initial printing, would be an asset. But not Mike, who isn’t ready yet to buy his own history. He’s determined, regardless of the moral costs, to make history instead.

Barrett’s piece is a cautionary tale. It says that whatever good Bloomberg may have meant the city, his money and power has become too corrupting, that the good citizens of Gotham would do well turn their back on their putative savior from financial doom.

Worth a try, right?

By HomepageNo Comments

You’ve got to give these folks credit for trying:

Victory in Iraq
On this November 22, 2008, join us in observing Victory in Iraq Day.

Let us honor the sacrifice, dedication and sheer determination of American, coalition and Iraqi troops who have brought freedom to the nation and people of Iraq.

Although our governments have chosen to not name any official day marking the end of this war, we the people have taken it upon ourselves to commemorate November 22, 2008 as the day of victory over the forces of tyranny, oppression and terror in Iraq.

And, of course, the raping and pillaging of our civil liberties and our national treasury really didn’t happen.

I say four years too late.

A perspective on Obama’s election

By HomepageNo Comments

The Central Virginia Progressive-The DAVISReport sends us The Ethnicity of our President Elect and how it changes the paradigm

A friend sent me the essay below and when I read it I knew I had to share it on this blog. The author, Mr Robert J. House, in his 70’s, is a retired professional man of Black African descent,who came of age before, during, and through the civil rights 1960’s.
His thoughts on the election of Barack Obama and how it changes the paradigm:
Some have asked what I think, so I thought I would add my two cents worth. I’m amazed at how calm I was when at 11PM election night, MSNBC made the announcement.
Of course there was a great sense of pride, but true to my nature after a pause, the wonderment came, what will it all mean? When Barack Obama walked out with his family, my emotions were a misting in my eyes, and a chill, followed by a warm glow of fulfillment. I was amazed at how much he has aged, coupled with the sadness etched on his face by the loss of his grandmother.
Women shaped his life, as is the reality for many of the black men of our generation who “amounted to anything” . I know that was the case for me – it has been both a blessing and a challenge.
For America, and the world, his election is a daunting task. We all know about the Two Wars, the economy, failing education, crumbling infra-structures and a health care system that borders on genocide for the poor and disenfranchised.
All this coupled with our damaged reputation around the world. My question is, will America “step up” and support this new young president and begin to seriously address and fix these problems or will some Americans, particularly those out of power,or those possessed with racial and cultural hatred coupled by fear and fueled by lack of economic opportunity, rather see this country fail than give this “n***** ” a chance to succeed?
The thing is, those who would strongly withhold their support fail to take into consideration that when they had power and access, they failed, because they could not or were not equipped to handle the issues.

For we Americans of “Black African descent”, the days coming are going to be particularly challenging and life altering times. I’m reminded of Tavis Smiley’s annual forum on the “State of Black America” and how last year, he got “pissed” because Obama would not attend. My thoughts are that that forum dwindled in effectiveness (other than a place to complain) because the lack of jobs, poor education, poor infrastructure, the cost of energy and the overall economy now affected all ethnicity.

Our task will be to understand our particular place in American society and our responsibility to that place and ourselves. Unlike other “minorities” we are unique in that we do not have a typical ancestral and cultural core that we can identify and cling to.

The Latinos (not to be confused with Hispanics), Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, etc) Eastern Europeans, Middle Eastern (Iran, Iraq, Egyptians, Laotians, Syrians, etc) all have their separate cultural identity from dress, language, food, religious worship, role of women, etc. These immigrant minorities came here of their own free will. Whereas our ancestors, for the most part, came here against their will.
This stripped from us ancestral and cultural identity, aspects that would sustain us though generations. The vast majority of us cannot identify what country or continent we came from and only assume we must come from one of the west African countries. But we do have a uniqueness that sets us apart and makes us “first among equal” of the immigrant groups.
Our african ancestors built this country and we have the blood, sweat, tears and the scars to prove it. For me, for all of us, this is the country of our ancestors and Barack Obama’s election as it’s Chief Executive is the manifestation of our ownership, our pride of ownership, our inclusion.

With his election to the presidency, Barack Obama has shone the bright light on our ownership and it is our responsibility to do all that we can to protect and enhance it. We cannot, with any conviction, no longer say that we cannot succeed, not be responsible for and to our families (particularly our children), not be stewards of our communities, not establish meaningful and worthwhile relationships because “the man won’t let us”.

Truth be told, we are “the man” and it is past time (particularly for our men) to prepare and act like it!

Not all of us will go to college, achieve noteworthy status, or get rich, but all of us have something to offer.

It’s only when we fail to try and take our place in ensuring our ownership that we tear down those who work hard, sacrifice, get knocked down and get back up and keep on trying. In God’s time he sent the world Barack Obama, loaded his back like a country mule and told him to keep stepping. We can do no less.
The DAVISReport

An important question

By Homepage2 Comments

I will admit that I grew to dislike Hillary Clinton during the year and found how she ran her campaign as well as the contest with Sen. Barack Obama more than disgraceful. I don’t want her as secretary of state. The president-elect is a lot smarter man than I’ll ever be so, if he wants her in this role, more power to him. He was elected to make decisions like this.

The New York Times published an opinion-editorial, What’s So Special About a Team of Rivals?, by JAMES OAKES that I think is important to read.

Oakes’ piece corrects some of the gauzy history around Abraham Lincoln, fostered largely by Pulitzer-winning historian Doris Kearns Goodwin and her book, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, that this was such a monumentally wise idea.

Rather than it being a stroke of genius, Lincoln’s decision to appoint his main rivals for the Republican nomination into his cabinet was rather routine and mundane:

INSPIRED by the wisdom of Abraham Lincoln, President-elect Barack Obama is considering appointing a “team of rivals” to his cabinet — if rumors about the nomination of Hillary Clinton to be secretary of state are true. But there’s more mythology than history in the idea that Lincoln showed exceptional political skill in offering cabinet positions to the men he had beaten in the race for the 1860 Republican nomination.

For one thing, there was nothing new in what Lincoln did. By tradition, presidents-elect reserved a cabinet position, often secretary of state, for the leading rival in their party. John Quincy Adams inaugurated the practice by appointing one of his presidential rivals, Henry Clay, to that post. It was a controversial move in 1824; enemies of Adams denounced the appointment as a corrupt bargain.

By the 1850s, the practice had become a tradition. In that decade, Presidents Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan installed in their cabinets men who had been major rivals for their party’s nomination. Daniel Webster, who lost the Whig Party nod in 1848, became Fillmore’s secretary of state. William Marcy, after failing to win the 1852 Democratic nomination, took the same position in Pierce’s cabinet. Lewis Cass, the Democratic nominee in 1848 and a man whose presidential dreams never diminished, was appointed Buchanan’s secretary of state in 1857. These were not notably successful administrations. Most historians agree that Pierce and Buchanan rank among the worst presidents in American history. There was nothing particularly unusual, or even impressive, when Lincoln followed this well-established practice.

All we’ve heard from the chattering class is “team of rivals”, “team of rivals”, “team of rivals” since news first came out (leaked by the Clintons) that HRC is under consideration by Obama.

The Clintons, Bill and Hillary, are a special dose of poison. They suck up so much of the oxygen in the room whenever they’re involved in anything that, I think, it is best to leave them aside if you do not have to deal with them. I think this is such a time.

The president-elect will have many opportunities to make mistakes. Does he have to start with this one?

True words

By HomepageNo Comments

My friend Todd Drew has a writing voice that drives me to envy. Lately, he has been posting his ruminations on the Yankees and life in general at Bronx Banter. His latest post there just blew me away.

This is what Todd did. He took his thoughts and set them to music–the poetry of Langston Hughes, to be exact:

Theme for Bronx B

By Todd Drew

People know my thoughts from a baseball blog without knowing my face. Some have asked if I am Latin because I like Alex Rodriguez. Others have said that I must be black because I like Barry Bonds.

I am.

I am Latin and black. I am from Asia and Africa and Europe and the Middle East. I am Mexican and Dominican and Cuban and Panamanian and Nicaraguan and Venezuelan and Columbian. I am everyone from everywhere. I came here in the hold of a ship. I snuck across a border in the middle of the night. I picked tomatoes in California and loaded bales of cotton in Texas and processed meat in Kansas and laid bricks in Brooklyn.

That makes me an American.

I believe we are all Americans here in America.

I write about America and Americans because that is what I see and where I live and who I know and what I think and believe. It is all I know to be true.

Continue . . .

I’ll die happy if I could write as well.

I don’t hate Prince, just his views

By HomepageNo Comments

Sometime in the late to mid 1970s, Prince announced himself not only as a musical genius, but as a social revolutionary.

By highlighting different lifestyles and playing with (in his music as wells as personal style) sexuality and androgyny, for instance, Prince opened all of our eyes to the way people live. That earlier Prince seemed to say that it’s okay to be who you are and for me to be who I am. That gave power to his fans and deepened his music.

The music. I love Prince’s music and I own practically as much of the music as anyone could. I’ve listened to all of his output. And it has colored my view of the world.

But, in an interview with the New Yorker magazine recently, a different Prince seemed to emerge, a less tolerant and, perhaps, bigoted one.

Speaking seemingly about Prop 8, which overturned the state’s Supreme Court ruling and outlawed marriage by same-sex couples, Prince said:

“So here’s how it is: you’ve got the Republicans, and basically they want to live according to this.” He pointed to a Bible. “But there’s the problem of interpretation, and you’ve got some churches, some people, basically doing things and saying it comes from here, but it doesn’t. And then on the opposite end of the spectrum you’ve got blue, you’ve got the Democrats, and they’re, like, ‘You can do whatever you want.’ Gay marriage, whatever. But neither of them is right.”

When asked about his perspective on social issues—gay marriage, abortion—Prince tapped his Bible and said, “God came to earth and saw people sticking it wherever and doing it with whatever, and he just cleared it all out. He was, like, ‘Enough.’ ”

I don’t know what scripture Prince is referring to but he is just plain wrong.

And it saddens me that this man, who gave so much hope and entertained people and enriched lives, would now be spouting inane but hurtful bigotry.

Local boy makes . . . bad?

By HomepageNo Comments

The Central Virginia Progressive-The DAVISReport sends us Central Virginia Connection Alert to the Auto Crisis

Let me begin by saying that Rick Wagoner, Chairman of GM, is a nice man. A local kid, Rick was salutorian of Tucker High School’s class of 1973 and attended UVA. He has local family and is supportive of our local community.

I recall a short conversation I had with him at a Henrico County School function about six years ago when I asked him why there wasn’t more choice in smaller fuel efficient cars coming out of GM. His answer paraphrased from memory-People say they’ll buy them but consumer demand drives the product and Americans demand larger vehicles.

Sigh…

If your like me and want to learn the back story, the book below, without a crystal ball, totally nails today’s auto crisis. I hope someone has the author on a job short list post the eventual structural reorganization. As with most quagmires, this newest financial blackhole didn’t happen overnight and won’t quickly abate. Hold onto your wallet…

The DAVISReport

Doubleday Books | The End of Detroit by Micheline Maynard

Posted by www.EileenDavis.blogspot.com The Davis Report – The Voice of Central Virginia and the Capital City