Humble Voice - The best community for art, photography, music, video and writing

NEWSWEEK-LIMBAUGH BAD FOR GOP

3/9/2009 at 10:08 PM

Why Rush is Wrong
The party of Buckley and Reagan is now bereft and dominated by the politics of Limbaugh. A conservative's lament.

David Frum
NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Mar 16, 2009
It wasn't a fight I went looking for. On March 3, the popular radio host Mark Levin opened his show with an outburst (he always opens his show with an outburst): "There are people who have somehow claimed the conservative mantle … You don't even know who they are … They're so irrelevant … It's time to name names …! The Canadian David Frum: where did this a-hole come from? … In the foxhole with other conservatives, you know what this jerk does? He keeps shooting us in the back … Hey, Frum: you're a putz."

Now, of course, Mark Levin knows perfectly well where I come from. We've known each other for years, had dinner together. I'm a conservative Republican, have been all my adult life. I volunteered for the Reagan campaign in 1980. I've attended every Republican convention since 1988. I was president of the Federalist Society chapter at my law school, worked on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal and wrote speeches for President Bush—not the "Read My Lips" Bush, the "Axis of Evil" Bush. I served on the Giuliani campaign in 2008 and voted for John McCain in November. I supported the Iraq War and (although I feel kind of silly about it in retrospect) the impeachment of Bill Clinton. I could go on, but you get the idea.

I mention all this not because I expect you to be fascinated with my life story, but to establish some bona fides. In the conservative world, we have a tendency to dismiss unwelcome realities. When one of us looks up and murmurs, "Hey, guys, there seems to be an avalanche heading our way," the others tend to shrug and say, he's a "squish" or a RINO—Republican in Name Only.

Levin had been provoked by a blog entry I'd posted the day before on my site, NewMajority.com. Here's what I wrote: President Obama and Rush Limbaugh do not agree on much, but they share at least one thing: Both wish to see Rush anointed as the leader of the Republican party.

Here's Rahm Emanuel on Face the Nation yesterday: "the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican party." What a great endorsement for Rush! … But what about the rest of the party? Here's the duel that Obama and Limbaugh are jointly arranging:

On the one side, the president of the United States: soft-spoken and conciliatory, never angry, always invoking the recession and its victims. This president invokes the language of "responsibility," and in his own life seems to epitomize that ideal: He is physically honed and disciplined, his worst vice an occasional cigarette. He is at the same time an apparently devoted husband and father. Unsurprisingly, women voters trust and admire him.

And for the leader of the Republicans? A man who is aggressive and bombastic, cutting and sarcastic, who dismisses the concerned citizens in network news focus groups as "losers." With his private plane and his cigars, his history of drug dependency and his personal bulk, not to mention his tangled marital history, Rush is a walking stereotype of self-indulgence—exactly the image that Barack Obama most wants to affix to our philosophy and our party. And we're cooperating! Those images of crowds of CPACers cheering Rush's every rancorous word—we'll be seeing them rebroadcast for a long time.

Rush knows what he is doing. The worse conservatives do, the more important Rush becomes as leader of the ardent remnant. The better conservatives succeed, the more we become a broad national governing coalition, the more Rush will be sidelined.

But do the rest of us understand what we are doing to ourselves by accepting this leadership? Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Jesse Jackson was to the Democratic party in the 1980s. He plays an important role in our coalition, and of course he and his supporters have to be treated with respect. But he cannot be allowed to be the public face of the enterprise—and we have to find ways of assuring the public that he is just one Republican voice among many, and very far from the most important.

All of this began even before Obama took office. In his broadcast on Jan. 16, Limbaugh told listeners he had been asked by a major publication for a 400-word statement about his hopes for the new administration:

I'm thinking of replying to the guy, "OK, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words. I need four: I hope he fails." … See, here's the point: everybody thinks it's outrageous to say. Look, even my staff: "Oh, you can't do that." Why not? Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here … I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails." Somebody's gotta say it.

Notice that Limbaugh did not say: "I hope the administration's liberal plans fail." Or (better): "I know the administration's liberal plans will fail." Or (best): "I fear that this administration's liberal plans will fail, as liberal plans usually do." If it had been phrased that way, nobody could have used Limbaugh's words to misrepresent conservatives as clueless, indifferent or gleeful in the face of the most painful economic crisis in a generation. But then, if it had been phrased that way, nobody would have quoted his words at all—and as Limbaugh himself said, being "headlined" was the point of the exercise. If it had been phrased that way, Limbaugh's face would not now be adorning the covers of magazines. He phrased his hope in a way that drew maximum attention to himself, offered maximum benefit to the administration and did maximum harm to the party he claims to support.

Then, exacerbating the wound, Limbaugh added this in an interview on Sean Hannity's Jan. 21 show on Fox News: "We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to bend over, grab the ankles, bend over forward, backward, whichever, because his father was black, because this is the first black president." Limbaugh would repeat some variant of this remark at least four more times in the next month and a half. Really, President Obama could not have asked for more: Limbaugh gets an audience, Obama gets a target and Republicans get the blame.

Rush Limbaugh is a seriously unpopular figure among the voters that conservatives and Republicans need to reach. Forty-one percent of independents have an unfavorable opinion of him, according to the new NEWSWEEK Poll. Limbaugh is especially off-putting to women: his audience is 72 percent male, according to Pew Research. Limbaugh himself acknowledges his unpopularity among women. On his Feb. 24 broadcast, he said with a chuckle: "Thirty-one-point gender gaps don't come along all that often … Given this massive gender gap in my personal approval numbers … it seems reasonable for me to convene a summit."

Limbaugh was kidding about the summit. But his quip acknowledged something that eludes many of those who would make him the arbiter of Republican authenticity: from a political point of view, Limbaugh is kryptonite, weakening the GOP nationally. No Republican official will say that; Limbaugh demands absolute deference from the conservative world, and he generally gets it. When offended, he can extract apologies from Republican members of Congress, even the chairman of the Republican National Committee. And Rush is very easily offended.

Through 2008 Rush was offended by the tendency among conservative writers to suggest that the ideas and policies developed in the 1970s needed to change and adapt to the very different world of the 21st century. Here's what he had to say about this subject in his speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference on Feb. 28:

Sometimes I get livid and angry … We've got factions now within our own movement seeking power to dominate it, and, worst of all, to redefine it. Well, the Constitution doesn't need to be redefined. Conservative intellectuals, the Declaration of Independence does not need to be redefined, and neither does conservatism. Conservatism is what it is, and it is forever. It's not something you can bend and shape and flake and form … I cringed—it might have been 2007, late 2007 or sometime during 2008, but a couple of prominent, conservative, Beltway, establishment media types began to write on the concept that the era of Reagan is over. And that we needed to adapt our appeal, because, after all, what's important in politics is winning elections. And so we have to understand that the American people, they want big government. We just have to find a way to tell them we're no longer opposed to that. We will come up with our own version of it that is wiser and smarter, but we've got to go get the Wal-Mart voter, and we've got to get the Hispanic voter, and we've got to get the recalcitrant independent women. And I'm listening to this and I am just apoplectic: the era of Reagan is over? … We have got to stamp this out …

Here is an example of the writing Limbaugh was complaining about: The conservatism we know evolved in the 1970s to meet a very specific set of dangers and challenges: inflation, slow growth, energy shortages, unemployment, rising welfare dependency. In every one of those problems, big government was the direct and immediate culprit. Roll back government, and you solved the problem.

Government is implicated in many of today's top domestic concerns as well … But the connection between big government and today's most pressing problems is not as close or as pressing as it was 27 years ago. So, unsurprisingly, the anti-big-government message does not mobilize the public the way it once did.

Of course, we can keep repeating our old lines all the same, just the way Tip O'Neill kept exhorting the American middle class to show more gratitude to the New Deal. But politicians who talk that way soon sound old, tired, and cranky. I wish somebody at the … GOP presidential debate at the Reagan Library had said: "Ronald Reagan was a great leader and a great president because he addressed the problems of his time. But we have very different problems—and we need very different answers. Here are mine."

I wrote that in spring 2007. But you can hear similar words from bright young conservative writers like Reihan Salam and Ross Douthat, and from veteran Republican politicians like Newt Gingrich. Gingrich told George Stephanopoulos on Jan. 13, 2008: "We are at the end of the Reagan era. We're at a point in time when we're about to start redefining … the nature of the Republican Party, in response to what the country needs."

Even before the November 2008 defeat—even before the financial crisis and the congressional elections of November 2006—it was already apparent that the Republican Party and the conservative movement were in deep trouble. And not just because of Iraq, either (although Iraq obviously did not help).

At the peak of the Bush boom in 2007, the typical American worker was earning barely more after inflation than the typical American worker had earned in 2000. Out of those flat earnings, that worker was paying more for food, energy and out-of-pocket costs of health care. Political parties that do not deliver economic improvement for the typical person do not get reelected. We Republicans and conservatives were not delivering. The reasons for our failure are complex and controversial, but the consequences are not.

We lost the presidency in 2008. In 2006 and 2008, together, we lost 51 seats in the House and 14 in the Senate. Even in 2004, President Bush won reelection by the narrowest margin of any reelected president in American history.

The trends below those vote totals were even more alarming. Republicans have never done well among the poor and the nonwhite—and as the country's Hispanic population grows, so, too, do those groups. More ominously, Republicans are losing their appeal to voters with whom they've historically done well.

In 1988 George H.W. Bush beat Michael Dukakis among college graduates by 25 points. Nothing unusual there: Republicans have owned the college-graduate vote. But in 1992 Ross Perot led an exodus of the college-educated out of the GOP, and they never fully returned. In 2008 Obama beat John McCain among college graduates by 8 points, the first Democratic win among B.A. holders since exit polling began.

Political strategists used to talk about a GOP "lock" on the presidency because of the Republican hold on the big Sun Belt states: California, Texas, Florida. Republicans won California in every presidential election from 1952 through 1988 (except the Goldwater disaster of 1964). Democrats have won California in the five consecutive presidential elections since 1988.

In 1984 Reagan won young voters by 20 points; the elder Bush won voters under 30 again in 1988. Since that year, the Democrats have won the under-30 vote in five consecutive presidential elections. Voters who turned 20 between 2000 and 2005 are the most lopsidedly Democratic age cohort in the electorate. If they eat right, exercise and wear seat belts, they will be voting against George W. Bush well into the 2060s.

Between 2004 and 2008, Democrats more than doubled their party-identification advantage in Pennsylvania. A survey of party switchers in the state found that a majority of the reaffiliating voters had belonged to the GOP for 20 years or more. They were educated and affluent. More than half of those who left stated that the GOP had become too extreme.

Look at America's public-policy problems, look at voting trends, and it's inescapably obvious that the Republican Party needs to evolve. We need to put free-market health-care reform, not tax cuts, at the core of our economic message. It's health-care costs that are crushing middle-class incomes. Between 2000 and 2006, the amount that employers paid for labor rose substantially. Employees got none of that money; all of it was absorbed by rising health-care costs. Meanwhile, the income-tax cuts offered by Republicans interest fewer and fewer people: before the recession, two thirds of American workers paid more in payroll taxes than in income taxes.

We need to modulate our social conservatism (not jettison—modulate). The GOP will remain a predominantly conservative party and a predominantly pro-life party. But especially on gay-rights issues, the under-30 generation has arrived at a new consensus. Our party seems to be running to govern a country that no longer exists. The rule that both our presidential and vice presidential candidates must always be pro-life has become counterproductive: McCain's only hope of winning the presidency in 2008 was to carry Pennsylvania, and yet Pennsylvania's most successful Republican vote winner, former governor Tom Ridge, was barred from the ticket because he's pro-choice.

We need an environmental message. You don't have to accept Al Gore's predictions of imminent gloom to accept that it cannot be healthy to pump gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. We are rightly mistrustful of liberal environmentalist disrespect for property rights. But property owners also care about property values, about conservation, and as a party of property owners we should be taking those values more seriously.

Above all, we need to take governing seriously again. Voters have long associated Democrats with corrupt urban machines, Republicans with personal integrity and fiscal responsibility. Even ultraliberal states like Massachusetts would elect Republican governors like Frank Sargent, Leverett Saltonstall, William Weld and Mitt Romney precisely to keep an austere eye on the depredations of Democratic legislators. After Iraq, Katrina and Harriet Miers, Democrats surged to a five-to-three advantage on the competence and ethics questions. And that was before we put Sarah Palin on our national ticket.

Every day, Rush Limbaugh reassures millions of core Republican voters that no change is needed: if people don't appreciate what we are saying, then say it louder. Isn't that what happened in 1994? Certainly this is a good approach for Rush himself. He claims 20 million listeners per week, and that suffices to make him a very wealthy man. And if another 100 million people cannot stand him, what does he care? What can they do to him other than … not listen? It's not as if they can vote against him.

But they can vote against Republican candidates for Congress. They can vote against Republican nominees for president. And if we allow ourselves to be overidentified with somebody who earns his fortune by giving offense, they will vote against us. Two months into 2009, President Obama and the Democratic Congress have already enacted into law the most ambitious liberal program since the mid-1960s. More, much more is to come. Through this burst of activism, the Republican Party has been flat on its back.

Decisions that will haunt American taxpayers for generations have been made with hardly a debate. The federal government will pay more of the cost for Medicaid, it will expand the SCHIP program for young children, it will borrow trillions of dollars to expand the national debt to levels unseen since WWII. To stem this onrush of disastrous improvisations, conservatives need every resource of mind and heart, every good argument, every creative alternative and every bit of compassionate sympathy for the distress that is pushing Americans in the wrong direction. Instead we are accepting the leadership of a man with an ego-driven agenda of his own, who looms largest when his causes fare worst.

In the days since I stumbled into this controversy, I've received a great deal of e-mail. (Most of it on days when Levin or Hannity or Hugh Hewitt or Limbaugh himself has had something especially disobliging to say about me.) Most of these e-mails say some version of the same thing: if you don't agree with Rush, quit calling yourself a conservative and get out of the Republican Party. There's the perfect culmination of the outlook Rush Limbaugh has taught his fans and followers: we want to transform the party of Lincoln, Eisenhower and Reagan into a party of unanimous dittoheads—and we don't care how much the party has to shrink to do it. That's not the language of politics. It's the language of a cult.

I'm a pretty conservative guy. On most issues, I doubt Limbaugh and I even disagree very much. But the issues on which we do disagree are maybe the most important to the future of the conservative movement and the Republican Party: Should conservatives be trying to provoke or persuade? To narrow our coalition or enlarge it? To enflame or govern? And finally (and above all): to profit—or to serve?

Frum, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, is editor of NewMajority.com.

URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/188279
© 2009

0 comments

NEWSWEEK: RUSH LIMBAUGH IS WRONG

3/9/2009 at 10:07 PM

0 comments

Economy on Slippery Slope

3/8/2009 at 12:27 AM

0 comments

New Political Blog From James Myers, The Entertainment Critic: Rush Limbaugh at CPAC

3/2/2009 at 3:43 PM

THE DEATH OF NEO CONSERVATISM, THOUGHTS ON RUSH LIMBAUGH, AND THE REAL REASON FOR ALL OF THE RECENT BLUSTER-THE UPCOMING FIGHT OVER PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BUDGET



On Saturday, February 28, 2009, Mr. Rush Limbaugh gave a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). He has been called the voice of the Republican Party and the heart of the conservative movement, and in my mind he is the apparent savior of the Neoconservative movement that dominated politics in the last 8 years, holding Ronald Regan as a sacred cow.

The focus of Mr. Limbaugh’s speech was for Conservatives to take back the Republican Party and the Nation. Punctuating by jumping up and down, chest thumping, fist pumping, and heart slamming, his talk was about staying the conservative course in the Republican Party and being proud of Obstructionism and non-bipartisan politics. The tone of the speech has been called “mocking, bulling, full of contempt, harsh, unapologetic”, and in some instances eerily “sinister.” As is his tendency, there was very little substance, and there was a lot more playing to the crowd, attempting to energize the group. Unfortunately, he had very little substantially to say and his angry, insulting, rude and unapologetic message, considering the mess the Bush Administration and the Neocons left the American People with, was in appropriate.
"We conservatives have not done a good enough job of just laying out basically who we are because we make the mistake of assuming that people know. What they know is largely incorrect, based on the way we're portrayed in pop culture, in the drive-by media, by the Democrat party," the neoconservative talk show host told a mostly-young crowd of energized supporters.
His basic premise in his speech based on some basic tenants of conservative philosophy, sprinkled with a combative, begrudging tone about the recent political losses the movement had suffered as a result of the Presidential election,
"We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be. We recognize that we are all individuals. We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independent. We believe that the preamble of the Constitution contains an inarguable truth, that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty, freedom. And the pursuit of happiness."

That all sounds good Rush, but when you examine more closely what you had to say, the ‘pursuit of happiness’ is primarily reserved for the upper class, “achievers” and the rest of us will just have to wait. He went on to say that conservatives don’t hate anybody, and since all people are created equal, we all start out the same, but what separates us is our will to succeed, our desire to be the best. He went on to say, that we must succeed on our own, without any government interaction. The people who do not accept the government’s help are achievers and anyone who does is a loser. The losers fail because the government makes them passive people who do not strive to make their lives better and government intervention harms these people, making them soft, passive under achievers, that are done a great disservice by an overreaching, our of control government. Large, overextended government stifles our creativity, our entrepreneurship, and in doing so contributes to a welfare state, prolonging the war on poverty. Belonging to an American political party or movement makes you a contestant with the other guys, and the only choice is to pound them into submission, winners survive and losers be damned.

The problem with all of this is that the Neoconservatives have failed to recognize and take into account their role in our current situation, and according to Mr. Limbaugh have no need to apologize for it. Mr Limbaugh’s little talk failed to take into account that the Neocons version of government caused this mess by deregulating banks, inducing people to refinance mortgages to what was called a fixed rate from an adjustable rate, in an elaborate bait and switch scheme resulting in doubling or tripling our payments. It did not take into account the unfettered spending the Neocons engaged in when they financed the War in Iraq, which was sold to the American People on the basis of a lie; that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we must stop them or die. It failed to take into account how that lie lead to deaths of over 4,000 American, 100,000 Iraqis and the injury and mental maiming of 100,000 more American soldiers, then potential damages and costs of which we can only guess at today. It did not take into account the detainees at Guantanamo, who should have been afforded the rights of American citizens as we have allowed nationals in our country to possess in our criminal courts for years. It did not take into account the people in New Orleans who suffered from the natural disaster of Katrina, only to find their government uncaring, unconcerned and unresponsive to this plight. Nope, no apologies from old Rush; just more expressions of preserving wealth for the wealthy and yet another prayer than someday trickle down economics would finally save the day for the Republicans, the Neocons and disciples of Ronald Regan.

Mr Limbaugh instead said the democrat party (he refused to call it the democratic party) relied on big government to solve all of our problems, that we cannot rely on them to answer our prayers, because in doing so this makes us weak, mindless globs of underachievers, that blindly follow along to the beat of kindly, liberal fascists. Uh-huh? Here is what he didn’t say. He didn’t talk about how the Neocons had titled the table and screwed us. He didn’t talk about how they had changed the climate in which we live and left us with a mess. He didn’t talk about the tremendous costs of lie to us and leading us in a criminally fraudulent way into the War in Iraq, based of WMD. Not an expression of sorry we led you into that war, sorry about the trillion dollar costs, sorry about the loss of life and treasure. He didn’t say he was sorry about the bait and switch mortgage crisis, sorry about the con game, sorry about you being unable to pay for your car or mortgage because we took advantage of you and in doing so, we sold all of your bad paper all over the financial world, plunging the entire world in to a near depression. He did not say that he was sorry the Neocons caused a financial crash as a result of their greed by tilting the free market of capitalism to such an extreme, that it has plunged the world into a recession bordering on a near depression.
He did not say that he was sorry that the little financial tricks threatened the student loan system, making it more difficult to get a student loan and in turn threatening millions of college educations. He did not say he was sorry Neo-conservatism made it hard to get sick, go to the doctor, or enter a hospital because we don’t have health insurance. He did not say that he was sorry our last President had in effect suspended the Bill of Rights, wiretapping its citizens and insurgents alike, reading our e-mail, and violating our Right to Privacy. When Mr. Bush detained indefinitely insurgent suspects in Guantanamo, meaning on his whim and against any person he so choose to brand an enemy of the state, he in effect suspended all of our civil rights, like the right to bail, the right to know what you have been charged with, the right to counsel, the right to defend your self, the right to discover the prosecutions’ evidence against you, the right to a speedy trial, the right to confront and cross-examine your accusers, the right against self-incrimination, (didn’t Bush and Neocons say we don’t torture?), the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the right to be convicted only by a standard of beyond a reasonable doubt, the right to trial by jury and the right to appeal. No, no tilting of nature and natural causes there that underlies traditional conservative philosophy.

No acknowledgement of what they did to our civil justice system either. One of the last things Mr. Bush did before he ran out the door was to make it harder to sue a long term care facility for negligence or gross neglect of elderly patients. So the least of us in our society has no legal protection either, but instead face dismissals of their cases under the guise of federal preemption? No right to bring a negligence action, no right to compensatory/punitive damages, no right to a jury trial, no right to address grievances? No protection for these people against abuse? The old, infirm, ill and sick are losers too? No apology for Katrina victims or the Bailed out banks who instead of lending money, have tried to help themselves to the governments (our) generosity to save them from ruin. What can be inferred from his little talk is that Mr. Limbaugh is in effect saying that winners can take advantage of losers. This reminds me of a line from the movie, Animal House, where one of the pledges lends his car to a frat brother, who returns it to him a complete wreck, and afterwards says, “hey, you f_ _ _ _ _ up. You trusted us.”

No, there was no acknowledgement of the problems created by Neocons in the last 8 years, no admission of mistakes, no accountability, no apology and let’s move on talks. No, there was not even a bipartisan tone to the talk, in fact it was just the opposite.
"Bipartisanship occurs only after one other result. And that is victory," he said. "What they mean is we check our core principles at the door, come in, let them run the show, and then agree with them. To us bipartisanship is making them agree with us after we have cleaned their clocks and beaten them, and that has to be what we are focused on.” (emphasis added). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khxpmGLxPEM

So desperate are the Neocons to preserve what they believe is status quo, that Mr. Limbaugh once again reiterated that he wishes for President Obama to fail. Never mind that if the President fails, our country might fail too. Damn the torpedoes and the consequences, the Winners like Rush have to be in power. Comparing the remark to his desire to see the Arizona Cardinals "fail" in this year's Super Bowl game against the Pittsburgh Steelers, Limbaugh defended his comment without denying it. "This notion that I want the president to fail, folks, this shows you a sign of the problem we've got," he said. "What is so strange about being honest and saying, I want Barack Obama to fail if his mission is to restructure and reform this country so that capitalism and individual liberty are not its foundation? Why would I want that to succeed?" he said, bringing the crowd once again to its feet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6N1tTdpuAU

See the winning and competing thing is very, very big to Rush. Mr Limbaugh here is a clue for you. First of all given the situation we’re in, these are extraordinary times, which call for extraordinary measures. President Obama has said that these measures are not the norm, but immediate action needs to be taken, or the situation will get much, much worse. A lot of economists and experts agree with him. This is not a normal liaise faire, leave the market alone business cycle, but one artificially induced by the outside greedy forces the Neocons allowed to do as they pleased. Second, me thinks you protest too much. The American people made their choice in November; it is time for a change, the old trickle down, Ronald Regan theories of good government have not worked. Your movement has seen its day and it is over. You’ve failed. Take responsibility, be accountable for the wrongs and adjust. Comparing the outcome of the stimulus bill or the new upcoming budget that addresses many of the issues like employment, education, healthcare, and basic civil rights is not an athletic contest. There is much more at stake here. To argue to drag your feet, beat our brains in, win at all costs attitude is not helpful. Campbell Brown from CNN put it best in response to your article in the Wall Street Journal, and your criticism of the a reporter from that network who disagreed with you, “Mr. Limbaugh…the histrionics and the name calling, they undermine anything constructive that you have to say… our country is in desperate straights right now, and we need ideas. But what we don’t need is nasty rhetoric, and useless noise. This does not help anyone get a job, keep a job or feed their family. If there ever was a time to put the meanness behind us and focus on real dialogue and real solutions, this is the time.”

0 comments

New Music Review by The Entertainment Critic: E=MC2 by Mariah Carey

5/16/2008 at 4:16 AM

Music Review: E=MC2
The Entertainment Critic Music Review By James Myers
www.theentertainmentcritic.com
www.theentertainmentcritic.net
www.theentertainmentcriticmagazine.com

E=MC2
Format: CD
Release Date: 04/15/2008
Label: ISLAND
Catalog No.: 001027202
UPC: 602517507586
Sales Rank: 18

Album Credits
Performance Credits
Mariah Carey: Primary Artist, Background Vocals
Crystal Johnson: Background Vocals

Technical Credits
Mariah Carey: Producer, Executive Producer
Jermaine Dupri: Producer
Bernie Grundman: Mastering
Benny Medina: Management
James Poyser: Producer
L.A. Reid: Executive Producer
Manuel Seal Jr. Producer
Scott Storch: Producer
Damian "Junior Gong" Marley: Guest Appearance
Kuk Harrell: Engineer
Michael Richardson: Management
Chris "Tricky" Stewart: Producer
Doug Joswick: Package Production
Brian Garten: Engineer
Swizz Beatz: Producer
John Horesco IV: Engineer
Bryan-Michael Cox: Producer
Tor Erik Hermanson: Instrumentation
Mark Sudack: Executive Producer, Management
Kelly "Becky 4 Real" Sheehan: Engineer
Carol Corless: Package Production
Derrick Selby: Engineer
Mikkel S. Eriksen: Engineer, Instrumentation
B.M.C. Instrumentation
James "Scrappy" Stassen: Engineer
Nick Banns: Engineer
Bishop Clarence Keaton: Guest Appearance
Gina Rainville: Management
Melissa Ruderman: Management


E=MC² Tracks

1 Migrate / T-Pain 4:17
2 Touch My Body 3:24
3 Cruise Control / Damian "Junior Gong" Marley 3:32
4 I Stay in Love 3:32
5 Side Effects / Young Jeezy 4:22
6 I'm That Chick 3:31
7 Love Story 3:56
8 I'll Be Lovin' U Long Time 3:01
9 Last Kiss 3:36
10 Thanx 4 Nothin' 3:05
11 O.O.C. 3:26
12 For the Record 3:26
13 Bye Bye 4:26
14 I Wish You Well 4:35


E=MC² DEBUTED AT NUMBER ONE ON THE BILLBOARD 200 WITH 463,000 COPIES SOLD, MAKING IT THE BIGGEST OPENING WEEK SALES OF HER CAREER. WITH SIX NUMBER ONE ALBUMS, CAREY IS NOW TIED WITH JANET JACKSON IN THE U.S. FOR THE THIRD MOST NUMBER ONE ALBUMS FOR A FEMALE ARTIST, BEHIND MADONNA WITH SEVEN AND BARBRA STREISAND'S EIGHT CHART TOPPERS. IN ITS SECOND WEEK, THE ALBUM TOPPED THE CHART AGAIN WITH 182,000 COPIES SOLD. E=MC² IS CAREY'S FIRST ALBUM TO SPEND TWO STRAIGHT WEEKS AT #1 SINCE 1995'S DAYDREAM. THE ALBUM HAS SOLD 827,000 COPIES TO DATE.
ON THE UK ALBUM CHART, IT DEBUTED AT NUMBER THREE, SELLING 34,800 COPIES. THIS WAS HER HIGHEST PEAK POSITION IN THE UK SINCE BUTTERFLY, WHICH PEAKED AT NUMBER TWO. IT DEBUTED AT THE TOP ON THE UNITED WORLD CHART WITH 617,000 COPIES SOLD AND HELD THE TOP POSITION FOR ANOTHER WEEK, SELLING 1,075,000 UNITS TO DATE.[ IN THE PHILIPPINES, THE ALBUM REACHED GOLD STATUS SELLING OVER 15,000 COPIES IN JUST EIGHT DAYS.
ON APRIL 15, 2008, THE SAME DAY THE ALBUM WAS RELEASED, MAYOR ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA PROCLAIMED APRIL 15 OFFICIALLY AS "MARIAH CAREY DAY" IN LOS ANGELES. IT WAS IN PART OF CELEBRATING CAREY'S EIGHTEENTH NUMBER ONE SINGLE, "TOUCH MY BODY". ALSO, ON APRIL 25, 2008 THROUGH APRIL 27, 2008; THE EMPIRE STATE BUILDING WAS LIT UP IN CAREY'S MOTIF COLORS — LAVENDER, PINK, AND WHITE — IN CELEBRATION OF HER ACHIEVEMENTS IN THE WORLD OF MUSIC. CAREY IS THE FIRST PERSON IN HISTORY TO BE HONORED IN THIS EVENT.




The issue with Mariah Carey has been and always will be the same; is she a great pop artist and singer, or is she a diva with too much pretense and French pastry in her music to be taken seriously? All too frequently in the past, the gifted singer with the 8 octave range has taken us on a joyride, a “need to decorate every damn song with more octaves than Maria Callas,” and very little emotion or substance. Her last album, The Emancipation of Mimi was a near perfect album that featured more of her emotional rather than her vocal range. E=MC2 is a better album, if that is possible, where we see a free and easy Mariah, that has produced a pop album, that is, "equal parts levity and gravity.” If Mimi was her coming out party, than E=MC2 is her coming home party; an artist that is in control and is totally comfortable in her skin. To be blunt, this is one of the year’s best.

E=MC² is the eleventh studio album by American pop and R&B singer Mariah Carey. The album was released on April 15, 2008 in the United States. The album name means "(E) Emancipation (=) equals (MC) Mariah Carey (²) to the second power". It is a play on Einstein's famous mass–energy equivalence formula and is the sequel to her 2005 album, The Emancipation of Mimi.

The album's music appeals to a lot of genres such as Pop, R&B and Hip hop, but some of her songs also include Gospel and Reggae beats. She experiments for the first time with reggae tones on "Cruise Control" and also uses a Jamaican patois during the second verse. On "Side Effects" she speaks about her marriage to Tommy Mottola describing it as a "private hell", the "emotional abuse" she saw during this time and the side effects from which she still suffers. MTV's author Jennifer Vineyard said it's "like a rock power ballad" and compared the music style to that of Bonnie Tyler and Pat Benatar. Two songs from the album sample melodies of other songs: one of them is the Seventies-soul-recalling "I'm That Chick" which samples Michael Jackson's "Off the Wall". The other song is "I'll Be Lovin' U Long Time," which samples DeBarge's "Stay with Me" and recalls the melodic riff of the "Hill Street Blues" theme music. Her second single "Bye Bye" is about the loss of her father, Alfred Roy, who died of cancer in 2002, and his absence during her childhood. Although the lyrics of the song mostly seems to be personal, she tries to keep the topic universal, so that everybody "who just lost somebody" can refer to it. The closing track "I Wish You Well" is a piano ballad kept simple with gospel influences. In the song she quotes some parts from the Bible.

Her music has this floating, ethereal quality to it. It is a soothing experience that makes you feel rested, peaceful. A fluttering warbler, this music soars. It is a quiet, reflective, emotional experience that leaves you wanting more. Mariah dresses like a diva, but she sings like an angel; a gift that reminiscent of some of the best female singers of all time. A girls girl, her personality and warmth is reflected in ever single song. Guaranteed to make you imagination drift, this one is like a warm summer breeze. One of a kind, dreamy and romantic, Mariah the singer has finally emerged.

0 comments

New Book Review By The Entertainment Critic: Hold Tight by Harlan Coben

5/14/2008 at 5:33 AM

Hold Tight

THE ENTERTAINMENT CRITIC BOOK REVIEW, BY JAMES MYERS
www.theentertainmentcritic.com
www.theentertainmentcritic.net
www.theentertainmentcriticmagazine.com

HOLD TIGHT
By Harlan Coben
Published by: Dutton, a Division of The Penguin Group (USA)
Publication Date: April, 2008
Price: $26.95
416 Pages
ISBN-13: 9780525950608
Five Star Rating *****

HARLAN COBEN (BORN JANUARY 4, 1962) IS A JEWISH AMERICAN AUTHOR OF MYSTERY NOVELS. THE PLOTS OF HIS NOVELS OFTEN INVOLVE THE RESURFACING OF UNRESOLVED OR MISINTERPRETED EVENTS IN THE PAST (SUCH AS MURDERS, FATAL ACCIDENTS, ETC.) AND OFTEN HAVE MULTIPLE PLOT TWISTS. BOTH SERIES OF COBEN'S BOOKS ARE SET IN AND AROUND NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY, AND SOME OF THE SUPPORTING CHARACTERS IN TWO SERIES OF NOVELS HAVE APPEARED IN BOTH. HIS NOVELS ARE MOST POPULAR IN THE UNITED STATES AND FRANCE

LAST 7 NOVELS HAVE APPEARED AT THE TOP OF ALL MAJOR BEST SELLER LISTS, INCLUDING THE NEW YORK TIMES, BOOK SENSE, THE TIMES (LONDON) LE MONDE, PUBLISHERS WEEKLY, USA TODAY, & THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

THE WOODS WAS ON THE BEST SELLERS LISTS ACROSS AMERICA AND ALONG WITH PROMISE ME WAS NAMED ONE OF THE BEST THRILLERS OF THE YEAR BY LIBRARY JOURNAL

HIS BOOKS HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED IN 38 LANGUAGES AND OVER 40 MILLION COPIES HAVE BEEN SOLD WORLDWIDE

HOLD TIGHT PUBLISHED IN THE US ON APRIL 15, 2008 QUICKLY ASCENDED TO THE TOP OF THE NY TIMES BEST SELLER LIST THE WEEK OF MAY 1-8, 2008

AWARDS: 2001-TELL NO ONE: NOMINATED FOR EDGAR, ANTHONY, MACAVITY, NERO, BARRY, AUDIE, # 1 HARDCOVER ON BOOK SENSE 76 LIST, MOST DECORATED THRILLER OF 2001

2003-NO SECOND CHANCE FIRST EVER INTERNATIONAL BOOK OF THE MONTH FOR BOOKSPAN

SINCE 1995: WON AN EDGAR, SHAMUS, AND ANTHONY ---FIRST WRITER TO WIN ALL 3

ON THE SHORTLIST FOR THE BRITISH BOOK AWARDS AUTHOR OF THE YEAR (OSCAR OF THE BOOK TRADE). THE 1ST AMERICAN TO MAKE THE LIST

FILMS: TELL NO ONE RELEASED AS A FILM IN FRANCE IN 2006, GROSSED OVER $32 MILLION; TO BE RELEASED IN US IN THE SUMMER OF 2008; VARIETY CALLS THE FILM, “A SHARP, EFFICIENT PACKAGE.”

TELEVISION: FOX TV HAS PURCHASED THE RIGHTS TO THE POPULAR MYRON BOLITAR SERIES FOR A PILOT BY BONES



“The van was white with tinted windows. The back doors were open like a mouth waiting to swallow her whole. And standing there, right by those doors, now taking hold of Marianne and pushing her up inside the van, was the man with the bushy mustache.

Marianne tried to pull up, but it was no use.

Mustache tossed her in as if she was a sack of peat moss. She landed on the van’s floor with a thud. He crawled in, closed the back doors, and stood over her. Marianne rolled into a fetal position. Her stomach still ached, but fear was taking over now.

The man peeled off his mustache and smiled at her. The van started moving. Straw Hair must be driving.

“Hi Marianne,” he said.

She couldn’t move, couldn’t breath. He sat next to her, pulled his fist back, and punched her hard in the stomach.

If the pain had been bad before, it went to another dimension now.

“Where’s the tape? he asked.

And then he began to hurt her for real.”

“HOW MUCH SHOULD PARENTS REALLY WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THEIR KIDS?”---Dutton Publishing


One of the greatest thriller writers in history is back with a provocative new novel, Hold Tight. Harlan Coben weaves of tale that combines intrigue and technology in this incredible page turner. Seemingly divergent plots weave a tale of sex and death in the best edge of your seat story of 2008. Coben has a knack for taking the mundane occurrences in life and turning them upside down into scary thrillers that are among the most compulsive page turners in writing history. He singled handedly has invented what has been referred to as “the family thriller.” The family thriller involves tingling situations where ordinary people are forced to confront modern day fears when they are placed in situations that rapidly become beyond their control. You always have that, “but for the grace of God, there go I,” feeling when you read Coben’s books. His newest effort, Hold Tight is just such a book. Coben boldly expands on the family thriller in this joyride of a book.

Hold Tight asks the simple questions: what would you do to keep your kids safe? Are you willing to spy on your kids to keep them for harm? How far is too far? How far is not far enough? Are there things you do not want to know about your children? In this book, Coben takes unforeseen events and weaves multiple plots into an amazing climax, all the while asking the question: How do you weigh your child’s privacy against the parent’s right to know? Do parents have ‘the right or the duty’ to spy on their children to keep them safe? How can you tell what is normal rebellious teenage behavior from an out of control cry for help? In his 15th novel, Coben addresses these questions and scares the dickens out of us, in this well-crafted thriller.

Tia and Mike Baye have a normal family, (kinda like Ward & June Cleaver) complete with an 11 year old precocious daughter, and a hockey loving teenage son. But sixteen year old Adam suddenly becomes distant and sullen after his best friend, Spencer Hill suddenly commits suicide. The parents become more and more concerned. Finally, out of desperation, they install a spyware program on Adam’s computer, the will appraise them of every e-mail, IM, and text message he sends and receives. When a message comes to their attention, “Just stay quiet and all safe,” they are jolted. Spencer Hill supposedly died alone, but Spencer’s mother, Betsy Hill, discovers that Adam may have been with Spencer the night before his death. Before anyone can get to the bottom of just what Adam knows about Spencer’s death, Adam disappears. Mike Baye, a doctor and Tia Baye, a lawyer, are not the types to just sit around, so action is taken to find Adam. Long hidden secrets in the neighborhood and among its children begin to surface. At the same time, one woman is found dead and another is missing, and somehow the police suspect all of these matters are connected to Dr. Baye and his missing prescription pads. This could cost Dr. Mike everything.

As if Mike Baye isn’t dealing with enough, he also learns that Lucas Loriman, the sweet kid who grew up next door, is in urgent need of a kidney transplant. As the boy’s doctor, Mike suddenly finds himself in possession of an explosive secret that threatens to rip the Loriman family apart.

Eleven year Jill Baye is sticking by her best friend Yasmin after a teacher at school made such a devastating remark to her, that her classmates have teased her to the point where Yasmin and her hard-luck, single parent father are considering moving away. This is something Jill does not want to happen.

Mike’s best hope is to track Adam by using the GPS on his phone. Somehow Adam is connected to a strange teen club in Manhattan and a killer who is on the loose named Nash who takes a little too much pleasure in his work. Randomly, yet selectively killing women in the neighborhood, the police seem to think these women knew each other. “We're not even sure what he's trying to accomplish: just that he's very, very good at it; and very, very scary.” Nash is the scariest character I’ve read so far this year.

This is by far and away Coben’s best book to date. He spins several plotlines that at first seem disconnected and then slowly weaves them into a tale that is frightening, and intriguing at the same time. In this book, we are witnesses to a master storyteller who takes us on a giant thrill ride from start to finish. This is the freshest family thriller of 2008, and Coben is clearly at the top of his game. Don’t let anyone interrupt you when you read this one. There is too much going on to answer the phone. Gripping and thrilling, this one is masterful. Harlan, clear off a few spots on that award shelf at home, you’re about to collect some more hardware. Nearly a perfect book, this one is almost a 6 star effort. The inventor of the family thriller is at the top of his craft, and if you read only one book this summer…



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGX1yVBoaak

0 comments

New Movie Review From The Entertainment Critic: Ironman

5/5/2008 at 12:58 AM

Movie Review: Ironman
The Entertainment Critic
www.theentertainmentcritic.com
www.theentertainmentcritic.net
www.theentertainmentcriticmagazine.com
In Theatres Now Review
Opened May 2, 2008
By James Myers

Rating: 9 of 10

Director: Jon Favreau
Writers (WGA): Mark Fergus (screenplay) &
Hawk Ostby (screenplay)
Genre: Action | Adventure | Drama | Sci-Fi | Thriller more

Cast:

Robert Downey Jr ... Tony Stark / Iron Man

Terrence Howard ... Jim Rhodes

Jeff Bridges ... Obadiah Stane / Iron Monger

Gwyneth Paltrow ... Pepper Potts

Leslie Bibb ... Christine Everhart

Shaun Toub ... Yinsen

Faran Tahir ... Raza

Sayed Badreya ... Abu Bakaar

Bill Smitrovich ... General Gabriel

Clark Gregg ... Agent Phil Coulson

Tim Guinee ... Major Allen

Will Lyman ... Award Ceremony Narrator

Marco Khan ... Insurgent #4

Kevin Foster ... Jimmy

Garret Noel ... Pratt

Rated: PG-13 for some intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence, and brief suggestive content.
Runtime: 126 min
Country: USA
Language: English
Color: Color
Aspect Ratio: 2.35: 1 more
Sound Mix: DTS | SDDS | Dolby Digital
Certification: Canada: PG (Alberta/British Columbia/Ontario) | Australia:M | Norway:11 | Hong Kong: IIA | South Korea:12 | UK:12A | Canada: G (Québec) | USA:PG-13 | Germany:12 | New Zealand: M | Singapore: PG | Sweden:11 | Iceland:12 | Finland:K-13 | Netherlands:12 | Malaysia: U | Canada:14A (Manitoba) | Ireland:12A | Switzerland:12 (canton of Geneva) | Brazil:14 | Switzerland:12 (canton of Vaud) | USA:126
Filming Locations: Alabama Hills, Lone Pine, California, USA
Company: Dark Blades Films


This summer’s movie season is upon us, as May 2, 2008 marked the premier of the first summer blockbuster, Ironman. The movie in its very first weekend is a runaway smash, with a box office gate of $100.7 million, the second highest ever premier gross in motion picture history. Robert Downey, Jr., is perfectly cast as the arrogant, rich, superficial, playboy arms genius, Tony Stark, the moving force behind Stark Industries, an arms manufacturer that makes the very best in rocket warfare. Tony is the second generation Stark in this business as his father started the business with his original partner, Obadiah Stane, (you won’t know who the actor is until he begins to talk; it’s Jeff Bridges, with his head shaved!). Tony is an arms genius, who as the movie opens is in a Hummer with scotch in hand, the ice clinking in the glass, making wisecracks with army personnel. The film then flashes back to a test sequence that Tony conducts of his new weapon, "Jericho Missile", an extremely destructive, multi-warhead weapon system that Tony is showing to the Air Force and his old friend, Colonel James Rhodes (Terrence Howard), a serious jet pilot. This sequence shows the genius of Stark and the destructive power of the Jericho Missile. Downey is near perfect as the missile separates in to multiple warheads in the mountains of Afghanistan in the far off distance, arms outstretched as the precise time the bombs detonate with such force that the blast knocks the hats off of the pilots. Tony grabs his drink back from the stunned serviceman says, “...here’s to peace,” and walks to his vehicle. It is a brilliant, central scene in the picture, and from then on the audience realizes that this guy might be flaky, but he’s very good at what he does.

We flash back to Hummer, which is attacked and overtaken by a terrorist group, who calls themselves, The Ten Rings. Ironically, Tony is injured by shrapnel from one of his own weapons. Led by the evil and sadistic, Raza (Faran Tahir) they capture Tony, and force him to make a Jericho Missile for them. With the help of fellow captive Dr. Yinsen (Shaun Toub), Tony takes the next 3 months to build crude but strong power armor, powered from a miniature arc reactor. The arc reactor supplies energy to an electromagnet which protects Stark's heart from the embedded shrapnel in his chest. Unfortunately, in the escape attempt, Yinsen is killed. This is the second pivotal scene in the picture, as he lies dying, he tells Stark, …”to do something to help others” and not to waste his life. Stark escapes and is rescued, eventually returning home safely to Stark Industries, where he announces that Stark will not longer build arms, but will take steps to help it’s fellow man. The stock plunges and Stane is not pleased. He then leads a coup with the Board of Directors to bar Tony from their meetings.



Back at his home in Malibu, equipped with all the state of the art computer equipment, including his virtual assistant, Jarvis, Stark goes about the task, with the help of his assistant, Pepper Potts (played perfectly by the beautiful and capable, Gwyneth Paltrow), of perfecting his Ironman exoskeleton. The second best line in the picture comes from the hilarious sequences tracing Stark’s failure to make the contraption fly, when he tells her, “…you caught me doing stranger things than this.” The test sequences of flying in the suit are the funniest in the picture.

Once the body armor is complete, and Stark leans of insurgent activity in Afghanistan by his old nemesis, The Ten Rings, the first mission of Ironman begins. He saves the people of the village and stops the insurgents, but he strengthens the resolve of Raza to build and possess one of the Ironman suits from the prototype Tony left behind. The flying sequence on his way back to the US is hilarious, too. Chased by the Air Force, Tony gives them a run for their money, while talking to his buddy Rhodes the whole time.

Realizing that Obadiah Stane has been dealing with the insurgents under the table, Tony is determined to stop him. He has Pepper retrieve files relating to the sale of those weapons and his agreed to kidnapping from the computer in his office. While hacking into the system she discovers that it was Stane who hired the Ten Rings to kill Stark, but they had reneged on the deal when they realized who the target was. She also discovers that Stane has recovered the power suit prototype (Iron Man Mk I), and has engineered his own version, Iron Monger, an oversized, beefed up version of Iron Man.

Stane, upon realizing Pepper's discovery, steals Stark's arc reactor from his chest to power his new suit, leaving Stark for dead. Using his first reactor, which was not designed to power the suit, Stark does battle with Stane in Los Angeles, defeating him when the larger arc reactor that powers Stark Industries is deliberately overloaded. Stark barely makes it out alive when his reactor almost fails completely, but reactivates, causing a terrific explosion, killing Stane as Iron Monger.

The movies ends with Tony at a press conference, initially denying he is a superhero, then in a sudden reversal, and contrary to what the government has told him to do, announces to the world, that he is Ironman. Ozzie Osborne plays the Ironman theme and the credits roll, but don’t leave your seat quite yet. As with all the Marvel Comics movies, there’s more! Throughout the film, Clark Gregg appears as Agent Phil Coulson of Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement and Logistics Division (S.H.I.E.L.D.) trying to arrange a meeting with Stark. Following the credits, Samuel L. Jackson appears as their head, Nick Fury, telling Stark about the "Avenger Initiative". So there is a guaranteed sequel, and the buzz is that there will be 2 more Ironman pictures, with this cast.

This movie is surprising well-casted and directed. Directed by Jon Favreau (you may remember him from the movie, Swingers), he does an amazingly good job of having the right people in the right places, with the right dialogue at the right times. Downey and the rest of the cast had a tremendous amount of input into the script and the dialogue, ala Robert Altman; the film has a realistic feel in its dialogue and the relationships between the actors. The special effects and the amazing interaction between characters, (the sexual tension between Stark and Pepper is reminiscent of Bonds and Moneypenny), and Robert Downey Jr bringing his incredibly cohesive talents to this summer blockbuster, make this picture an absolute “you can’t miss this one” film. In a summer that will bring us Batman, Indiana Jones, The Hulk, Hellboy, and a new Star Wars picture, Ironman is a great kickoff to a summer season of blockbuster films. An explosion of summer fun, Ironman is a must see this summer.

0 comments

New Book Review By The Entertainment Critic: Home By Julie Andrews

5/7/2008 at 3:17 AM

Home: A Memoir of My Early Years

THE ENTERTAINMENT CRITIC BOOK REVIEW, BY JAMES MYERS
www.theentertainmentcritic.com
www.theentertainmentcritic.net
www.theentertainmentcriticmagazine.com

HOME: A MEMOIR OF MY EARLY YEARS
By Julie Andrews
Published by: Hyperion
Publication Date: April 1, 2008
Price: $26.95
352 Pages
ISBN-13: 9780786865659
Four Star Rating ****

JULIE ELIZABETH ANDREWS, DBE (BORN JULIA ELIZABETH WELLS ON OCTOBER 1, 1935 IS AN AWARD-WINNING ENGLISH ACTRESS, SINGER, AUTHOR AND ICON. SHE IS THE RECIPIENT OF GOLDEN GLOBE, EMMY, GRAMMY, BAFTA, PEOPLE'S CHOICE AWARD, THEATRE WORLD AWARD, SCREEN ACTORS GUILD AND ACADEMY AWARD HONOURS. ANDREWS ROSE TO PROMINENCE AFTER STARRING IN BROADWAY MUSICALS SUCH AS MY FAIR LADY AND CAMELOT, AS WELL AS MUSICAL FILMS LIKE MARY POPPINS (1964) AND THE SOUND OF MUSIC (1965).

ANDREWS HAD A MAJOR REVIVAL OF HER FILM CAREER IN THE 2000S, IN CHILDREN'S FILMS SUCH AS THE PRINCESS DIARIES (2001), ITS SEQUEL THE PRINCESS DIARIES 2: ROYAL ENGAGEMENT (2004), AND THE SHREK ANIMATED FILMS (2004-2007). IN 2005, ANDREWS MADE HER DEBUT AS A STAGE DIRECTOR WITH A REVIVAL OF THE BOY FRIEND, IN WHICH SHE ALSO MADE HER BROADWAY ACTING DEBUT IN 1954.

ANDREWS IS ALSO AN ACCOMPLISHED WRITER OF CHILDREN'S BOOKS, AND IN 2008 SHE PUBLISHED AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY, HOME: A MEMOIR OF MY EARLY YEARS.



“I am told that the first comprehensible word that I uttered as a child was ‘home.’
My father was driving his secondhand Austin 7; my mother was in the passenger seat beside him holding me on her lap. As we approached our modest house, Dad backed the car to turn onto the pocket-handkerchief square of concrete by the gate and apparently I quietly, tentatively, said the word.

‘Home.’

My mother told me there was a slight upward inflection to my voice, and not a question so much as a trying of the word on the tongue, with perhaps the delicious discovery of connection…the word to the place. My parents wanted to be sure they heard me correctly, so Dad drove around the lanes once again, and as we returned, it seems I repeated the word.

My mother must have said it more than once upon our arrival at our house-perhaps with satisfaction? Or relief? Or maybe to instill in her young daughter a sense of comfort and safety. The word has carried enormous resonance for me ever sense.

Home.”

The voice, once lost, that brought us some of the landmark musicals of the 20th Century, The Sound of Music, Camelot, My Fair Lady, and Mary Poppins, has returned in this wonderful memoir. Julie Andrews’s new book, Home: A Memoir of My Early Years, is a richly detailed, wonderful book that takes us inside all of the ins and outs of her early life, both personal and professional. Born into a marriage of two horribly mismatched parents, her father the teacher, her mother a performer, the mother eventually left the father to marry a successful vaudeville singer, and Julie went with her mother. Julie gives us a vivid description of the war years in England, in a household full of strife and full of music.

Julie’s professional life began when she was only 12. The family became dependent on her income for their survival. In 1948 she became the youngest solo performer to ever participate in a Royal Command Performance before the Queen. Julie sang all over the country, and she performed weekly on the BBC, living in rented rooms with older female chaperones, and an abiding longing for family and home. At on the age of 18, she left the UK for the USA to make her Broadway debut in the musical The Boy Friend. This was the beginning of her meteoric rise to Hollywood and Broadway stardom.

Home is filled with stories and anecdotes about working on some of the biggest musicals in history like, My Fair Lady with Rex Harrison, in Camelot with Richard Burton, and Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins. It cover a career that soared over seven decades including The Sound of Music, Mary Poppins, Thoroughly Modern Millie, Hawaii, 10, and The Princess Diaries. This book also features over 50 personal photos, many of which have never been seen before. She includes long, detailed discussions about her award winning television appearances, multiple album releases, concert tours, her international humanitarian work, best-selling children’s books and her work to improve literacy.

As we all know, towards the end of the Broadway run of Victor/Victoria, she lost her singing voice, and despite operations, she never recovered it. She has undergone a revival of sorts recently in the 2000’s with The Princess Diaries I and II, a made-for-television movies based on the Eloise books, a series of children's books by Kay Thompson about a child who lives in the Plaza Hotel in New York City. The same year, Andrews made her debut as a theatre director, directing a revival of The Boyfriend, the musical in which she made her Broadway debut, at the Bay Street Theatre in Sag Harbor, New York. Her production, which featured costume and scenic design by her former husband Tony Walton, was remounted at the Goodspeed Opera House in 2005 and went on a national tour in 2006. From 2005 to 2006, Andrews served as the Official Ambassador for Disneyland's 18 month-long, 50th anniversary celebration, the "Happiest Homecoming on Earth", travelling to promote the celebration and recording narration or appearing at several events at the park.

In 2004, Andrews performed the voice of Queen Lillian in the animated blockbuster Shrek 2 (2004), reprising the role for its sequel, Shrek the Third (2007). Later in 2007, she narrated Enchanted, a live-action Disney musical comedy that paid homage to classic Disney films such as Mary Poppins.

In January 2007, she was honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award at the Screen Actors Guild's awards, and stated that her goals including continuing to direct for the stage, and possibly to produce her own Broadway musical.

Home, has been published as part one of the memoirs/celebration of her life. Well written and detailed with glaring honesty, I cannot wait to read part two. This is a great book about a remarkable life, whose influence has spanned many generations. The voice of a great performer is back. One you should not miss this summer.

0 comments