The odd thing about my affinity for Yes is I cannot recall quite when I became a fan. It seems like I have always had “The Yes Album.” “Fragile” has never been far away either. Long before most of my generation became familiar with them because of “Owner of a Lonely Heart,” I was listening. I thought that maybe my older brother had listened to them, but I never remember seeing them in his collection of folk albums.

Yes, as a band, has had a tumultuous history. 16 members have come and gone in their 40+ year history. The only constant has been bassist Chris Squire. Along with drummer Alan White, the rhythm section has remained the same since 1972 and the 1973 album “Tales from Topographic Oceans.” There have been three main guitarists, Peter Banks, Steve Howe, and Trevor Rabin. Several Keyboardists have played in the band including Tony Kaye, Rick Wakeman, his son Oliver Wakeman, Patrick Moraz, and Geoff Downes to name a few. A part of the progressive rock scene in the early 70s, the band embodies the best and worst of the movement. For me, it would be hard to detail the entire history of dysfunction and virtuosity that is Yes. The band has had its hits and fair share of misses as a band. Their music is filled with compassion while at the same time an equal share of hubris. When it works, it is magical. When it doesn’t, it is unbearable. Sometimes, years later, I will give an album a second chance and it works. Sometimes it doesn’t.

My Favorite Albums 
1. The Yes Album
2. Fragile
3. 90215
4. Going for the One
5. Magnification
6. Drama

Sometimes, it is hard to put into words why you like some albums more than others. For me, it is even harder when it comes to Yes. “The Yes Album” has a classic mixture of great songs, great musicianship. There is not one throwaway song on the record, they are all classic. From ‘Starship Trooper’ to ‘Yours is No Disgrace’ to ‘I’ve Seen All Good People’ and ‘Perpetual Change,’ every second of the record breathes, expands, and emanates great sounds. I feel the same about “Going for the One”. From the majesty of ‘Parallels’ to the quiet sounds of ‘Wonderous Stories’ and the majestic ‘Awaken’, every song to me is a classic.

The same can be said of “Fragile,” “90215,” “Magnification,” and “Drama.” “Drama,” for some Yes fans would not make the list because it did not have the vocals of Jon Anderson but instead had Trevor Horn and former Buggles and future Asia keyboardist Geoff Downes. However, those songs, for me, thunder out of the stereo and speakers still. There is not a bad song, in my opinion on that record. Squire, White, and Howe remained at the core of the band and their prowess was never more evident. However, that lineup only lasted one record in 1980. It appeared Yes was dead.

White and Squire tried to make a go of a band with Jimmy Page (XYZ – ex Yes and Zeppelin) and then Squire and White got in contact with original keyboardist Tony Kaye and a young South African guitarist, Trevor Rabin. The band took the moniker Cinema. When they played Jon Anderson some of the tracks, he was enthused and wound up singing on some and Yes was reborn in 1983. The resulting album, 90215 changed the fortunes of the band. The music sounded fresh, modern, but it still sounded like Yes. Even with Rabin’s guitar and the sleek production of Trevor Horn, the music and songs were great and I consider the album a classic.

By the mid 1980s, I was out of college and my interest in Yes waned a bit as I focused on other interests in my life. I would buy the albums and listen to some, not listen to others. The 80s saw the high gloss production make its way into Yes. I initially did not care for a Yes album for many years until the late 1990s. My re acquaintance to Yes happened coincidentally with Napster and other file sharing programs. And for the past 15 years, I have listened to Yes every winter. Along the way, I have found some cool stuff. Magnification to me is a classic Yes album. After reuniting and breaking up constantly in the 1990s, Anderson, Howe, Squire, and White recorded an album with an orchestra just like they did thirty years earlier for “Time and a Word.” The result to me was a classic mixture of the personalities of each band member being subservient to the music. And the orchestra doesn’t hurt either.

The Unbearable
1. Tales from Topographic Oceans – I would have liked to been a fly on the wall for the discussion of the concept of this album. “OK. We are going to make an album of 4 songs. Each song will be 20 minutes. And our new drummer, the rock guy, will play drums.” No wonder Rick Wakeman left after this.
2. Tormato – I tried to listen to this over Christmas break. I got through 3 songs before I had to turn it off. However, my step-son downloaded some of the reissue. The tracks left off are far better than most of what was put on. Again, no wonder Wakeman left again and this time Anderson went with him.
3. Union – 8 members??? Really? What a cluster!

In the past few weeks, I have found myself listening to some of the baffling lineup albums from the 1990s – “Talk,” and “The Keys to Ascension 1 and 2.” And much to surprise, I found myself really enjoying the “Keys to Ascension 2″ studio tracks. One particular track that has my attention the past few days is ‘Mind Drive.’

Recently, Yes released a new studio album, their first in ten years, called “Fly From Here.” Produced by Trevor Horn, Canadian singer David Benoit handles the vocals and Geoff Downes has returned to play the keyboards. I haven’t really made up my mind on the record yet. I downloaded it but I need to listen to it a few more times.

I really don’t know what it is about Yes that I have remained a fan for 35+ years. Maybe it was the artwork that grabbed me initially, maybe it was the songs. Maybe it was the virtuosity, the dynamics of sound, I do not know. I just know winter would not be the same without them.

A little documentary on the band – Part 1 has no sound, so on to Part 2

At the time of the US Civil War, the telegraph was only 20 years old. The invention had spread slowly across the US. Originally, Congress was the main investor. For most of its first twenty years, the main use of the telegraph was for its operators to talk about the weather when they cleared the lines in the morning. Out of this activity came weather reporting and NOAA – the government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. As the war approached, the telegraph was seen as a fancy tool for businesses and the rich. It was not something even the military had embraced. The Army used the telegraph to send orders for supplies. The invention was not embraced by the populace and was thought to never be able to replace the common letter.

The location of telegraph offices during the Civil War

Abraham Lincoln, on the other hand, saw the invention as something magical. He called a telegram a “lightning message.” The telegraph played a large role in Lincoln’s life the last three years before he assumed the presidency. In 1858, newspaper reporters covering the Lincoln-Douglas Debates sent the messages to their newspapers back east via the telegraph. As a result, the new Republican Party had its first star for its anti-slavery platform. In 1859, Lincoln became quite the speaker on the east coast because of the debates. His speeches were telegraphed to the far western parts of the country. It was through the telegraph that the entire nation became aware of Lincoln and his views. From a backwoods railsplitter and postmaster, Lincoln’s image was taken to the nation through the telegraph. In 1860, Lincoln did not attend the Republican Convention in Chicago. Rather, he used the telegraph to keep abreast of the situation. It was through telegrams that Lincoln was informed of his nomination and following election that fall. In the weeks that followed his election, Lincoln used the telegraph to begin to assemble his administration. It was also through the telegraph that the South was informed of Lincoln and it was through the telegraph that news of secession spread. And thus, the Civil War was nearing.

During the war, the telegraph became Lincoln’s eyes and ears and virtually placed the commander-in-chief at the battle. However, it took two years for Lincoln to use the invention in a productive way. At the First Battle of Bull Run. Lincoln was informed via telegraph the Union had won the battle. He preceded to go for a carriage ride. Upon his return, Lincoln was informed of the Union defeat ass the Confederates reinforced the field with troops coming from the nearby railroad.

In 1862, Lincoln began to see the possible uses for the telegraph. Lincoln first had to wrestle control of the telegraph away from McClelland. For it was McClelland who controlled the telegraph and what messages were read. When Lincoln went to read dispatches one day, the operator was under strict orders to only let McClelland read the messages. The operator said “There was nothing new in the file” while he stuck messages under his desk. While not technically lying to Lincoln, Lincoln went into McClelland’s office and found the dispatches he was looking for on McClelland’s desk (hence not in the file). As a result of this incident, Lincoln wrestled control of the messages from McClelland and shifted the flow of information to the War Department.

Conveniently located across the street from the White House, the War Department and its telegraph office became the second home of the President during the Civil War. Lincoln developed a report and somewhat of a camaraderie with the office. Homer Bates, a telegraph operator, recorded Mr. Lincoln’s daily routine:

He often talked with the cipher-operators, asking questions regarding the despatches which we were translating from or into cipher, or which were filed in the order of receipt in the little drawer in our cipher-desk.

Lincoln’s habit was to go immediately to the drawer each time he came into our room, and read over the telegrams, beginning at the top, until he came to the one he had seen at his last previous visit. When this point was reached he almost always said, “Well, boys, I am down to raisins.” After we had heard this curious remark a number of times, one of us ventured to ask him what it meant. He thereupon told us the story of the little girl who celebrated her birthday by eating very freely of many good things, topping off with raisins for desert. During the night she was taken violently ill, and when the doctor arrived she was busy casting up her accounts. The genial doctor, scrutinizing the contents of the vessel, noticed some small black objects that had just appeared, and remarked to the anxious parent that all danger was past, as the child was ‘down to raisins.’ ‘So,’ Lincoln said, ‘when I reach the message in this pile which I saw on my last visit, I know that I need go no further.”

When it came to the war, Lincoln had used the telegraph very sparingly in 1861. In 1862, things had changed. McClelland and other generals were unwilling to engage the enemy despite superior numbers. In May of 1862, Lincoln hand wrote the following telegram to be sent to McClelland. Author Tom Wheeler wrote of the exchange of telegrams:

Lincoln’s redirection of General McDowell’s troops away from General George McClellan on the Peninsula below Richmond greatly upset McClellan, who wired the President, “It is the policy and duty of the Government to send me by water all the well-drilled troops available.” Lincoln’s reply illustrates his increasing frustration with McClellan, as well as his appreciation of the limitations of what could be said in an impersonal electronic message. After telling McClellan he was “painfully impressed” by the General’s position, he added, “I shall aid you all I can consistently with my view of due regard to all points.” The president’s frustration then boiled over and he added, ” and last I must be the Judge as to the duty of the government in this respect.” Upon reflection Lincoln crossed out the last line.

It was through the “T-Mails” with McClelland that we see Lincoln’s growing frustration with his Generals in 1862 to either fight or pursue Lee and Stonewall Jackson. By the fall of the 1862, Lincoln’s patience was at an end. After the Battle of Antietam, the Union was in a position to possibly to destroy Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia had McClelland pursued Lee after the battle. However, McClelland, true to form, failed to take the offensive. McClelland always thought he was outnumbered. Lincoln’s reply via telegram was very terse and made fun of McClelland’s inability to attack and McClelland’s ability to make excuses even about horses. Lincoln wrote, “about sore-tongued and fatigued [sic] horses,” demanding to know “what the horses of your army have done since the battle of Antietam that fatigue anything?”

Over the next year, the telegraph became Lincoln’s eyes and ears to keep track of the incompetence in the field and to minimize it. By the end of 1863, the fortunes of the war had shifted when Ulysses S. Grant was placed in charge of Union forces. The change in leadership in the military also reflected a change in how Lincoln used the telegraph. Now, instead of keeping track of the war, Lincoln used the telegrams to support Grant. In the year of 1864, an election year, Lincoln kept abreast of Grant’s pursuit of Lee through Virginia and bolstered Grant’s confidence through a series of exchanges in which Grant had lost some confidence and taken a lot of criticism after Cold Harbor. Lincoln would build Grant up, remind Grant of how the two were tied together in the cause.

Along with Sherman, Grant’s Virginia campaign and siege of Petersburg that fall brought Lincoln another term in the White House and would help to end the war the coming year.

Lincoln’s use of the telegram is important for several reasons.

1. The ability to receive information from the battlefield kept Lincoln abreast of not only the actions of the battle, but also of the ability and decision-making processes of his Generals. It became apparent early on that McClelland was incompetent and unwilling to engage Lee despite superior numbers. McClelland always believed in the telegrams that it was he who was outnumbered and not Lee. When ordered to attack, McClelland did so but not without making excuses as to why he was going to lose and it would not be his fault. Lincoln tired of McClelland’s attitude very quickly and would replace him at the first opportunity and that was after Antietam.

2. Lincoln was the commander-in-chief of the military and thus was able to assert his authority in record time. The telegraph allowed him to project his authority into the battle and move troops to and fro. While not micro-managing, Lincoln always was careful of his words. He often would write and edit his telegrams just before they were sent. At times, the information was disheartening, but in the end, the messages allowed for Lincoln to be a battlefield presence.

3. It’s always about people. If there is one thing Lincoln had in spades it was people skills. He could tell a yarn and was known for his story telling and jokes going all the way back to his days in New Salem. The telegraph made and supported his leadership skills in 1864 and 1865. Lincoln liked Grant because Grant attacked Lee at every opportunity. While McClelland retreated whenever possible, even after winning, Grant pressed on even when losing or coming to a draw. For Grant, there was no such word as retreat. In the telegrams between Lincoln and Grant, Lincoln consistently reminds Grant of his duty and to be vigilant in his duty. Tom Wheeler described one important exchange in 1864.

Lincoln read a telegram from General Grant to the army chief-of-staff that worried about the effect these events might have on the depletion of his force attacking Richmond. Lincoln responded, telling Grant, “Hold on with a bull-dog grip, and chew and choke.” When Grant received the message, he observed, “The President has more nerve than any of his advisors.”

The letter not only shows the single-minded tenacity of Lincoln but also how Lincoln instilled the tenacity to press on in Grant.

4. There is a lot to learn from these telegrams and how Lincoln conducted the war. But more so, there is what we can learn about Lincoln and his communication skills. Tom Wheeler praised Lincoln for telegrams and how it can applied to today’s electronic mail. Wheeler states Lincoln’s strengths were that less was more. Be brief and frank. Use candor and sometimes it is best to not return a message. And when possible, sometimes use a handwritten note. While email is nice and fast, sometimes it does not have the emotional impact of taking the time to write it by hand. Lincoln was known for such notes in addition to his telegrams.

The telegram was not the end-all and be-all of Lincoln’s communicative skills. It was just another extension. For Lincoln’s words, whether they are delivered in person, by letter, speech, or telegram, still echo through the ages.

For further reading

David Homer Bates, Lincoln in the Telegraph Office

Tom Wheeler, Mr. Lincoln’s T-Mails

In eighth grade I had read The Hobbit. I thought it was magical. The next logical step was to get into Dungeons and Dragons (D&D as we called it). Unfortunately, I did not know any other nerds in the new town. So, slowly, I read the monster manual, player’s handbook, and Dungeon Master’s Handbook. Walking the halls of the high school, I kept my secret to myself for a long time – months in fact. It was on a bus to a track meet when I overheard two other people talking about D&D. The next weekend, I was involved in my first campaign. Of course, cigars, beer, and Rush were involved, lots of Rush. It became the soundtrack to D&D. Albums like Caress of Steel, Fly by Night, 2112, A Farewell to Kings, Hemispheres, and the recently released Permanent Waves. 

D&D started out in the late 1960s by David Arneson and a then unemployed Gary Gygax. However it wasn’t until 1974 that the game first made its appearance in a box. The story of Tactical Studies Rules (TSR) the company Gygax used to start and publish the game is the story of a company that got too big for what Gygax had envisioned. The first 1000 games of D&D sold in less than a month. The $1000 used to produce the rules and 1000 games had been earned back and then some. By 1977, Gygax produced Advanced Dungeons and Dragons and the rush for the game was on (no pun intended).

For me, it was a rite of passage. Not the main one, but one of many. There is still something magical about imagining yourself with a torch in one hand, a sword in another, trying to find the monster’s lair and some sort of treasure. There was also learning how to work with other people. As a player, you could not accomplish the mission by yourself. You had to work together to get it done. It was the dungeon master against you. I was not a good dungeon master. I did not want to give up the treasure.  I enjoyed the player role much better. There was a bond there if you defeated the campaign. I can still almost smell the torch burning and the touch of the bricks as they sweat in the dampness of the dark.

Not everyone was sold on the game. Parents feared their children were in to Devil Worship. A student died in a real live action version of the game. Another family blamed their son’s suicide on D&D.  Here is a 60 Minutes piece on the backlash.

My own parents did not let me play it in the house in high school. My friends and I usually wound up in someone’s basement with the stereo cranked and the dice rolling. Looking back, I don’t know if I loved the game or the social aspect of it. Maybe it was both. It was a rite of passage for me. When I turned 16, I didn’t play D&D or AD&D as much as I had to get a job, but once or twice a month, I loved playing it. In nearby Decatur, there was a place you could order dice and campaigns to play. It usually took only 3-4 days to complete a transaction.

When college came in the fall of 1982, I packed up my manuals, dice, campaigns, my Rush albums and off to college I went. I was hopeful to find someone to play the game. I did not think it would be right across the hall in the dorm. It was. Every Saturday night my Freshman year was spent playing the game with my character, a Palladin, named Rothmoor (after David Lee Roth). It was also in those sessions that I was introduced to Genesis, Yes, Peter Gabriel, Brian Eno, and King Crimson.

As that year came and went, I found some friends but I also found out more about music than I had ever known before. When I left college in 1986, I was pretty much done with the game. I still kept the manuals and dice nearby. Every once in a while I pop open a campaign and give it a read. The 1980s were not kind to the game. TSR and the main writer, Gary Gygax, were constantly at odds. The original three men (one had died) who had started the company were not in charge anymore. Gygax left the company in 1986 and started a new company and wrote other board games, but none as popular as D&D or AD&D. Me, I don’t think I have played the game in almost 25 years. I have however, rolled the dice and I still listen to the music. Every time I hear late 70s Progressive Rock, I still think of D&D.

Here is a peak into the past…It was quite thorough on the history of the game and how to play. There are 7 parts to the video.

Born James Butler Hickok in 1837 in what was then called Homer, Hickok grew up in an abolitionist and religious home. The family was purportedly known to have helped escaped slaves northward to Lee County and DeKalb County and eastward to Grundy County and Kendall County. Young James was known to explore the countryside and became an expert marksmen in doing so. Hickok also was a voracious reader. Hickok read as many adventure stories as he could get his hands on. He became enamored with the legends of Davy Crockett and Daniel Boone.

At the age of 15, James went south to nearby LaSalle to become a mule boy on the newly opened I & M Canal. He would care for the mules and walk the mules pulling barges up and down the canal. Most days were filled with apples, long walks, and foraging through the nearby forests for game. Hickok and one of the mule boys, Charles Hudson, did not get along. Hudson thought Hickok was challenging him for the head mule boy position. In the ensuing fisticuffs, Hickok won the fight but he thought he had killed Hudson when they fell in to the six foot deep canal. As a result, young James took off for the west.

First Hickok went to Arkansas before he went to Kansas. At the time, the newly minted Kansas territory was in turmoil over whether Kansas was to be slave or free. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 determined that popular sovereignty would decide the matter. Free-soilers began to pour into Kansas just as Pro-slavery settlers arrived. The result was “Bleeding Kansas.” First hooking up with General Jim Lane, then later a 12-year-old Buffalo Bill Cody, Hickok’s skills of riding and shooting came into need. Hickok soon went to work for what would become the Pony Express driving a wagon.Odd jobs in the west were common for Hickok. He never stayed in one place very long, and he never stayed in one profession either. Whether it was fighting a bear, delivering mail, or law enforcement, Hickok was a natural drifter.

In 1861, Hickok was involved in an incident of much dispute. Hickok shot and killed David McCandles at Rock Creek Station. McCandles had come to collect a second payment on the property owned by Russell, Majors, & Waddell and their stagecoach company. Court records referred to him as “Duck Bill.” After the incident, Hickok would grow a mustache to cover his lips, which protruded out like a duck’s bill.

The Atchison Daily Champion newspaper reported the fight this way:

The McCandlas gang consisted of only the leader and three others, and not of fourteen as stated in the magazine. Of these “Wild Bill,” in the fight referred to, shot McKandlas through the heart with a rifle, and then stepping out-of-doors, revolver in hand, shot another of the gang dead; severely wounded a third, who ran off to a ravine near by, and was found there dead, and slightly wounded the fourth, who ran away and was not heard of afterwards. There was no grudge existing between the McKandles gang and “Wild Bill,” but the former had a quarrel with the Stage Company, and had come to burn the station “Bill” was in charge of.

Hickok was said to have killed McCanles during a dispute over funds from the sale of the station. Eventually, Hickok was found not guilty. He did not stay in Rock Creek Station. His next adventure saw him joining the Union Army during the Civil War.

Hickok’s time in the service had him doing many things: Wagon master, teamster, packer, property master, driver, and scout. It is also where Hickok got the name “Wild Bill” rescuing a bartender from a fight. It is rumored, but not substantiated, that Hickok spent all of 1863 in south as a spy. His whereabouts for the year 1863 to this day have not been confirmed.

In 1864, Hickok reappeared and the next few years saw him once again taking odd jobs here and there. But in these years, Hickok’s fame began to spread. His ability to “quick draw” his pistols still became the stuff of legend. Several times during his life, Hickok would be tried for murder, yet he never was convicted. In 1865, David Tutt became one of Hickok’s victims. Like so many other incidents of the time period, gambling debts played a role in the confrontation. The Missouri Weekly printed the following:

David Tutt, of Yellville, Arkansas, was shot on the public square, at 6 o’clock on Friday last, by James B. Hickok, better known in Southwest Missouri as “Wild Bill.” The difficulty occurred from a game of cards. Hickok is a native of Homer, Lasalle County. Illinois, and is about twenty-six years of age. He has been engaged since his sixteenth year, with the exception of about two years, with Russell, Majors & Waddill, in Government service, as scout, guide, or with exploring parties, and has rendered most efficient and signal service to the Union cause, as numerous acknowledgments from the different commanding officers with whom he has served will testify.

After Hickok had taken Tutt to the cleaners in a card game, Tutt brought up a previous debt. Hickok agreed Tutt’s claim forthright. Hickok gave Tutt the balance due. For Tutt, this was not enought. Tutt brought up another debt but Hickok disputed the debt. In the pursuant discussion, Davis took Hickok’s pocket watch. Tutt claimed he would hold it as collateral until Hickok paid the sum in full. Hickok was incensed. However, Hickok did nothing at the time. Tutt was surrounded by his cronies. Had Hickok attempted any retribution, Wild Bill would have met his end right then and there. Hickok agreed Tutt he could keep the watch, but said if Tutt ever wore the watch in public, Wild Bill would shoot him on the spot. Tutt did not scare easily.

On July 21, 1865, Tutt proudly wore the watch in public in downtown Springfield, Missouri. When the two men met face to face, Tutt drew first and missed. Wild Bill did not. He shot Tutt in the heart. The account became the stuff of legend. At the trial, the judge instructed the jury not to decide guilt or innocence based on the facts, but instead to base their decision on whether it was a “fair fight.” Wild Bill was found not guilty.

Hickok’s legend only grew larger in the coming years. The St. Louis Missouri Democrat wrote the following in 1867:

James Butler Hickok, commonly called “Wild Bill,” is one of the finest examples of that peculiar class known as frontiersman, ranger, hunter, and Indian scout. He is now thirty-eight years old, and since he was thirteen the prairie has been his home. He stands six feet one inch in his moccasins, and is as handsome a specimen of a man as could be found. We were prepared, on hearing of “Wild Bill’s” presence in the camp, to see a person who might prove to be a coarse and illiterate bully. We were agreeably disappointed however. He was dressed in fancy shirt and leathern leggings. He held himself straight, and had broad, compact shoulders, was large chested, with small waist, and well-formed muscular limbs. A fine, handsome face, free from blemish, a light moustache, a thin pointed nose, bluish-grey eyes, with a calm look, a magnificent forehead, hair parted from the centre of the forehead, and hanging down behind the ears in wavy, silken curls, made up the most picturesque figure. He is more inclined to be sociable than otherwise; is enthusiastic in his love for his country and Illinois, his native State; and is endowed with extraordinary power and agility, whose match in these respects it would be difficult to find. Having left his home and native State when young, he is a thorough child of the prairie, and inured to fatigue. He has none of the swaggering gait, or the barbaric jargon ascribed to the pioneer by the Beadle penny-liners. On the contrary, his language is as good as many a one that boasts “college laming.” He seems naturally fitted to perform daring actions. He regards with the greatest contempt a man that could stoop low enough to perform “a mean action.” He is generous, even to extravagance. He formerly belonged to the 8th Missouri Cavalry.

Over the next ten years, Hickok lived off this reputation in newspapers and Harper’s Magazine. He was a lawman, showman, and gambler. He lived mainly in Kansas and southwest Missouri during these years. Whether he was tracking or working as a lawman, Hickok’s reputation preceded him. Hickok favorite set of pistols were a set of 1851 Ivory plated Colt Navy 36 caliber Revolvers. He often wore them backwards in holsters, sashes, or belts. Even Hickok’s horse, Black Nell, was the stuff of legend. It was said to lay down just by Hickok’s touch. It was even rumored to come on command and even jump up on a pool table. George Ward Nichols wrote in 1867:

Bill whistled in a low tone. Nell instantly scrambled to her feet, walked toward him, put her nose affectionately under his arm, followed him into the room, and to my extreme wonderment climbed upon the billiard-table, to the extreme astonishment of the table no doubt, for it groaned under the weight of the four-legged animal and several of those who were simply bifurcated, and whom Nell permitted to sit upon her. When she got down from the table, which was as graceful a performance as might be expected under the circumstances, Bill sprang upon her back, dashed through the high wide doorway, and at a single bound cleared the flight of steps and landed in the middle of the street

illustration from Harper's New Monthly Magazine, February, 1867

In the early 1870s Hickok’s health began to wane. It was rumored that his eyesight was beginning to go. Then again, his mental capacities were not in full effect either after accidentally killing one of his deputies. After a brief stint in Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show, he left show business, something he for which didn’t care too fondly.

When gold was discovered in the Black Hills in the Dakotas, Wild Bill made  his way north to Deadwood, South Dakota in 1876. An outlaw town, Hickok tried to make it in gold but he soon set up shop mainly as a gambler in the town – set up illegally in Indian territory. Hickok was said to be night blind during this time. The saloons soon became the place for him to search for gold by gambling. Hickok had frequently talked of a premonition that Deadwood would be his last camp. In saloon Number 10, Hickok would meet his fate. With his back facing the back door, Jack McCall walked in and shot Hickok dead. His last words, “It looks like you got me and I’m broke.” His cards, Aces and 8s, the dead man’s hand, fell on the table. McCall faced a kangaroo court in Deadwood and was found not guilty. McCall claimed Hickok had killed a family member of his in Kansas. The Kangaroo Court agreed with McCall that the killing was justified in the lawless town. However, The government later tried McCall in a real court. He was found guilty of the murder of Hickok and executed.

The newspaper simply read about Hickok’s death,

“Died in Deadwood, Black Hills, August 2, 1876, from the effects of a pistol shot, J. B. Hickock [sic] (Wild Bill) formerly of Cheyenne, Wyoming. Funeral services will be held at Charlie Utter’s Camp, on Thursday afternoon, August 3, 1876, at 3 o’clock P. M. All are respectfully invited to attend.”

For further reading…Wild Bill Hickok Gunfighter: An Account of Hickok’s Gunfights by Joseph G. Rosa

Here is the entire Harper New Weekly Magazine article here.

On February 25, the two girls will share their exhibit to the world. As a huge fan of PKD, I am both excited and nervous with the exhibit they will produce. For me, as with any history fair project, it begins with a thesis – what is it the exhibit is going to argue. From a historical perspective, there are many things you could do with PKD as a history fair exhibit. These include:

1. The effect of the Cold War on his works

2. The effect his works had on the movies

3. The effect of McCarthyism on his own paranoia

4. The Role of Dick’s works as warnings about the future

5. The effect of the counterculture on his works

6. How did Dick develop and write his most famous works?

7. The use of technology in the works of PKD

8. Many more…

Regardless of the thesis, the exhibit does not matter if the students can not find sources. Over the years I have collected some digitized sources of letters of PKD. The most obvious place to start would be the bound volumes of PKD letters. Unfortunately, most students cannot go out and purchase them (cost prohibitive), nor are the students able to check the volumes out of a local library as most libraries do not contain the works. Have no fear, the Internet is here!!! With a simple search for PKD letters, one is not only able to find actual text of PKD letters, but more importantly for the history fair students, actual images of those letters. Some are available at the PKD official web site, others are from assorted sites in the cybersphere.

Aside from letters, the next best source of information would be actual interviews and magazine articles including Paul Williams’ 1974 Rolling Stone piece on PKD which is available in pdf format. A student could use YouTube Interviews, old newspaper critiques. Proquest has access to Chicago Tribune and New York Times databases. Some of these articles are enlightening to see how PKD was viewed in his time period.

As for books about PKD, there are a few biographies of Phil out on the market. I am not a big fan of biographies. Yes, I am a historian, but no, I prefer to weave  history together through documents, interviews, newspapers, and magazines. Secondary sources are only useful to a point. The main primary source of any PKD exhibit will be the works of PKD. 200+ short stories and 30+ novels tell more of the man than almost any biography could. Even the video, The Penultimate Truth, is a better source than most PKD biographies.

The reason I like videos, or educational films, are the interviews. This film interviews 3 of PKD’s wives and a step-daughter. It is a thorough work which I enjoy watching it again from time to time. It examines his whole career in 90 minutes and the picture painted of the man is as complex as any book, even more so as PKD’s friends recall the climactic points of his life. For that matter, they could even email and interview Johnathon Lethem, blogger David Gill, or even one PKD’s wives who both recently wrote memoirs on PKD.

As the two girls begin their quest to explore the mind of PKD, I have to remind myself not to get too involved. Even though I have been waiting for this someone to do this exhibit for years, I also want them to find things on their own as young historians. The last thing I want is for them to be turned off to not only history, but the work of PKD. My job will be to ask the questions. Their job is to find the answers. If they ask for help I will, but they have to do the research. They have to do the writing. They have to do the organizing, and most importantly, they have to do the analysis. I will be excited to see what they construct. When it is done, I will put up a picture of the exhibit here on this post or blog. And maybe, just maybe, it will do well. And maybe, they will become fans of PKD.

The Work Station of PKD

Backtracks on PKD

http://historyrat.wordpress.com/2009/04/04/philip-k-dick-the-face-of-the-21st-century-fiction/

http://historyrat.wordpress.com/2011/04/26/rethinking-philip-k-dick-the-influence-of-the-cold-war/

Grant at Cold Harbor

forces were killed or wounded in an attack on entrenched Confederate positions. Historian Ernest B. Ferguson called it “mindless slaughter” and “not war but murder”. Grant later acknowledged it was the only attack he wished he had not ordered. But this battle, despite its devastation and carnage, marked a turning point in battle strategy for both Union and Confederate commanders.

At the beginning of 1864, the Union had undergone significant changes in its command structures. Lincoln, after having gone through George McClellan (twice) Joseph Hooker, Irvin McDowell, Ambrose Burnside, and George Meade as heads of the Army of the Potomac, took a different approach towards catching and destroying Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia. Ulysses S. Grant, former commander of the Army of the Tennessee, was placed in charge of all Union forces. Later, after criticism of Grant surfaced over Grant’s use of force and large loss of life, Lincoln would say of Grant, “I can’t spare this man. He fights.”

And fight Lee is what Grant would do in 1864. Grant’s pursuit of Lee began at the Battle of the Wilderness. With over 100,000 men, Grant’s pursuit of the 62,000 Confederate Army of Northern Virginia began on May 5, 1864. Over three days, Grant’s forces tussled with Lee’s. Both sides suffered heavy casualties. On May 7, Grant pulled away from the battle and began a surprise move toward the south, toward Richmond. Lee, although the military victor at the Wilderness, was now playing second fiddle. Grant forced Lee to pursue him. Grant was on the offensive and Lee and the Confederacy were on the defensive. The two sides next engaged that May at Spotsylvania Court House, just a few miles from the Wilderness. From May 8 through May 21, 1864, Grant attacked Lee at will, but yet Grant was unable to defeat Lee. Casualties were heavy for the two week battle with over 32,000 killed or wounded. The Confederates held. However, Grant’s intended tactics of constant war was beginning to have an effect on the Army of Northern Virginia. Lee’s numbers were dropping.

The two sides next met at North Anna from May 23–26, 1864. Grant wasted no time in being the aggressor while Lee was able to defend his positions with light casualties. However, Grant still was able to move around the flank of Lee at the end of the battle to continue the Union march toward Richmond. Just as at the Wilderness and Spotsylvania Court House, Grant withdrew his forces to begin the offensive anew. This time, the battle would be much different.

Most people tend to think of a battle as happening over 1-2, maybe even three days during the Civil War. The Battle of Cold Harbor would take place over a two week period from May 31 to June 12. However, the greatest loss of life would be on June 3 for which the battle is mostly known. Lee, although having been given 7,000 more men through the arrival of P.G.T. Beauregard, was wearing down. Grant’s persistent attacks forced Lee to use every available man. If the lines ever broke, then the Army of Northern Virginia would be finished. For Lee, this meant no reserve forces would be available and Lee had to use new tactics.

What had made the American Civil War so deadly up to this point had been a combination of technology and tactics.
The Technology
1. New rifles – the barrels of the rifles had grooves bored in them to spin the bullet through the rifle. This spin created not only more accurate weapons, but also created more distance
2. The Mini Ball – manufactured at the Springfield, Illinois Armory, the .56 caliber bullet did not just kill soldiers on contact, it destroyed and shattered bones. The shattering, along with the trace of the bullet, created infection throughout the surrounding tissue. Thus, amputation became the common surgery to avoid infection. A wound in the stomach was often considered fatal.
3. Fuses – Artillery commanders could now adjust their shells to explode after short intervals or long intervals giving the commanders a variety of methods in which to kill advancing troops or troops in entrenched positions at a distance.
The Tactics
1. Formations – Both sides used the standard formation of marching abreast toward enemy positions. Combined with the new weapons, this meant high casualty rates for both sides – but mainly the aggressor. The defensive positions held the advantage throughout the war except in sieges.
2. Lee often split his army – For one reason, Lee was always outnumbered. Lee would then use these smaller force to out maneuver the Union at almost every battle (except Gettysburg and Antietam). With his numbers wearing thin as a result of constant warfare, Lee would have to come up with a new defensive plan. He no longer had the numbers or reserves to divide his army in the face a superior foe.

The resulting change in tactics at Cold Harbor was to build earthworks, a.k.a. trenches. Although this type of warfare would become popular in World War I, Lee used it to his advantage at Cold Harbor. The forest provided cover and terrain suitable for defensive positions to ensure that the Army of Northern Virginia could defend and hold them.

On the morning of June 3, Grant had his forces move on two of the entrenched positions around Cold Harbor. Attacks began as early as 4 a.m. By noon, over 7,000 (some reports say 10,000) Union casualties laid on the battlefield. Grant would say of the attack,

I regret this assault more than any one I have ever ordered. I regarded it as a stern necessity, and believed that it would bring compensating results; but it has proved, no advantages have been gained sufficient to justify the heavy losses suffered. (Ferguson, 2000, p. 178)

Over the next nine days, the two sides continued to hammer away at each other. Newspapers hammered away at Grant, calling him a “Butcher.” Lincoln was not dissuaded. He knew, like Grant, that Lee was starting to wear thin. Had the attack succeeded, the Army of Northern Virginia would have been destroyed. Lincoln had the man he wanted to end the war in command. Grant, above all else, had taken control of the war. It was Grant who decided the terms of battle. Lee was in no position to do so.

After the Battle of Cold Harbor, Grant made another swing around Lee’s line, and instead of heading for nearby Richmond, the capital, Grant swung towards Petersburg. Using the lessons of Cold Harbor and Vicksburg, Grant laid siege to Petersburg for nine months. Lee, once again, built massive earthworks and trenches to defend against an attack and to place himself between Grant and Richmond. The tactics had changed. Cold Harbor made sure of it.

With most of Lee’s army hungry, and some shoeless, it would only be a matter of time for Lee and Grant knew it – thus the siege. A Captain in the Army of Northern Virginia stated after the Battle of Cold Harbor, “We are being conquered by the splendor of our own victories, and Grant accepts defeat with that consolation” (Ferguson, 2000, p.256). It was only a matter of time now before Lee surrendered, only a matter of time.

My Great-Grandfather, Albert Tell Slusher, was 14 during this campaign. A bit young for battle, he still was one of thousands of young boys who enlisted in the Army of Northern Virginia to hold off Grant. He would be at Cold Harbor. He would be at Petersburg, Richmond, and Appomattox Court House, too. He helped fire artillery according to his pension records. I never met the man. He died some 40+ years before I was born. Luckily, it was not 100 years.

Cleaning up one of the battlefields at Cold Harbor

For Further Reading
Not War But Murder: Cold Harbor 1864 by Ernest B. Ferguson

Teaching U.S. History before the dawn of the Internet was just as challenging as today. Whether it was filmstrips, overhead projectors, ditto machines, reel-to-reel films, or carbon copies, some sort of technology has always existed for History teachers to try to engage their students. When I began teaching, I relied quite heavily on the textbook. It was my crutch. As those first weeks went by, I knew the textbook was not going to get me through the year. I had to come up with other strategies to engage students. There was the VCR, the map worksheet, the occasional simulation, or music of the time period. It did not matter what I did, I was not going to reach every student in the classroom. I had to think in those terms. Mind you, this was only my first month as a teacher, but that is how I thought. I brought in editorial cartoons from newspapers.  This began to reach them. The funny drawing began to connect with them. Soon, other strategies worked. Arguments, debates, and other strategies where students get to take a stand for something that mattered to them. Creativity mattered. Thus, I realized that after two months of teaching, the key for students to learn was that when they entered the classroom, they knew they would be engaged somehow, someway.

In 1996, everything changed. The school put a computer in my classroom. And that computer was hooked up to the Internet. The Internet changed how I accessed historical materials, how I tested, and even how I learned. When broadband came to town so did online video. Over the last 15 years, the computer has transformed how I plan, edit, write, and deliver curriculum. Sometimes, I think maybe it was better the old way. Just because you have the technology doesn’t mean you should use it all the time. It took me a few years to realize that. Today, I only have a few videos I show and most of them are digital. They exist on a flash drive or DVD.

The greatest gift of the Internet for students has been as a visual tool. It is much easier to go find an image of someone, or something, and show the students how things were. It even has added to the aura of developing suppositions about what happened before during and after. It makes no sense for students to go look up stuff on the Internet and spit it back at you. As a teacher, you need to find a way for students to use the information on the Internet to make an argument, not just to copy and paste information – because that is what they do if you don’t engage them.

But for me, the greatest gift as a teacher is that I am now able to access almost any primary document from a major historical event. To have my students read them, whether it is a battlefield map from Gettysburg or a letter from Jefferson to Lewis and Clark or a photograph from the Great Depression, the primary document allows me to place my students in history and teach them not only about history but also more importantly, making choices, how to think critically, and how to plan ahead. In addition, the document teaches context. Something always came before and something will happen after a choice is made. Consequences – what a concept for eighth graders!

One year ago, I spoke at the National Council for the Social Studies Annual Conference in Denver about how I teach the Cuban Missile Crisis with primary documents. It is one of my favorite parts of the curriculum to teach. But as more and more history is being unearthed and uploaded, decisions are going to have to be made about what is taught and what is not taught. I remember in high school, my teacher made it to the Great Depression. That’s it. No World War II. No Vietnam. No Civil Rights Movement. No Cuban Missile Crisis. In the small rural school I currently teach at, I am the only History teacher in the 8th grade. I get to choose what I teach and how I teach. Many districts are not like that. Most districts in fact are not like that. Still, what History are we going to teach in the 21st Century? And is it going to be a textbook driven class?

Jackie Robinson steals home

I rarely use the textbook at all. I haven’t for years. It goes all the way back to my first year of teaching when I realized Jackie Robinson was not in the textbook. I knew then I could rely on a book that did not have such a monumental event in it. There was not even a mention of the Negro Leagues nor sports in general except in passing. In my current design, I have several lessons throughout the year about baseball. One is on how it developed during the Civil War. Other lessons are on baseball in the 1920s, 30s, 40s, and beyond. Each lesson is a microcosm for issues in society of the time period. Whether it is new inventions, electrification, race, steroids, and the use of technology, I think any teacher would be remiss if they didn’t teach how baseball shows how our nation has changed over the past 150 years. Any sport, whether it is the NBA, the NFL, or boxing, gives students a glimpse into how sports reflects society. It is an amazing sight to watch students faces light up when they see Muhammad Ali in his prime. But the bigger issues I see in his face are race, religion, and Vietnam – all in one man.

In the last few years, I have contemplated changing the Units which I teach. The main reason is that the eighth graders I have now will be taking US History through 1914 as sophomores. My class is US History 1865-present. There is some overlap between the two grade levels. But, that is not always a bad thing. The high school teacher spends more time on the Progressive Era and I spend more time on local and Illinois History in that era. It all works out.

What I have been struggling with most the past few months is how to quantify the current era of America History. It is easy to look back and to organize units based on historical periods. Most history teachers use the following
1. Colonial and Revolutionary Era
2. Early America
3. Westward Expansion
4. Civil War and Reconstruction
5. The Transformation of the US
6. The US as a World Power
7. The 20s and 30s
8. World War II
9. The Post War World 1945-1963
And that is where things begin to get murky. In my 1865-Present class, I use the following units after JFK:
10. Massive Change: The 1960s – Civil Rights Movement, Vietnam, Music, and Nixon
11. Conservative America – The shift in America to a more conservative philosophy is highlighted in this unit as it goes from Ford and Carter to Reagan, Bush 41, and Clinton.

The trouble for me has been in looking ahead to this year. Do I put George W. Bush in the Conservative unit or do I start a new unit? And if I put Bush 43 in a new unit with Obama, what do I call it? I am tempted to call it “Catastrophic America” but I don’t know how history is going to be played out. Starting with September 11th and continuing with the 2007-2008 economic meltdown from which we have yet to recover, it is tempting to name it “Catastrophic” although some might find the title of the unit a bit harsh, but that is what it has been. From oil spills to hurricanes to political infighting, it has been an era defined by how differing views on how government should handle those two events.

I don’t know why I am spending a lot of time and energy thinking about this, but this is what I do. I think before I teach.

A Young Bobby Fischer

Growing up in the early 1970s afforded a young boy a variety of idols. There was Reggie Jackson of the Oakland A’s, Gale Sayers of the Chicago Bears, Neil Armstrong of the Apollo program. But for nerds like me and my brother, there was only one person any young boy could attempt to be like that did not require adept physical attributes, and that was Bobby Fischer. At the age of 14, Bobby was the US Chess Champion. At age 15 he earned the title of Grand Master – the youngest in history. Between 1957 and 1967, he would win 8 US championships. After winning the World Championship from Boris Spassky in 1972, Fischer would basically fall off the Earth for almost 15 years. And then “Poof!”, he was gone.

I am not a chess master. I don’t pretend to be. I enjoy the game, the strategy of it, and the sport of it. It’s a game with a very simple objective. Capture the King. But to capture that King, it requires a complex set of moves with almost endless variations. But above all else, I can appreciate the ability to think ahead ten moves at a time. For Bobby Fischer, the game was not just about manipulating the pieces on the board, it is about manipulating the opponent. He often said he liked to make his opponents squirm. For America, Bobby Fischer was a Cold Warrior’s dream! In the midst of the Cold War, along comes an American who can challenge the Soviet dominance and hold on the reigns of the World Chess Championships.

Fischer’s parents were both from Europe. They would marry in 1933 and flee soon after. Being Jewish, they would immigrate to the US. Bobby was born in Chicago in 1943. The father would leave the home when Bobby was 2. The mother, Regina, would raise Bobby herself. The two of them moved to Arizona where Regina taught elementary school. Soon, Bobby and his mother would migrate to Brooklyn and this is where Bobby’s tale begins.

Bobby began playing Chess at the age of 6. He would play in small tournaments, but he would learn from the masters of the game. Carmine Nigro, President of the Brooklyn Chess Club, introduced him to the club and became his mentor. Fischer claimed to have read over 1000 books on Chess. He was like a sponge. Later, at 12, Fischer would join the prestigious Manhattan Chess Club.

Bobby Fischer exploded on the national scene at the age of 13. Fischer joined the Hawthorne Chess Club and moved from competing against kids his close to his age to adults full time. For chess aficionados, here is a blow-by-blow of Fischer’s game against Donald Byrne. The game shows Fischer’s ability to think creatively and draw his opponents into a trap from which there is no escape. Fischer had lost his queen yet still was able to win the game. It has become known as a “Brilliancy” game but is better known as the “Game of the Century”.

Fischer, for all intents and purposes, tried to lead a normal childhood. He went to Erasmus High School in Brooklyn. He would drop at the age of 16 to pursue Chess full time. His home life was different, too. Although Bobby’s father was never around (he died in 1952), there were several father figures in his life. In the 1950s, it was Arnold Denker, a Chess master, and sportswriter Dick Schaap. They would often take Bobby to sporting events and cultural activities to socialize him. Fischer and the two men would be lifelong friends.

As Fischer’s reign as US Chess Champion began at the age of 14, so did a variety of idiosyncratic behaviors. He would often place demands to be met in order for him to appear. Most of the demands had to do with the design of the board, the relationship of the lights, the type of lights, the closeness of the audience. Most of the demands were met. They had to be. For the chess world, Bobby was the draw for the tournament. Without Bobby, no one would come to see the matches.

By the age of 25, he was an American icon. He had yet to win the World Championship, but many thought it was only a matter of time. Bobby often played overseas. Once, the US government forbid him to play a tournament in Cuba. So, Bobby being Bobby, played over the telephone and won the Capablanca Championship.

Here, Fischer, a huge celebrity, appears on the Dick Cavett show in 1971 and comes across as quite a normal person.

1972 would be the year that everything would change. In 1972 at the World Chess Championship, in Iceland, Fischer quickly disposed of his opponents in a run of undefeated matches unlike anything anyone had ever seen. At 29, Fischer was at the peak of his powers. He didn’t just beat opponents, he annihilated them. Fischer had reached the final against Boris Spassky of the USSR. The matches, a total of 24 scheduled, would be anything but normal. Fischer fell behind early. The next match, Fischer would fail to show up unless his demands were met. Eventually, organizers of the event gave in. I tend to think that for Fischer, these were all head games. Spassky and the organizers of the event did not have to give in to Fischer’s demands. If they had not, Fischer would have forfeited the matches and Spassky would have retained his title. Instead, the audience was moved back, lights were changed, and the cameras turned off – all demands of Fischer.

Fischer came back, and game three began. Over the next 18 matches, Fischer regained his footing despite being down 0-2. Slowly, Fischer began to assert himself. For the first time in game 3, Fischer beat Spassky.  After a draw in game 4, Fischer came back to win game 5 and never looked back. Fischer had gone from national hero to world celebrity. By breaking the Soviet dominance of Chess World Championship, Bobby had become an American icon.

The victory did not stun the world, but it did stun the Soviets. Garry Kasporov stated,

“Fischer’s victories brought problems for many people in the Soviet camp, because it was thought there had been failures of training or discipline that should be corrected. No one could accept that it was simply Fischer’s genius that was causing the trouble.”

However, Bobby never cashed in on his fame afterwards. He basically fell of the face of the Earth. He would never defend his title, even on his terms.

Spassky vs Fischer

There were rumors around surrounding Fischer for the next 20 years. The Worldwide Church of God was said to have had an influence. The occasional appearance to play against a computer or the occasional arrest happened, but it was not until 1992 that Bobby appeared. A rematch against Boris Spassky would take place in war-torn Yugoslavia. Against UN and American sanctions, Fischer appeared and won. He took the prize money of $3 million and ran. His voice and words would appear on radio from time to time. He would make anti-Semitic comments along with anti-American comments throughout the 1990s and again after the events of September 11, 2001. Rumors began to swirl that Fischer’s father was not his father. In fact it was another emigre from Hungary, a Jewish physicist. In the next few years, Fischer would continue his bizarre rants, end up in jail, somehow get to Iceland, and he would die there in 2006.

His life, although quite public through 1972, turned inward and bizarre. Much like Howard Hughes, an appearance by Bobby Fischer was something to behold. Yet, he would only play publicly once after his 1972 title. He remains an American master. As to what went wrong and why he would never defend his title, no one will know. Those he stayed with those years are not talking. Close friends tend to believe it was his father. Whenever his father was mentioned, Fischer would often clam up.

Chess Champion and Master Garry Kasparov stated about Fischer, “perhaps the most mythologically shrouded figure in chess”. He is. He is also one of the most shrouded figures in American history. We are all left to wonder what could have been and what went wrong. Fischer once said “Chess is life.” That life ended at 29.

Here is a video biography of Bobby up to shortly before his death.

Al Davis and Hall of Fame center Jim Otto

Al Davis began his career in professional football with the Los Angeles Chargers as an assistant to Sid Gillman in the old American Football League. Gillman, maybe the biggest offensive innovator in NFL, had a huge impact on how Davis looked at the game. Gillman used the deep pass along with sending men in motion to destroy defenses. The motion revealed whether a team was playing zone or man-to-man coverage. Using the deep pass stretched the field and created more room for offense. After the 1962 season, Davis was hired away from the AFL Champion Chargers (who had then moved to San Diego) to be the head coach of the Oakland Raiders.

Davis brought what he learned from Gillman and used it with the Raiders. Two of the first three years saw the Raiders win the AFL West Championship. In 1966, Davis stepped out of coaching to be the AFL Commissioner. The AFL was in a bidding war with the NFL over players. With its wide open offenses and flashier play, the AFL was becoming more attractive to prospective players. AFL Owners revered Davis who originally signed Lance Alworth (my early hero) for the Chargers during his tenure there. Davis was an in your face kind of person. He took prisoners and many NFL Owners feared him. In fact, when merger talks began in 1966, the NFL went directly to the AFL owners and bypassed Davis. Davis was against the merger because of fees the NFL would impose on the franchises to join the league. After only two months on the job as commissioner, the other owners reached a deal in June of 1966 with the NFL. It would take four years to merge. In 1970 the Steelers, Colts, and Browns from the NFL joined ten team AFL to become the AFC.

Soon after the merger was announced, Davis stepped down and returned to the Raiders. He would not coach anymore. He would be the General Manager and an owner of the franchise. The Raiders would go on an unprecedented winning streak the next ten years. That run included AFL West Championships, and AFL Championship, and a trip to Super Bowl II only to lose to the Green Bay Packers.

In 1969, Davis brought in a young coach, John Madden, to take over the team. Davis would assemble a team built on speed and stretching the field. Madden would do the coaching. Ken Stabler would the southpaw quarterback. Speedster Cliff Branch would be the deep threat. Fred Biletnikoff would be the other threat. Throw in Dave Casper at TE and this team with a bevy of interchangeable running backs dominated the league with six straight division titles. In 1977, the Raiders would win the Super Bowl. Madden would soon resign after not making the playoffs in 1978.

Receiver Fred Biletnikoff, left, and quarterback Ken Stabler

The Silver and Black were to be feared. The Raiders of the 1970s played hard. They were vicious defenders and ball hawks. From Ted Hendricks to Lyle Alzado, and John Matusak, the Raiders defense did not just tackle you, they punished you. Nine players from those early 70s teams are in the Hall of Fame. They include Dave Casper, Jim Otto, George Blanda, Willie Brown, Gene Upshaw, Art Shell, Fred Biletnikoff, Dave Casper, Ted Hendricks, and Bob Brown. Surprisingly, Ken Stabler should be, in my opinion, along with WR Cliff Branch and DB Jack Tatum. That is an impressive feat as the Steelers from that era.

Davis valued speed above all else. In the 1980s, the team would win its second and third Super Bowls under coach Tom Flores, the first Hispanic coach in NFL history. Those teams were far different beasts than the 1970s teams. The San Jose Mercury News stated Davis’ genius as General manager was that

“He routinely signed players that other teams wouldn’t touch, and he wasn’t afraid to buck convention, as evidenced by his selection of punter Ray Guy and kicker Sebastian Janikowski in the first round of the draft.”

One of those players was quarterback Jim Plunkett.  Plunkett lead the team to the 1980 and 1984 Super Bowl. That team was built on speed, all over the field. In 1983, the Raiders would win the Super Bowl again. Led by RB Marcus Allen, the team dominated going 12-4 and cruising to 38-9 victory in the Super Bowl.

After the third Super Bowl Championship, the 80s were not kind to Raider Nation. Davis would sue the NFL, move the Raiders to LA, and then back to Oakland. Public feuds with star player Marcus Allen did not help. But there is no denying the influence Davis held on the game in the 1970s. In an era, and a league, predicated on running the ball down the throat of the defense, Davis stretched the field with the long ball. First with Daryl Lamonica, then Ken Stabler, and finally Jim Plunkett. However, other apprentices to Gillman further changed the game in the 1980s. Bill Walsh and the West Coast Offense across the bay in San Francisco changed the offensive game plans of many throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Davis’ greatest days were behind him.

The Raiders would have a brief resurgence under Jon Gruden as head coach only to see Davis trade Gruden to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers after the 2001 season. The next year, the Raiders and the Buccaneers would meet in the Super Bowl with Gruden and the Buccaneers winning.

Raiders History Video

Some famous Al Davis Sayings
- Just win, baby!
- The quarterback must go down, and the quarterback must go down hard
- Don’t adjust. Just Dominate.
- We don’t take what the defense gives us; we take whatever the hell we want.
- We want to win. The Raider fans deserve it. The Raider players deserve it, even my organization deserves it. You have to win and you have to win with a vision for the Super Bowl. That’s our passion here.

The influence of the Raiders on the hardcore rap community is explained by Snoop Dogg

For Jobs, his career began with his friendship with Steve Wozniak. First, the two friends began as phone hackers. That’s right, phone hackers. It wasn’t called hacking back in the early 70s, it was called phone phreaking. Wozniak built a blue box to access phone networks and sold them to hack into phone networks. Out of the interest in phreaking, Wozniak began to branch out into computers. The Homebrew Computer Club began to draw the interest of Wozniak. The club saw Wozniak try and fail many times in building the computers. What came about was the Apple I. Soon the Apple II followed and Apple was on it way.

In the 1980s, Jobs fought for control within the company. In 1984, the Macintosh with its user interface (mouse) made waves but the actual computer was quite limited in what it could do. What the Mac needed was software. To achieve that, Jobs turned to a young software company named Microsoft. Still Macintosh sales were slow. Jobs was forced out of the company in favor of former Pepsi CEO John Scully.

Next for Jobs was a company called Next. Next did not go well. Sure, they came out with a sleek, and slick, all black design. The computer did not catch on. However, the operating system was drew rave reviews. In addition to software development, Jobs had overtaken Pixar in 1986. Using the talents of John Lassiter, Toy Story was born. Upon its release in 1995, Toy Story joined the pantheon of great American films. Eventually, Jobs took Pixar public and made billions before the company was absorbed into Disney.

In 1996, Jobs, much wiser from his time away from Apple, was a different man. He was more secretive, and less in your face (to his competitors but not his employees). Jobs returned to the company he started. For the next 15 years, Jobs took a company on the brink of failure, streamlined and simplified products and product lines.

Jobs said,

“It’s really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don’t know what they want until you show it to them” and ““That’s been one of my mantras — focus and simplicity. Simple can be harder than complex: You have to work hard to get your thinking clean to make it simple. But it’s worth it in the end because once you get there, you can move mountains.”

To keep the company afloat, Bill Gates invested $150 million in Apple. In addition, the “Think Different” campaign brought the company back into the American Consciousness. Using a variety of figures from history, innovators all, the slogan caught on.

In 1998, the iMac appeared. 6 million units were sold making it the largest selling computer in history.

In 2001, Jobs turned the music industry on its ear first with iTunes. Songs cost 99 cents. The song became the thing, not the album. When the iPod was released in October of 2001, the device changed how people listen to music. They listen to it everywhere. The CD was dead, and the iPod was King.

Throughout the 2000s, Apple and jobs began to be at the forefront of innovation. The greatest being the iPhone and the iPad. Jobs was the face of Apple. He loved the simple and sleek looks of his products along with the easy to use aspects. The price, however, was not as good. Initially, the costs of the products was substantial. Today, Apple computers (MacBook Pro) are expensive. iPhones had an $800 startup cost and had limited service until its 2010 deal with Verizon.

Since 2004, Jobs had been battling Pancreatic cancer. Over the next seven years, Jobs lost weight but continued to do his job and show up at product launches. Eventually, the cancer would claim his life.

Above all else, what Jobs and Apple created were not just products. Rather, what made the products impressive was the ability of the user to be mobile. No longer do you have to be plugged in to listen to your music, see your photos, or access the Internet. You can do it all from the palm of your hand.

As Jobs said at Stanford in 2005:

“Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven’t found it yet, keep looking. Don’t settle. As with all matters of the heart, you’ll know when you find it. And, like any great relationship, it just gets better and better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you find it. Don’t settle.”

Here is a great documentary on the iPod and how it changed the world

Here is a good documentary on the career of Jobs