Saturday, March 17, 2007

The Iron Horse

Are you following the latest twist in the O.J. Simpson book deal? It's kind of odd. A court has ruled that Simpson's rights in that If I Did It book must be auctioned off with the proceeds going to help pay down the $33.5 million judgment that the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown won against him. He's paid almost nothing on the amount which, with interest, is now more like $38 mill. The Goldman family, which adamantly opposed publication of the book when it was first announced, has now done a one-eighty and they want the book published.

I'm sure there are those who think the difference now is one of sheer greed, and I think that's unfair. Even if money is the primary reason for the change, the families are entitled to some compensation for all they've been through, and some bucks on a judgment that they won. But there's a big question here that's going unasked and unanswered. The other night on Larry King Live, Fred Goldman was asked what's changed and he answered as follows...

Well, I think what changed is very simply the fact that we know more about it now than we did then and we believe that there's perhaps good reason to see it back out in print. Everybody that's read it, my attorneys specifically, believe that it's tantamount to a confession.

And then King said that Judith Regan, who was involved in packaging the book, told him she believes it's the total truth. He then asked Goldman, "How do you react to that?" and Goldman replied...

Well, frankly, from the bits and pieces that I've heard about it, I would tend to agree. He never contradicted the timeline or any of the evidence in the criminal trial. If nothing else, he almost validated it all.

This was one of those moments that reminded me why I've pretty much given up watching Larry King. They happen often on that show. A guest says something that cries out for a follow-up query and King, because he does no research (not only does none but practically brags about it) doesn't ask the obvious question. In this case, it would have been something like...

Fred, all the reports from people who've read Simpson's account of the murders in his book say the same thing. They say the text talks of an accomplice named Charlie who was present when the killings were committed, who urged Simpson to stop and who may have disposed of the murder weapon and other evidence. Do you think there really was a Charlie? And if not, why do you agree that the book is the total truth and why would you then want it published?

...or words to that effect. I suspect Goldman would have said no, that's the one part he doesn't believe but he thinks the rest is a confession and that there's a value to having that portion in print. But it would have been nice if there'd been a real interviewer there to pose that question.

• Posted at 11:40 PM · LINK

One More Honor For Sergio

Well, I guess it's an honor. It's something.

The current issue of Mad, the one just coming out, is #476. The first Mad work by Sergio Aragonés appeared in #76, which was the January, 1963 issue. He missed one issue so this new one represents the 400th time his artistry has appeared in America's most popular humor magazine.

This is not the record. Mike Slaubaugh maintains lists of these things and if we consult the relevant tote board for this category, we see that Al Jaffee has had work in 427 issues. Tied for third are Dick DeBartolo and Mort Drucker, each of whom has been in 391 issues. Since Drucker is not in every issue lately and DeBartolo is, Dick will probably have third place to himself as of next month. (In fifth place, we see Dave Berg with 386 appearances but he's not likely to challenge anyone, having died in 2002.)

In the meantime, I am locked in about a ninety-way tie for 237th place, having contributed two pieces to the magazine. This is so much more impressive than that guy on Jeopardy! yesterday. He only managed to create a three-way tie.

On another list of his, Mike notes that DeBartolo holds the record for the most consecutive issues of Mad with 374, followed by Sergio with 365. Sergio had no work in Mad #111 because...well, his recollection is that the post office lost what he mailed in for that issue. Personally, I'd like to believe it was something more embarrassing so when people ask me, I always make up something that involves a morals charge, a stay in prison and maybe a couple of farm animals.

You may also be interested in this list of Mike's that charts circulation figures over the years. This looks pretty dreadful for Mad but there aren't a lot of other magazines where the list wouldn't tell a similar story.

Getting back to Sergio for a moment. His first appearance in Mad was with a batch of astronaut cartoons but he instantly became known for the tiny cartoons in the margins of the pages — the ones that look like this...

Before he came along, Mad had text gags in those spaces. They called the feature "Marginal Thinking" and the jokes sometimes took the form of a little lecture by a character named Marginal Marvin. The lines were written by the editorial staff and it was quite a drain on their time and creativity.

Sergio is, as we all know, an extremely fast cartoonist. He wanted to sell a lot of work to Mad but there was a limit as to how much they could buy from him without firing all their other artists. Since his English then was severely limited, he didn't get the text gags in the margins and thought that maybe he could replace them with his drawings, thereby creating more space for his work in the magazine. The editors liked the suggestion since it got them out of filling those spaces themselves, but they thought of it as a brief respite. Surely, they believed, the new kid from Mexico wouldn't be able to come up with gags like that for every issue and they'd have to go back to the text gags. Four hundred issues later, he's still filling those spots and Marginal Marvin still can't catch a break.

• Posted at 4:31 PM · LINK

The Last Jeopardy! Post (I Hope)

Even I'm tired of my posts on this topic. However, I felt I should link to a Live Journal posting by Scott Weiss, the gentleman whose wager on yesterday's Jeopardy! created its unprecedented three-way tie. Here's the whole post and here's the most relevant paragraph...

Oh, you want to know about the Final Jeopardy! wager? It was an intentional bet. I counted on Anders and Jamey betting rationally and wagering everything. I thought it would be really cool to be a part of Jeopardy history. I knew that meant I'd be playing seasoned opponents, but it didn't matter to me. I had already won a couple of games myself, and I thought it would be neat to share the money. (See my post about Jennifer from a couple of days; that's what the literary people call foreshadowing. :-)). Now there'll be a notation next to one of my games in the J! Archive. How cool is that?

Several folks who wrote me assumed that Weiss was trying to bring back two opponents he knew he could beat. Here, he suggests the opposite. In any case, congrats to him for doing what he intended to do...and no, it isn't all that logical, which may be why the Game Theory expert suggested it wouldn't happen again. And you know what else isn't going to happen again? Me posting about this episode. You're welcome.

• Posted at 3:38 PM · LINK

Loose Ends Before Bedtime

I only have one tonight. A couple of folks have written to me to say that Scott, the contestant on Jeopardy! who caused the three-way tie, did so deliberately to make a little history and also, perhaps, because he figured he'd do better to bring back two contestants he figured he could beat, rather than face two unknown quantities the next time. Okay, fine. My point was that he wasn't playing to win.

Good night, Internet. See you in the morning.

• Posted at 2:54 AM · LINK

Today's Video Link

Here's an appearance by the comedian, philosopher and juggler A. Whitney Brown on The Tonight Show around 1988. There are a couple of odd bleeps in there but it's a good spot, especially as an example of political humor of the time. Back when Brown did commentaries on Saturday Night Live, I thought he was one of the sharpest people on television and I'm sorry he doesn't seem to be performing much these days.

• Posted at 2:23 AM · LINK