Saturday, June 6, 2026

Banners in Washington

 


Remarking on the banners of Trump displays on buildings in Washington, D.C., a thirty something woman said, "Oh, that's such a Hitler thing."




This surprised Mad Dog because for her Hitler, the Third Reich, should not be a thing. She is of a generation for which Hitler is just some grainy black and white image on a youtube video, or possibly she's seen "Inglorious Basterds" or "Sophie's Choice," but she is of a generation which seldom refers to Hitler. She has tattoos. She met her husband on the internet. She read "Project Hail Mary," and saw the movie and loved them but she has never heard the soundtrack to "Hair" or read "Exodus" or seen the movie.



For many of Mad Dog's friends who still live in Washington, D.C., the Trump banners hanging from the stately granite buildings have been particularly demoralizing. For some who have decided to retire and move away from Washington, the topic of the banners arises with some frequency.

What is it about a cloth banner?



In its very impermanence, it contrasts with the stolid stone building from which it is hung, and it proclaims an ascendance of a feeling of what that building means now, in the moment.



Banners may have been used before Hitler and the Third Reich, but nobody ever embraced them to the extent the Nazis did. Rallies with thousands of bright red banners thrilled the masses.



The sight of Trump's face on the Department of Justice or the Department of Agriculture looks to Mad Dog as much a desecration as spray paint graffiti tags on the Lincoln Memorial would be, or Swastikas on a Jewish gravestone.



And for longtime residents of DC, seeing those banners is more than jarring. 




Trump has even hung his banner next to a banner with Lincoln's image, which is interesting. Next to Obama, Lincoln is the President Trump wants most to best. With Obama, who so thoroughly humiliated Trump with his devastating digs at the White House Correspondents' dinner, it's personal. Obama, lean, athletic, who played basketball weekly is simply the cool kid Trump grew up seething against, someone who was simply so superior Trump knew he could never compete. Lincoln, on the other hand is someone Trump never met, and all he knows about Lincoln is everyone says he was our greatest President and that's a title Trump wants.

Of all the photos of Trump banners, the one with Lincoln is Mad Dog's favorite. Trump put it up there to show he belongs in the same company as Lincoln. But, of course, it shows just the opposite. Everyone can see it. Everyone but Trump.

One thing about those buildings--the Agriculture Department, or the Justice Department buildings-- is by their very permanence they were quiet reminders that this, too, shall pass. Administrations come and go, but those buildings remain. They were there before Trump. They were there for Hoover and Roosevelt and Kennedy and Reagan and Obama and they will, hopefully be there for whoever follows Trump, but the banners say, "Trump rules."


Trump, of course, wants to be on Mount Rushmore, but that's in South Dakota, and in the famous Hitchcock movie with Cary Grant, and it's so artificial and something of a joke. It's sort of a gauche American attempt to emulate the Pyramids or the Sphinx.

The Trump banners in Washington are not so much gauche as louche. 






Colleges fly banners, sometimes for occasions like graduation, or, in the case of NYU, to distinguish college buildings from other city buildings in a college which has no discrete buildings of its own.



But banners on the State Department, the Justice Department, the Department of Labor? Those are supposed to be beyond politics. Those are supposed to be the civil service which  just trudges on and does its work no matter who is in the White House, doing the science so we can have accurate weather predictions (Commerce), tending to the missile silos (Dept. Energy), scouring the country to prevent Mad Cow Disease from infecting human populations (Agriculture), monitoring and alerting for the next pandemic (HHS) and rescuing people from storms at sea and hurricanes and tornadoes on land. 

And maybe that's why the banners matter now. The Supreme Court (which, as far as Mad Dog knows does not yet have a Trump banner) is supposed to be doing its thing guided not by Trump but by the law. Same for the Interior Department and Justice and State. The White House establishes policies, but the civil service is supposed to follow the law, which means Congress has a role, but you don't see images of Congress on any of the buildings. 





And, so far at least, there are no Trump banners on the Capitol dome, although it wouldn't be a surprise. Stay tuned.

It's not rational, but maybe that's why banners are so effective. They do not appeal to the rational. Like flags, they are meant to provoke emotion, not thought.



Banners are mute testimony and they speak not to the brain but to the heart.



Friday, June 5, 2026

If You Build It, They Will Come: Seacoast Style

 


When Mad Dog moved to Hampton in 2008 he discovered the only place to bicycle was along roadways; what New Hampshire considered a bicycle path was a yellow line painted along the road which was not much respected by pick up trucks pulling trailers with landscaping equipment, F-350 trucks, motorcycles or anyone really. 

So he started looking for a real bike trail, like the rail to trails system he new which surrounded and interdigitated with Washington, DC, the "Crescent Trail," which allowed you to ride into downtown, or along the Potomac to Mount Vernon or out almost to Dulles Airport without ever having to share the road with motor vehicles.

Scott Bogle


By 2009, he tracked own an employee of the Department of Transportation named Scott Bogle, who was hoping to purchase an old railroad path running from Hampton to Portsmouth. The company which owned it and had not used it for decades was in no mind to sell it cheap, especially when it learned someone might want to buy it, but Bogle persisted and there were lots of hurdles to overcome, mostly from people who owned land abutting the path who were sure, in quintessential New Hampshire mindset, that whatever anyone was planning it would violate their property rights; never mind that having a bike path run behind your house would increase its value substantially, as it has everywhere else bike paths have been built. Mad Dog stopped going to meetings after a few years, as he concluded the path would never be built.


But Scott Bogle soldiered on and in May the segment connecting Hampton to the trail was completed and now the trail ran continuously, unvexed to Portsmouth and it is a joy to behold.

Joe's Meats Breakfast Nook on the Trail North Hampton


Along the way Bogle had to navigate around Free Staters, who believe any number of things but one thing they all believe is the state has no business doing anything at all, from public roads to public schools, to public health and certainly, if the Free Staters had their way there would be no bike path.

North Hampton


But now, there is a bike path and Mad Dog has been on it nearly every day, along with scores of other bicyclists, baby strollers, walkers, dog walker,  and nature freaks, not to mention wild turkeys, ground hogs, and some animals Mad Dog cannot identify which look like foxes with clipped tails.

Bogie's Hampton


And commerce has blossomed: Free Staters would be surprised to learn a government project can actually stimulate private enterprise: In Hampton, Bogie's restaurant, which has a back porch on the trail is expanding it's porch; the Airfield Cafe lies right on the trail on the Border with North Hampton and further down in North Hampton is a breakfast place connected to Joe's Meats, also on the trail. Just before Portsmouth is an exit to Portsmouth Hospital, in case you work there.



Along the way are signs reminding bicyclists that in hunting season, hunters are allowed to shoot their guns along the trail, because, you know, this is New Hampshire, where the rights of the dozen or so hunters who may want to walk out their back doors to shoot their guns take precedence over the rights of the hundreds of bikers and hikers, so bicyclists are advised to wear orange in hunting season. In New Hampshire, there are only 8 roads a hunter is forbidden to shoot across--mostly eight lane divided highways like Route 95 and Route 101, but otherwise, a hunter spotting a deer roaming in a field across Route 27 can stand in his yard and shoot across the road to nab the deer, because, well, it makes sense in New Hampshire.



The trail, if Mad Dog had his way, would be named the Scott Bogle Bicycle Trail, but this being New Hampshire, it will likely be named the Kelly Ayotte Community Connection.





Some things will have to be worked out: Kids and adults on two hundred pound electric bicycles going 40 mph are a menace to life and limb and there is no sign of police presence or cameras or even speed limit signs. 

The local government in Hampton has been typically mute and clueless about all this. It's not entirely clear the Select Board is even aware of its existence, or would care if they knew.







The police have enough to do controlling the crowds at Hampton Beach and worrying about finding police officers who might want to ride even electric bikes along the trail would be a big ask.

But, overall, Hallelujah! the Bike Trail done cometh.

Wednesday, June 3, 2026

Mission Statement: Our Friend the Pig


"Nobody would have mistaken Brunhilda for a saint, but nobody could forget her, either. Exasperating as she was, I would never had punished her by locking her in a cage so small, she couldn't turn around. That sounds like torture to me."

--Nicholas Kristof, New York Times, May 31, 2026


Growing up a suburban kid the closest I ever got to farm animals was saran wrapped steaks and pork chops at the Giant Food store in Bethesda, Maryland, except for one summer when I got sent to a day camp on a farm where I saw them giving a horse some sort of injection and the horse bled at the injection site, a rill running down its hip, and he reared up, and had to be restrained by a farmhand pulling on its harness, and I refused to return to the camp, refused to say why,  until my parents finally figured out what it was that had so disturbed me, and the farmer/camp owner explained to me the horse was unharmed and, in fact, benefited from his injection just as I had benefited from injections. 



Twenty years later, I wound up living for a year on a potato farm, and my neighbors all raised animals--chickens mostly--but also pigs, goats, some cows on what would now be called "free range" farms and as I went jogging down those country roads, I saw them killing animals daily. 


Barber's Pond



In fact, fifty feet off my front door was a small pond, and one day I awoke to see ten empty plastic milk bottles bobbing up and down in the pond and going out in my rowboat, I discovered they were tethered to cinderblocks at the bottom and I commenced pulling them up. A neighbor had set traps for the turtles in the pond, and he complained to the owner of the farm about my depredation of his attempts to catch himself turtle soup.



The owner of the farm backed me, mostly because the neighbor had never asked his permission. 

My girlfriend and I  would sit on the porch at night and listen to the sounds emanating from the pond. "That frog," she said, "Must weight fifteen pounds."  The frogs, with the deep bull frog bass, and the soprano frogs could have made a great Doo-Wop group, but the turtles were silent, now safe at whatever depths turtles hung out. 



That was my first venture into animal rights. 

I had just moved to that farm after eight years on Manhattan's Upper East side, and that guy in the movie "Martian" had nothing on me for mood shift. 



Today, I live a mile from a farm which raises pigs, cows, goats, and starting each July, turkeys. Every week I bicycle past the pig sty, and one day it struck me that the little piglets I saw suckling grew over the months to the size of a Boston Terrier, but they never seemed to get any larger and then disappeared. When I mentioned that to my neighbors, they rolled their eyes and told me I could find them at the local Hannaford's, in the meat department.

Obadiah Youngblood, "Covered Bridge"


The turkeys arrive as small fluffy things and are consigned to Camp Turkey, where as Mary, my local native guide to things Hampton, calls them, "Death Row Turkeys." 


 The farm sells them each November the week before Thanksgiving, and that whole story has been told in The Phantom Speaks Blog as "Game of Bones," so I'll not elaborate on it now, other than to say these turkeys at least are about as "free range" as white turkeys can be, with a football field sized enclosure, screened off from the wild turkeys who sometimes gawk at the white turkeys as if viewing captive animals at a zoo.



None of the farms I've just mentioned are anything like the huge industrialized protein factories Kristoff was talking about, where pigs are kept in cages so small they cannot turn around, where profit motive and industry mission statements dictate these sentient beings be treated as a protein source to be raised as cheaply as possible to be sure the overhead side of the ledger is small as possible.







Wild pigs, or boars, are, of course, destructive of farm crops and they are dangerous animals, and youtube is full of channels showing men hunting them with AK-15 attack rifles on foot, from helicopters or from trucks. The creepy thing about these videos is all the delighted whooping and squeals,  when one of these hunters fells a desperate fleeing pig, who collapses and his legs jerk in what looks like a seizure,  and the glee from the unseen, off screen hunter is unnerving. 

Killing This Looks Justified


If you saw a small boy sitting, grinning, as he pulled the legs off a praying mantis, or locking a kitten into a microwave and gleefully hit the cook button, or tying a brick around a puppy and heaving it into a lake, you would cringe and call the psychiatrist. But the delighted squeals from the boar hunters as they blast the panicked boars  is just boys having fun.



When the railroad cars at Auschwitz were thrown open and an arm, tattooed with a number flopped out into view, American GI's reacted in horror: "Like cattle!" they gasped.

To treat them like cattle was horrible.



To treat cattle or pigs like cattle is not.

Charnel House


When I was 19, my parents got me a plum job working in a lab at the National Institutes of Health, which was just a short drive from my home. In those days, there were no fences or walls around the campus, which really looked like a big college, with gracious green sun lit lawns and red brick three story buildings.

I worked in three different labs over the course of three summers there. These jobs were something I could put on my applications to medical school to make me look like a more promising applicant.

The first summer, I worked in a lab which studied the evolution of sleep, which meant various electrical devices got implanted through the skulls and into the brains of various animals from possums to spiny anteaters to frogs. Turns out, most animals sleep and they may even dream, although what they dream about was beyond the purview of the guy who ran the lab and who published many papers about sleep in "lower forms" of animals.

Spiny Anteater


To wonder about what a frog dreams about gets you thinking. But I am sure animals do dream, ("to sleep; perchance to dream; aye, there's the rub" as the Bard said) having watched my dog sleep, his back legs moving as if running, and listening to his grunts and whimpers: He is either chasing or being chased, but he is clearly dreaming. You don't need an implanted electroencephalogram to know that.

Annoying, Undistractable Goat


The lab had a farm in rural Maryland and one day we went out to plant a radio transmitter in the stall of a goat who had an electroencephalogram device implanted in his brain, through his skull, sticking out of his skull. My job was to distract the goat so the lab technician could sneak in and plant the transmitting device in the back of the stall without the goat noticing it. The goat had found and destroyed every previous monitor the lab had tried to install. 

"Goats are uncanny," the lab guy told me. "You can turn cartwheels in front of the cage, play a trombone but if I try to creep into the back of the stall from the back door, you'll see him looking over his shoulder and he turns around and ignores you and pays full attention to me, because he knows you're just the hired fool. How does he know that? Really annoying."

So, was that goat really a "lower form" of animal? 

Unfortunate Possum


As a side gig, the guy who ran the sleep lab did the favor of testing various drugs in possums, for someone studying some drugs,  to see if those drugs lowered their seizure thresholds. If a new sleep medication lowered the seizure threshold in a possum, it might not be the best choice for human beings. The way you discovered whether the drug lowered the possum's seizure threshold was to grab its tail and whip the possum up and down, its head whapping the hard concrete floor of the lab--I'll never forget the sound their jaws made hitting that floor--and you had to do it thirty times. If the possum went into a grand mal convulsion, that was not a good drug for people. If not, well, the possum had had a bad morning, but it could have been worse, considering what was done to other lab animals, and if the possum did not convulse,  the drug might be safe.

I could only bring myself to do three possums before I managed to find other tasks to do around the lab so I didn't have to whip possums by their tails. This was a lot worse than watching a horse get an injection, but I was older by then and maybe my medical school admission depended on my beating up on helpless possums. (As it turned out, medical school admission officers were uninterested in my cosmetic lab experience--the only summer job they asked me about was working as a lifeguard and swim team coach, which I loved because the kids were so great, and you could see the smiles on the interviewers who were sick of hearing about how many test tubes applicants had rattled during summer vacations.)

The next summer I worked in a biochemistry lab which was trying to delineate various pathways in the metabolism of glucose in the liver. To do this, white lab rats were splayed out, as if on a rack, each limb pulled taut by a plastic manacle and a midline chest to abdomen incision made, and the exposed liver was catheterized with a plastic tube. After about three hours on the rack, the rat was "sacrificed."

I don't know how important figuring out those particular glycosylation pathways in the rat really was. I'm not sure that knowing what was happening in a rat's liver actually tells you what is happening in a human liver, but I do know I had dreams every night about those rats, and I lost a lot of sleep that summer.

Walking into the building where we were working on those rats, sometimes I'd see a line of six or seven people holding up signs from a group called People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) which said, "Animals Have Feelings, Too," and "Is It Really Worth It?" And, "We Treat Lab Animals Badly."

 I thought, "Oh, you have no idea what an understatement that is."

                              Tough Guy Carnivore

Obviously, I was not the only person thinking what I was thinking: Years later I discovered a wonderful animated movie called "The Secret of NIMH," which my sons loved, and it was about rats at the National Institute of Mental Health, and their escape from torture chambers there. This was based on a book by Robert Conly, a journalist not an NIH employee. His book, "Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH" won lots of awards, but I had never heard of it, or I surely would have read it to my sons, but we were lucky to have the film. The book was published in 1971, when I was in medical school, so it's development likely took place during the years when I worked summers at the NIH torturing rats.

No Mercy Kid


Of course, I wanted to show the movie to my grand daughters but their mother, a pediatrician, would not allow it because it was too likely to upset them. Thus are we protected in American life from thinking about what we do to animals. I take her point, though. Still, I raised boys, and they were not mentally traumatized by considering the fate of lab rats and Jeremy the Crow (voiced by Dom Deloise) is worth the cost of the DVD.


Robert Conley


Throughout medical school and post graduate training, I always ran the other way when asked to participate in studies involving animals. Those rats and nude mice and spiny anteaters may have contributed some small bit to a sea of knowledge, but what it seemed to me was what they were really sacrificing for was the publication list of some lab director, toward tenure or career advancement, but not so much toward human health.


Banting, Best & Lab Dog


Which is not to say animal studies are never necessary. Without animal studies the polio vaccine would not have been possible and insulin would not have been discovered in 1921. 

But I preferred other kinds of research. I came to think there are lots of ways to achieve your goals without torturing animals and that ought to be a last resort.

And if your goal is to get cows to produce the maximum gallons of milk, maybe there's a way to do that without locking them into stalls. Looking at those cows who are standing in their own excrement on industrial farms, being fed tons of antibiotics--which is the real source of drug resistant bacteria, not promiscuous use in human patients, I would bet--and pigs trapped in metal cages for whatever short life they may have before the slaughterhouse, I wonder if the industrialized engineering of animal protein could not be achieved some other way.

Samantha and the Pig, Obadiah Youngblood


Efficiency experts maximize things to achieve goals. If the goal, the mission statement,  is to produce animal protein at the lowest cost and greatest pound per dollar, then you would keep pigs penned mercilessly, and the pork farmer's lobby, "Big Pork," has got Republicans on board with a law called the "Save Our Bacon," law. (Republicans are always so good at creating names for laws, much better than Democrats.) So these pigs are just "bacon," and don't we all love bacon?

The same thing happens when efficiency experts apply their skills to medical practice, where electronic medical records have allowed doctors to see more and more patients every day because record keeping, which is essential in medical practice, takes a long time to produce when written by hand, and new computer programs, "electronic medical records" or EMR's,  vastly increase the speed with which records can be generated.

Of course, the EMR drives faster appointments while it delivers bigger bills for the hospital, but the patients often feel they are not seeing a doctor but a data entry clerk who isn't really listening but simply filling in the blanks. The patients get to feel like the pig in the steel cage: hemmed in.





In 2008 I read Michael Pollan's wonderful, "Omnivore's Dilemma" which traced the sources of the food an American finds on his dinner plate, and that turned out to be, overwhelmingly, corn. Even the steak was corn, when you got right down to it, in the most cost effective efficient sense.  Turning the last page, I thought, "You know, I really don't need to eat farmyard animals." Pollan was not writing a Vegan screed and he finished his book with his wild boar hunt, and the meal he made from it, but I was not persuaded.

I would have no trouble existing on cereal, breads, vegetables, I thought. Why not try it? Would I really miss chicken, beef or pork? 

Later, watching nature shows on Youtube, I decided salmon are okay to eat because they just swim upstream and those not taken by bears turn all red, go belly up, and die after spawning, so they are suicidal fish and their protein would be wasted anyway, so I'll eat salmon.

I am also willing to rationalize lobsters, who are like giant ants with no facial expressions, and anyway I live in New Hampshire, where lobsters are inexpensive and called "New Hampshire chicken."  And the lobster rolls at the Beach Plum down the street on the North Hampton ocean front are pretty wonderful.



But I still cannot bring myself to plop a lobster into a boiling pot of water and listen to the hissing and think about that living creature trying to escape. So, yes, you are correct, I am not rational about this.

I certainly do not believe myself to be righteous in not eating meat or pork. I do eat this stuff occasionally, and I would never feel morally superior to meat eaters, which I was, shamelessly, until 20 years ago. 


"Save Our Bacon"


But, just speaking for me, I'd rather not eat things that show me they really want to live, and maybe they even dream.



On The Beach Redux



I can't remember when I first read "On The Beach," the Neville Shute novel about the post apocalpyse following a nuclear war; I was either 10 years old or 12, but I was definitely 12 when the movie came out,  and both had a powerful effect on me.




The movie had a powerful effect across many nations, when it premiered in 1959 in Moscow, Washington, New York, Sydney, London and Paris all on the same night, adjusted for the time zones.



It was the most powerful Jeremiad against nuclear brinksmanship and nuclear weapons until "The Day After," a 1983T.V. show about nuclear war and the total destruction it would bring. President Ronald Reagan later said that this show moved him and President Gorbachev to sign the nuclear arms reduction treaty in 1987. 

So "On the Beach," powerful and widely seen as it was, may have been ahead of its time, as 1959 was not long after the Red Scare, McCarthy period and no nuclear disarmament treaties got signs after that. In fact, just a few years later the world came within a hair's breadth of nuclear obliteration during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Neville Shute was appalled by the movie made of his book--they took it from a bleak, nihilistic work and tried to make a love story out of it with Ava Gardner and Gregory Peck, and the big conflict seemed to be whether Peck would bed Gardner or remain loyal to his dead wife.

So what prompted an Australian company to re make the film in 2000? 

Well, for one thing, they updated it: in the original, the nuclear holocaust began in the Middle East with a war between Israel and its Arab neighbors, but the 2000 version is sparked by a Chinese invasion of Taiwan with an American nuclear response.



The crucial scenes are preserved in both films: the expedition to Northwest America to investigate what turns out to be a spurious signal which might signify life, the escape of a sailor from the submarine, who opts to die at home rather than back in Australia, the fiery demise of an Australian scientist in his Ferrari, choosing a spectacular way to die rather than just taking his suicide pills. 

But the 2,000 film is vastly superior: At one point, looking at her sister and her sister's daughter playing in the garden, Moira says, "Look at that! A picture of that mother and child should have been pasted above every nuclear launch switch, and this war would never have happened." And we find out later something exactly like that did happen on board the American submarine.

Upon its arrival in Melbourne, the American submarine is pelted by Australians who are furious at the Americans for the war they ignited. The Australians advise Americans to not wear their uniforms off their ship. 



There is a much better and more extensive rendering of the argument about whether the nuclear cloud hovering over the Northern Hemisphere would ever actually cross the equator and doom Australia and the Southern hemisphere, which, for the purposes of the story has to happen, but the authors are careful to show how scientists cannot be sure and argue continuously about what their data means. Most scientists argue the air currents in the two hemispheres are so separate a nuclear cloud in the Northern Hemisphere would never cross the equator, but nobody's ever done the experiment. And, nobody is sure if nuclear detonations in Taiwan, and Micronesia would be close enough to the Southern Hemisphere to change the calculations.



In the end, in the story, the nuclear cloud relentlessly spreads south, latitude by latitude toward Melbourne.

Virtually everything is better in the 2000 film but it is a gut wrenching experience--in the end you've got to watch a mother and father give their own child a lethal dose to save her from further radiation induced suffering, before swallowing their own doses. Not since the scene in "Downfall" where the Goebbels poison their six children with cyanide capsules in the bunker has a scene of infanticide been so starkly rendered. 

The Australian authors also introduce a mishap which infects an American officer with a nuclear dose and we watch him die slowly, agonizingly from the resultant leukemia, a demonstration of what is going to happen to the women and children we have been watching.



There are no speeches from Fred Astaire decrying the fecklessness, incompetence and stupidity of heads of state, but simple conversations among people who know they are simply not in a position to prevent catastrophe.

The 2000 movie was made over 25 years ago, and one might ask why it was made at all, 40 years after the original, as nothing much has changed in the realm of nuclear holocaust discussions.



But the real theme is one of helplessness of ordinary people to prevent such horrors from reigning down upon them and their families. You and I, in our New Hampshire town or even our Washington, D.C. suburbs, are no better positioned to stop a "nuclear exchange" than we are to stop an asteroid from destroying the earth--like the folks in that wonderful movie, "Don't Look Up," there is simply nothing we can do.

There is the theme of sheer incompetence among our leaders which has even more appeal today than it did in the year 2000. The message is that if we simply accept this incompetence, it may ultimately come round to destroy us.




The crew asks the Captain to offer a prayer before they take their submarine back out to sea to go to die in America, and he admits he has no religious background, which becomes immediately apparent when he asks the Lord that their deaths not be "in vain."

Whatever that may mean.

Was he saying that he hopes life has meaning, even if, on the brink of death, he can't for the life of him figure out what that meaning might be?

But this film is not a Sartre essay on Being and Nothingness.

It's not a romantic comedy, nor even a science fiction excursion. 

It is profoundly depressing, but it is beautifully wrought.

At one point, Moira finds the Captain reading "Great Expectations," and asks why. "It's not a great title for current circumstances," he admits.



"Are you enjoying it?" she asks.

"More now than when I originally read it," he says. "Don't know why."

She laughs and we laugh with her--it's just a simple moment of humanity we've all shared, and it makes the people, the story, the whole enterprise seem very real.