36 Comments
Jul 31, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

Thanks for another great read. The tidbit about "Trust but verify" being of Russian origin is new to me, and possibly another example of Reagan's genius, since most of us remember his use of the same phrase during his Presidency. Nothing like using your adversary's words against him.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks! That's where Iearned the expression, and I imagine it's where most Americans learned it. It it was, indeed strategically designed to throw their expression back at them. From Wikipedia: "Suzanne Massie, an American scholar, met with Ronald Reagan many times between 1984 and 1987 while he was President of the United States. [1] She taught him the Russian proverb doveryai, no proveryai (доверяй, но проверяй) meaning 'trust, but verify'. She advised him that "The Russians like to talk in proverbs. It would be nice of you to know a few. You are an actor – you can learn them very quickly." [2] The proverb was adopted as a signature phrase by Reagan, who used it frequently when discussing United States relations with the Soviet Union." and after Reagan used it at a later meeting, "General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev responded, 'You repeat that at every meeting'. To this, Reagan answered, 'I like it'".

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

Thanks for the added context!

Expand full comment

A lot of our modern "experts" have a bad habit of sounding off on subjects that are actually outside their areas of study. Just because a person has studied extensively on one narrow, limited subject, that does not mean he/she is equally expert in other areas.

Expand full comment
author

Yup! Like the economist who passed himself off as an expert in astronomy at the bottom of this column. :)

Expand full comment
Jul 31, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

I've alluded to this quote before, and finally ran it to ground. It's from Josh Billings in the mid-19th century, and the misspellings are his:

"I honestly beleave it iz better tew know nothing than tew know what ain’t so."

Also:

"Wisdum don’t konsist in knowing more that iz new, but in knowing less that iz false."

Great article. I'm pretty sure I've never read another one that tied together Anastasia, Hitchcock, Houdini, and the Marx Brothers.

Expand full comment
author

Don’t forget Paul Simon!

And yup, I’ve used that Billings quote before, along with the eye dialect.

Expand full comment
Jul 31, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

Great post, Professor. I was reminded of the mermaid scene in “Local Hero.”

I need to watch “Vertigo” again soon.

Expand full comment
author

OK. Why the mermaid scene in Local Hero? (For my wife and me, that happens to be our favorite film of all time. Can’t even guess how many times we’ve seen it.) We spent 12 days in Scotland just to get a Local Hero vibe (though we weren’t able to visit the filming locations).

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

Because I clearly remember Marina heading out to sea and seeing her mermaid’s tail flap in the water, and repeated watchings of the scene still can’t shake the memory. My brain is pulling the “who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes” bit on me.

Local Hero is also one of my top 2 or 3 favorites as well, along with Crimes and Misdemeanors and Don Juan DeMarco.

Expand full comment
author

Ah! Yes, indeed that makes sense. I, too, have watched numerous times to see whether she had a mermaid’s tail or just scuba gear. Never have decided. Don Juan DeMarco was a wonderful film—poignant and kind of magical, as I recall. I’ll admit that I don’t remember much about Crimes and Misdemeanors other than its existence. Not positive I saw it, though we generally saw whatever Woody Allen made in that period. I’ll put it on the list.

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

If you do rewatch “Crimes and Misdemeanors,” and you have the time and are so inclined, I’d like to suggest watching Allen’s “Match Point” afterward. They seem to be, at a minimum, companion pieces.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks. In fact, I know Match Point well. Stunning film. Great cast.

Expand full comment
author

Actually, that was in our early childrearing period, so we missed a LOT of good films in that period of a few years. I’ll bet that was the case with C&M.

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

With respect to experts (many of whom deserve no respect) I recommend a book - The Crisis of Expertise by Gil Eyal (Polity Press 2019).

Expand full comment
author

Thanks! I’ll check it out.

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

From the book:

THE CRISIS OF EXPERTISE by Gil Eyal

Chapter 4 - Risk:

1. There is no expert on risk because there are too many experts on risk.

2. There is no expert on risk because there is no one with expertise exactly relevant to the problem at hand.

3. There is no expert on risk because (like trust) it is a de-differentiating concept, which transgresses the stable boundaries between disciplines and professions, ultimately the very boundaries between experts and laypeople.

4. Perhaps most importantly, there is no expert on risk because risk analysis is ethics and politics camouflaged by numbers.

Expand full comment
author

Love it

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

I’ve been re-reading about the history of the Chinese “ Great Leap Forward “ from ~1959 to 1961…I can’t believe that the horror of that oppression and famine occurred within the timeline of our tranquil little lives in Petersburg, VA. Chairman Mao and his operatives certainly knew how to manipulate their subjects into suspending reality.

Expand full comment
author

They certainly did. Bugs me to no end that he was lionized by so many over here.

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

I define an expert as a paid liar that hides deceit in complexity. Is that too cynical?

Expand full comment
author

Too cynical? I dunno. Maybe ask an expert to weigh in. :)

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

The legendary magician James Randi used to say that smart people are easier to fool because they tend to assume that they are harder or impossible to fool, and physicists also are not used to interpreting anomalies as hoaxes.

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22randi%22+smart+people+easier+to+fool

Expand full comment
author

Fantastic observations.

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

One of my graduate students commented that if you deconstruct “expert” you arrive at “ex” former or hasbin and “spurt” a drip under pressure. Sometimes in my career I’ve been noted as an expert, and I have always demurred and explained that I was no expert. I was just knowledgeable in my field.

Expand full comment
author

I love that. And yes, I'm sometimes introduced as an expert, and it gives me the shivers.

Expand full comment
Aug 5, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

An expert is someone 500 miles removed from the current problem

Expand full comment
author

I’m not sure whether that’s an overstatement or an understatement. Not sure the DC crowd understands the counties 30 miles away. Pretty sure they don’t. But you may be right in that the experts may be vacationing more than 500 miles from the people whose lives they manipulate.

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

1. No, it's still Citizen Kane. Just so much richer then Vertigo. Vertigo is basically a one trick pony. Good trick but only one. Kane uses the Rosebud mcguffin as a pry bar to lift the rest of the picture's exploration of people.

2. The disappearing elephant in Vertigo is what ever happened to Barbara Bel Gaddis's character.? Now you see her, now you don't.

3. I usually conclude by emails with "People who think they know all the answers, don't know all of the questions.

4. Most "experts" apply assumptive knowledge. They assume they know something and because they are "experts" what they know is true. And when they find out they are wrong it's not because they are wrong it's because of something or other . Basically their ego won't allow them to admit they are wrong.

I am never wrong. Incorrect, mistaken, occasionally in error or made a misjudgment, but never ever wrong.

5. There are 3 Major "You Knows".

A. Things you believe you know

B Things you think you know.

C .Things you actually do know (ie you know you know)

People confuse them all the time.

Expand full comment
author

Great post. Yes, I'd still put Kane at the top, though I dearly love Vertigo. We're currently halfway through the current BFI #1: "Jeanne Dielman, 23 quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles." For cinephiles like my wife and me, it is thus far an interesting curiosity piece. I know that things will take a turn in the second half, but I'll be very surprised if we find that it ought to be in a league with Kane or Vertigo. We'll see tonight.

As for the disappearing Bel Geddes trick: I always assumed that the whole Madeleine affair shattered and ended her friendship with Scottie. But no! Censors (in Europe or the US, depending upon who is telling the story) were incensed that the Gavin Elster was not brought to justice, so Hitchcock was forced to film a coda, to be appended at the end of the film. He was ultimately able to cut it--thankfully. But here it is (EXTREME SPOILER: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJBSSkn0Ldw).

Expand full comment
Aug 1, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

Maybe, but the way it was done was strange. What was her purpose? A rival for Novak's character? She obviously is in love with him but he doesn't see it or want to acknowledge it. He's in love with a ghost so to speak but she's the one who ghosts him at the end. She isn't upset at the end or doesn't seem to be or hiding it. No denouement, no tears. Just walks away. In a lot of ways she seems to be the most mysterious person in the film. If the character was played by a man it might make sense. Scotty's partner from when he was on the force. She's in the film a lot at the beginning and middle. And then just one scene near the end. Just odd. It's like Hitchcock didn't know what to do with her character.

Expand full comment
author

Interesting points. I can see three purposes. He can discuss his condition with her. Their early history lets you know he wasn’t so normal in relationships. And his bitterness toward her after the painting shows how far over the edge he has gone.

Expand full comment
Aug 2, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

I'll have to watch it again but they sound valid. Seems to me that at the end they both have little emotion. I can sort of understand it on his part, but not so much hers. Not even I told you so.

Expand full comment
author
Aug 2, 2023·edited Aug 2, 2023Author

By “at the end,” do you mean that extra scene that he omitted? Not sure I’d take it too seriously, as it’s a scene Hitchcock neither wanted nor used. But when I do watch it, I see Scottie as profoundly embarrassed by his foolishness. And Midge seems petrified of losing his friendship (or potential for love) once again. One great tie between Citizen Kane and Vertigo is that bothe have lush scores by Bernard Herrmann.

Expand full comment
Aug 3, 2023Liked by Robert F. Graboyes

Bob,

Have you ever seen or are familiar with the play “Three Philosophers on a Fire Tower?”

I saw it years ago. It centers on Swananoa, the mansion on top of Aston Mountain. It touches on the Anastasia fable. Written by Fletcher Collins. Very witty.

Expand full comment
author

Nope! Never heard of it. During my college years, I visited Swannanoa many times. Beautiful setting. Great house on the mountain. Quirky people inside of it. Odd history. Used to take dates up there and dine somewhere on Afton.

Expand full comment