August 9, 2019

The Heartland Is Moving in Different Directions


NY TIMES

The Midwest remains undecided, but conflicting trends point alternately toward victory for Trump or his eventual opponent.

Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C. on politics, demographics and inequality.

Credit...Sam Hodgson for The New York Times

The Democrats’ ability to wrest back Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa faces a steep hurdle. The population of the Rust Belt is aging at a much faster pace than the rest of the country.

Exit polls show that people over the age of 50 put Donald Trump in the White House, and the Midwest has them in droves.

In five states — Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Wisconsin — the number of 18-to-35-year-olds, the most liberal age group, grew by 56,448 between 2016 and 2018, according to Mark Muro, a senior fellow at Brookings.

That growth pales in comparison with the rising number of people 65 and older, a core of Republican support, which grew by 685,005 — an advantage of better than 12 old people for each young person. Nationwide, from 2016 to 2018, 18-to-35-year-olds grew by 677,853 while the 65 and over population grew by 3,207,209 — a smaller advantage of 4.7 old people for each young person, according to Muro.

Polls consistently show that older voters are more Republican than younger voters: In 2017, for example, Pew found that 18-to-35-year-olds skewed Democratic 54 percent to 39 percent; voters over 70 were 48 percent Republican and 41 percent Democratic.

The aging of the Rust Belt population is a major factor in a closely related trend, the declining share of self-identified liberals in the region.

Pew Research reports that from 2010 to 2017, the percentage of people who say they are liberals in the Midwest — defined broadly as Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North and South Dakota, Iowa, Illinois, Nebraska, Missouri and Kansas — dropped from 23 to 19 percent, while the percentage describing themselves as conservative fell by a statistically insignificant 1 percent, from 38 to 37 percent. Moderates grew from 33 to 37 percent.

The aging of the Midwest population, in combination with the ideological shift to the right documented by Pew, is more than daunting to Democrats. In other circumstances — that is, without Trump as the top of the Republican ticket — these trends would be better described as debilitating to Democrats.

But Trump is at the top of the ticket, so Democrats are eager to fight in the region.

The growing share of the Midwest population living in “larger, denser areas through much of this decade has likely reinforced the voting tendencies of younger, more diverse voters, in ways that may help Democrats,” Muro wrote by email.

In statewide contests, which of course are where the presidential competition for Electoral College votes is fought, the trend toward urbanization could help the Democratic nominee. Muro notes that

While only some Midwestern bigger metros are true stars, in state after state the larger metros — while not attracting large numbers of new residents from outside their states — are drawing in migrants from the surrounding cities and towns within the state. These migrants are often the young looking for education or jobs; they are leaving smaller towns and smaller cities behind, including their elders.

The result is a population-sorting dynamic in the Midwest that parallels national trends, albeit in weaker fashion. Muro observes that

The larger, more vibrant Midwestern cities grow a little, but it’s somewhat at the expense of the left-behind residents of the rest of the state. So the more successful Midwestern hubs — Columbus, Kansas City, Des Moines, Madison, Minneapolis-St. Paul — are pulling away from the rest of their states, just as are Boston and San Francisco and Seattle from the rest of the nation.

In fact, the growing urbanization of the Midwest, combined with the decline of pro-Republican rural communities, as shown in the accompanying graphic, may improve the odds for the Democratic Party and its candidates.

The Heartland Is Moving in Different Directions

Vast portions of 19 central states lost population from 2010 to 2017. Most of these shrinking regions are rural or centered on small cities.

2010–17

POPULATION GAIN

+2.5 to +10.3%

+1 to +2.5%

+1% or less

POPULATION LOSS

–1% or less

–1 to –3.7%

AVG. POPULATION CHANGE

BY AREA TYPE

2017

+3.7%

Medium metro

+3.6

Large metro

+2.4

Small metro

2010

AREA OF STUDY

–0.4

Micropolitan areas (core city

population 10,000 to 50,000)

–2.0

Rural adjacent to metro area

–2.8

Rural isolated

By The New York Times | Source: Brookings Institution and Walton Family Foundation, “The State of the Heartland Factbook 2018”

The 2018 election revealed other dynamics that might help the Democratic Party.

John C. Austin, director of the Michigan Economic Center and a nonresident senior fellow at Brookings, has explored the politics of the Midwest from a different vantage point. He examined income and other economic trends in 15 Midwestern congressional districts, including Pennsylvania, that went from Republican to Democrat. In the July 27 issue of Politico Magazine, Austin made a point of saying that

the conventional wisdom is wrong. Contrary to the perception that a rebounding economy will work to the president’s benefit, there is growing evidence in Michigan and throughout the Rust Belt that metro areas that are bouncing back — and there are a bunch — are turning blue again.

Austin noted that 10 of the 15 districts that flipped from Republican to Democratic in Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Iowa “have income growth rates that exceed their state averages.”

Of the remaining five flipped districts, in which growth was below the state average, three were in Pennsylvania, where Democratic victories resulted from a state Supreme Court decision ordering the replacement of the Republican gerrymander of congressional districts, making those districts much more favorable to Democratic candidates.

The pattern Austin describes was apparent in the Michigan governor’s 2018 race.

Gretchen Whitmer, the Democratic winner, made substantial inroads into once rock-solid, prosperous counties in West Michigan.

“Whitmer is the first Democratic gubernatorial nominee to take Kent County since James Blanchard in 1986, and he was an incumbent,” the Oakland Press reported. Not only that, but Whitmer almost won “in historically Republican Grand Traverse County, home to Traverse City. And she gained in the state’s most conservative county, Ottawa, which includes Lake Michigan coastal communities.”

The Press pointed out that “all three counties are among Michigan’s fastest-growing, where demographic shifts could prove important in future elections and impact how congressional and legislative districts are redrawn in 2021.”

In an email, Austin argued that when the local economy improves, the tendency of voters to blame people they perceive as outsiders — racial minorities and immigrants — diminishes, to the advantage of Democrats and to the disadvantage of Republicans:

Undergirding Trump’s nativist appeal is the fact that it is impossible to separate the interplay of economic prospects and race as a defining issue for the Midwest’s older manufacturing communities. Midwest industrial communities are the most segregated in the nation.

It should come as no surprise, Austin wrote, that

citizens of once tidy, thriving communities are nostalgic for better days. And it should also be no surprise that a latent bias to blame and resent people of color for “what’s wrong” when the economic wheels really come off is today on full display. Particularly when the racism and resentment are stoked by a demagogic President suggesting that immigrants are the problem, or just don’t belong in America.

In those areas where the economy is improving, however, Austin argues,

This dynamic can and is being changed in many communities. Voters in communities that are doing better economically appear less anxious and nostalgic, and more tolerant and forward looking — more interested in issues and less inclined to reward nativism and economic nationalism.

There are aspects of the politics of the Midwest that are unique to the region and there are aspects that are common to the nation at large. One shared trend is the phenomenon cited by Austin: the pattern of 2018 Democratic congressional victories in better-off districts.

The Economic Innovation Group, a Washington think tank that studies regional inequality, ranked all 435 congressional districts into five groups based on their economic condition: the prosperous, the comfortable, the mid-tier, the at-risk and the distressed.

An examination by the group of all of the congressional districts across the nation that flipped in 2018 from red to blue produced intriguing results.

Of the 43 congressional districts that shifted from Republican to Democratic control, 23, more than half, were ranked as prosperous, and seven, or 16.3 percent, were ranked as comfortable. Altogether, almost 70 percent of the districts that switched from Republican to Democratic were ranked in the top two economic categories.

While Austin’s work and the Economic Innovation Group data suggest that one path to Democratic victory lies in expanding the gains the party has made in affluent sections of the country, Muro and Jacob Whiton, a Brookings research analyst, voiced some warnings.

Using measures of income and growth separate from those used by the Economic Innovation Group, Muro and Whiton compared how well each of the 43 flipped districts has done in recent years to how well the states in which these districts are located have been doing.

Muro wrote by email:

Overall we find some suggestion that better economic performance supported red-to-blue flipping leading up to the 2018 midterms, but it’s not at all automatic, or deterministic. Local details, and certainly narratives and memes and political predispositions, are clearly playing a likely larger role.

Polls show that favorable economic trends nationally are not working to the clear advantage of Trump the way they would be expected to by many analysts.

A July 24 Fox News poll, for example, found that “More voters rate the economy positively today than have since 2001.” Fox reported that “approval of the job President Trump is doing on the economy stands at 52 percent (41 percent disapprove). That’s just one-point off his high of 53 percent last summer, and up from 48-46 percent in May.”

But Fox cautioned that “it’s unclear whether Trump can count on these ratings come election time. While 33 percent say economic conditions will get better if he is re-elected (39 percent say worse), the same number, 33 percent, think it will get better if a Democrat wins the White House (36 percent say worse).”

In 2020, Trump is likely to find his strongest levels of support in the same downwardly mobile white, disproportionately rural sections of the country that backed him decisively in 2016.

A different Economic Innovation Group report on the 207 counties nationwide that voted twice for Barack Obama and then for Trump — “The Flipped Counties of 2016 Still Lagging Behind” — found that not only did most of these counties suffer “a severe downturn during the Great Recession” but that they “experienced a sluggish recovery afterwards.”

These flipped counties (which are not congressional districts), the report continued, “represent a distinct cohort of places that have generally been bypassed by the upsides of recent economic change.”

Since Trump’s election, the counties that went from supporting Obama to supporting Trump have continued to fall well behind the rest of the nation on measures of the rate of growth of employment, new businesses and population.

A chart prepared with data from the Economic Innovation Group shows not only how the flipped counties have continued to fall behind, but also how prosperity has become increasingly associated with voting for Democrats.

Trouble in the Obama-Trump Counties

From 2007 to 2017, the prime working-age population (ages 25 to 54) shrank in 93 percent of counties that voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 and for Donald Trump in 2016.

WORKING-AGE POPULATION GAIN

WORKING-AGE POPULATION LOSS

UP TO

+10% GAIN

MORE THAN +10%

LOSS UP TO –10%

MORE THAN –10%

Obama-Trump counties

0.4%

6

63

30

Voting Republican

in three elections

23%

24

35

18

Voting Democratic

in three elections

26%

39

29

6

By The New York Times | Source: Economic Innovation Group

Two thirds — 65 percent — of the counties consistently voting Democratic saw their populations grow in the decade from 2007 to 2017, compared with 47 percent of consistently Republican voting counties and 6 percent of the Obama-to-Trump counties.

In contrast, 35 percent of Democratic counties experienced population declines, compared with 53 percent of Republican counties and 93 percent of the Obama-to-Trump counties.

The report concludes with bad economic news, which is, paradoxically, good news for Trump.

In 2016, the 207 counties that flipped from Obama to Trump “reflected voter dissatisfaction with the status quo.” Now, 15 months before the election, economic conditions in these counties remain dismal and “the latest data provide no evidence that their trajectories will have meaningfully changed by 2020.”

Assuming that the upper Midwest states will again be a battleground in 2020, the economic and demographic trends in the region are sending contradictory signals as to whether the region is moving right or left.

In a recent essay “The Rust Belt’s Mixed Population Story,” Aaron Renn, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, takes these questions on:

Residents of Rust Belt states are migrating to larger cities that have emerged as centers of success in the modern economy. But the Rust Belt’s urban resurgence disguises the reality that regional cities remain weak magnets for new residents on a national basis.

The Midwest is simultaneously “home to numerous stagnant and shrinking cities such as Flint, Youngstown, Rockford, Muncie, and Erie” and to booming “metro hubs like Columbus, Kansas City, Des Moines, Grand Rapids, Madison, and Minneapolis-St. Paul,” which, in turn, “are complemented by smaller success stories, including Iowa City; Lafayette, Indiana; and Traverse City, Michigan.”

Despite these positive developments, Renn continued, Midwestern growth is concentrated “within a limited number of successful metro regions, while the rest of the Rust Belt shows weak to negative demographic trends.”

In an email, Renn elaborated on the political implications of these developments, which, over time, could favor Democrats.

In the prospering cities “growing numbers of young, educated urbanites take their cues from their coastal counterparts” and increasingly support liberal economic, cultural and social norms.

But, Renn continued, “these regions also have rapidly growing suburban areas that continue to vote Republican” and “many old line Democratic urban strongholds like Cleveland and Detroit have lost large numbers of people.”

For real political change to occur in the Rust Belt, in Renn’s view, there would have to be “significant migration from outside, both domestic and international, as has happened in some Southern states where Democrats are now much more competitive.” Currently, such migration is “a modest factor in these Midwest places” but, Renn suggested, “many of these Midwest regional success story cities are at a position where they can begin to compete for national and immigrant talent in a way they couldn’t before.”

Richard Longworth, a fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, has written extensively on the Midwest. He emailed me his political assessment of the region:

As everybody knows, the old industrial cities that failed to adapt to globalization swung right in 2016. They’re old union towns that were traditionally Democratic and mostly voted for Trump.

But, he continued,

there was another trend. All of these urban hubs — Chicago, Minneapolis, Columbus, etc. — voted solidly for Clinton over Trump. In some of these cities, such as Chicago and Columbus, Clinton even had a bigger winning margin than Obama enjoyed in 2012.

As people move into Midwestern cities, “the evidence is that these migrants tend to be better educated and more diverse,” Longworth noted. “Exit polls tell us these people are more likely to vote Democratic.”

There are, Longworth wrote,

a lot of nuances here. These bright young college grads jamming the Big Ten bars in Chicago will presently get married and move to the suburbs. So the cities can be relied upon to stay true blue, but the suburbs may be up for grabs, the true swing battlegrounds: what we saw in the 2018 midterm elections was fairly encouraging, in that regard.

While the trends and the data are often conflicting and inconclusive, I’d say on balance that the developments are encouraging for Democrats, albeit modestly. There is also some evidence that Trump’s recent racist outbursts demeaning five Democratic members of Congress — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar and Elijah Cummings — offended many women, including blue-collar white women.

Obviously, being offensive is a dominant theme in Trump’s political history, but so far he has not paid the price that would have been imposed on any other elected official. Will it be any different now?

August 8, 2019


‘Just Come Out and Say It’: Players Want Answers on the Changed, Live Ball

The numbers show that the baseball used in the majors is flying farther than before. While M.L.B. insists it's not intentional, pitchers want to know why there are more homers than ever before.




NY TIMES

August 7, 2019

TONI MORRISON

Toni Morrison in 2008.

CreditCreditDamon Winter/The New York Times, 2008
NY TIMES

Toni Morrison, the Nobel laureate in literature whose best-selling work explored black identity in America — and in particular the often crushing experience of black women — through luminous, incantatory prose resembling that of no other writer in English, died on Monday in the Bronx. She was 88.

The first African-American woman to win the Nobel Prize in Literature, in 1993, Ms. Morrison was the author of 11 novels as well as children’s books and essay collections. Among them were celebrated works like “Song of Solomon,” which received the National Book Critics Circle Award in 1977, and “Beloved,” which won the Pulitzer Prize in 1988.

Image result for TONI MORRISON and OPRAH WINFREY
Ms. Morrison was one of the rare American authors whose books were both critical and commercial successes. Her novels appeared regularly on the New York Times best-seller list, were featured multiple times on Oprah Winfrey’s television book club and were the subject of myriad critical studies. A longtime faculty member at Princeton, Ms. Morrison lectured widely and was seen often on television.

In awarding her the Nobel, the Swedish Academy cited her “novels characterized by visionary force and poetic import,” through which she “gives life to an essential aspect of American reality.”

Ms. Morrison animated that reality in prose that rings with the cadences of black oral tradition. Her plots are dreamlike and nonlinear, spooling backward and forward in time as though characters bring the entire weight of history to bear on their every act.

Her narratives mingle the voices of men, women, children and even ghosts in layered polyphony. Myth, magic and superstition are inextricably intertwined with everyday verities, a technique that caused Ms. Morrison’s novels to be likened often to those of Latin American magic realist writers like Gabriel García Márquez.

Throughout Ms. Morrison’s work, elements like these coalesce around her abiding concern with slavery and its legacy. In her fiction, the past is often manifest in a harrowing present — a world of alcoholism, rape, incest and murder, recounted in unflinching detail.
Image result for Beloved
Beloved (1998)
It is a world, Ms. Morrison writes in “Beloved” (the novel is set in the 19th century but stands as a metaphor for the 20th), in which “anybody white could take your whole self for anything that came to mind.”

“Not just work, kill or maim you, but dirty you,” she goes on. “Dirty you so bad you couldn’t like yourself anymore. Dirty you so bad you forgot who you were and couldn’t think it up.”

But as Ms. Morrison’s writing also makes clear, the past is just as strongly manifest in the bonds of family, community and race — bonds that let culture, identity and a sense of belonging be transmitted from parents to children to grandchildren. These generational links, her work unfailingly suggests, form the only salutary chains in human experience.

Much of Ms. Morrison’s later work is concerned with history — often painful — as seen through the lens of an individual life; with characters’ quests, tragic or successful, for their place in the world; with the redemptive power of community; and with the role women play in the survival of such communities.

A compilation of black culture, edited by Morrison and published in 1974.
In 1974, she put together “The Black Book,” a compendium of photographs, drawings, songs, letters, and other documents that charts black American history from slavery through Reconstruction to modern times. The book exercised a great influence over the way black anthropology was viewed.

She wrote about the project in the February 2, 1974, issue of Black World: “So what was Black life like before it went on TV? . . . I spent the last 18 months trying to do a book that would show some of that. A genuine Black history book—one that simply recollected Black Life as lived. It has no ‘order,’ no chapters, no major themes. But it does have coherence and sinew. . . . I don’t know if it’s beautiful or not (it is elegant, however), but it is intelligent, it is profound, it is alive, it is visual, it is creative, it is complex, and it is ours.”

Researching the book, Ms. Morrison came across a 19th-century article about a fugitive slave named Margaret Garner who, on the point of recapture near Cincinnati, killed her infant daughter. More than a decade after “The Black Book” appeared, the story would become the armature of “Beloved.”

Image result for Song of Solomon
Her third novel, “Song of Solomon” (1977), cemented her reputation.

That book, Ms. Morrison’s first to feature a male protagonist, centers on the journey, literal and spiritual, of a young Michigan man, Macon Dead III.

Macon is known familiarly as Milkman, a bitter nickname stemming from the widespread knowledge that his unhappy, neurasthenic mother, “the daughter of the richest Negro doctor in town,” breast-fed him long past babyhood. (In “Song of Solomon” as in “Sula,” Ms. Morrison depicts black bourgeois life as one of arid atomization.)

The novel chronicles Milkman’s journey through rural Pennsylvania, a trip nominally undertaken to recover a cache of gold said to have belonged to his family, but ultimately a voyage in pursuit of self.

“Song of Solomon” was chosen as a main selection by the Book-of-the-Month Club, the first novel by a black author to be so honored since Richard Wright’s “Native Son” in 1940.


Ms. Morrison in 1986. She was one of the rare American authors whose books were both critical and commercial successes. Credit Jack Manning/The New York Times

Ms. Morrison’s fourth novel, “Tar Baby” (1981), deals explicitly with issues of racial and class prejudice among black people. Set on a Caribbean island, it chronicles the love affair of a cosmopolitan, European-educated black woman with a rough-and-tumble local man.
Image result for tar baby toni morrison
John Irving wrote of it. “What’s so powerful, and subtle, about Ms. Morrison’s presentation of the tension between blacks and whites is that she conveys it almost entirely through the suspicions and prejudices of her black characters … Like any ambitious writer, she’s unafraid to employ these stereotypes — she embraces the representative quality of her characters without embarrassment, then proceeds to make them individuals too.”

Image result for Beloved,

Beloved’: Her Masterwork

Ms. Morrison published “Beloved,” widely considered her masterwork, in 1987. The first of her novels to have an overtly historical setting, the book — rooted in a real 19th-century tragedy — unfolds about a decade after the end of the Civil War.

Before the war, Sethe, a slave, had escaped from the Kentucky plantation on which she worked and crossed the Ohio River to Cincinnati. She also spirited out her baby daughter, not yet 2.

“Sethe had twenty-eight days — the travel of one whole moon — of unslaved life,” Ms. Morrison wrote. “From the pure clear stream of spit that the little girl dribbled into her face to her oily blood was twenty-eight days. Days of healing, ease and real- talk. Days of company: knowing the names of forty, fifty other Negroes, their views, habits; where they had been and what done; of feeling their fun and sorrow along with her own, which made it better. One taught her the alphabet; another a stitch. All taught her how it felt to wake up at dawn and decide what to do with the day.”

Then a slave catcher tracks Sethe down. Cornered, she cuts her daughter’s throat rather than see her returned to a life of degradation.

Eighteen years pass. Sethe has been saved from the gallows by white Abolitionists and is later freed from jail with their help. She has resumed her life in Cincinnati with her surviving daughter, Denver, with whom she was pregnant when she fled Kentucky.

One day, a strange, nearly silent young woman a little older than Denver materializes at their door. Known only as Beloved, she moves into the house and insinuates herself into every facet of their existence.

Ms. Morrison receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama in 2012. The medal was among the many laurels she received in her writing career. Credit Luke Sharrett for The New York Times

“Beloved, she my daughter,” Sethe realizes in a stream-of-consciousness monologue toward the end of the book. “She mine. See. She come back to me of her own free will and I don’t have to explain a thing. I didn’t have time to explain before because it had to be done quick. Quick. She had to be safe and I put her where she would be.”

Toni Morrison in 1979. â€œLanguage alone protects us from the scariness of things with no names,” she said in her 1993 Nobel address. “Language alone is meditation.”
Jack Mitchell/Getty Images, 1979

Widely acclaimed by book critics, “Beloved” was made into a 1998 feature film directed by Jonathan Demme and starring Ms. Winfrey.

For mid-20th-century readers, one of the most striking things about Ms. Morrison’s work was that it delineates a world in which white people are largely absent, a relatively rare thing in fiction of the period.

What was more, the milieu of her books, typically small-town and Midwestern, “offers an escape from stereotyped black settings,” as she said in an interview in “Conversations With Toni Morrison” (1994; edited by Danielle Taylor-Guthrie), adding, “It is neither plantation nor ghetto.”

“I look very hard for black fiction because I want to participate in developing a canon of black work,” Ms. Morrison said in an interview quoted in The Dictionary of Literary Biography. “We’ve had the first rush of black entertainment, where blacks were writing for whites, and whites were encouraging this kind of self-flagellation. Now we can get down to the craft of writing, where black people are talking to black people.”

Ms. Morrison in 1994 at the Cathedral Church of St. John the Divine in New York. In granting her the Nobel the year before, the Swedish Academy cited the “visionary force and poetic import” of her novels, through which she “gives life to an essential aspect of American reality.”
CreditKathy Willens/Associated Press
Critical response to “Beloved” was overwhelmingly positive, though not uniformly so. In a corrosive review in The New Republic, the African-American critic Stanley Crouch called it “a blackface holocaust novel,” adding: “The world exists in a purple haze of overstatement, of false voices, of strained homilies; nothing very subtle is ever really tried. ‘Beloved’ reads largely like a melodrama lashed to the structural conceits of the miniseries.”

But the preponderance of opinion was on the other side. In January 1988, in the wake of the novel’s publication, The Times Book Review published an open letter signed by two dozen black writers, among them Maya Angelou, Amiri Baraka, Arnold Rampersad and Alice Walker, lauding Ms. Morrison and protesting the fact that she had “yet to receive the keystone honors of the National Book Award or the Pulitzer Prize.”

“Beloved” won the Pulitzer Prize that April. In 2006, after polling hundreds of writers, editors and critics, The Book Review named the novel the best American work of fiction of the previous quarter-century.

Image result for "Jazz." morrison
In 1992, she wrote "Jazz." Set in 1920s New York. Edna O’Brien wrote of it, “In sharp compassionate vignettes, plucked from different episodes of their lives, the author portrays people who are together simply because they were put down together, people tricked for a while into believing that life would serve them, powerless to change their fate … These are people enthralled then deceived by ‘the music the world makes.’” 

Image result for Love (2003) morrison
She published Love (2003), a family saga that has some similarities to The Song of Solomon in that it weaves its story around the lasting impact of a wealthy black patriarch and entrepreneur, Bill Cosey, the owner of Cosey’s Hotel and Resort, whose fortunes rest on the need for a holiday resort for black people in segregated America. His character becomes the focus of various generations of women’s longing for father, husband, lover, guardian and friend. Some critics have cautiously noted the teasing similarity between the central male protagonist’s name and that of the millionaire African American entertainer Bill Cosby.
Like The Song of Solomon, this novel records the historical and cultural changes affecting African Americans from the 1930s till the 80s, before, during and after the civil rights movement. Many reviewers hailed the publication of Love as demonstrating the kind of writing that had made Morrison a Nobel laureate.

Morrison’s ninth novel, A Mercy (2008), is set in 1682 in the early years of colonial Virginia, where English, Dutch, African, Portuguese and Native Americans compete to survive and rule.

Her next novel, Home (2012), moves forward to the 20th century, portraying the life of a Korean war veteran in segregated 1950s America and his attempt to save his sister from medical experiments carried out by a white doctor. It is dedicated to her son Slade, who died in 2010 aged 45, and with whom she had written several books for children.On the cover of Time in 1998.
Michiko Kakutani reviewed her 2015 novel, "God Help The Child." She wrote, “one of the great themes that threads its way through Toni Morrison’s work like a haunting melody is the hold that time past exerts over time present. In larger historical terms, it is the horror of slavery and its echoing legacy that her characters struggle with. In personal terms, it is an emotional wound or loss — and the fear of suffering such pain again — that inhibits her women and men, making them wary of the very sort of love and intimacy that might heal and complete them. In ‘God Help the Child,’ the two main characters (and some of the supporting cast, too) sustained terrible hurts in childhood.” 

Morrison in 1970, during her time as an editor at Random House.
CreditBernard Gotfryd/Getty Images
Ms. Morrison’s volumes of nonfiction include “Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination” (1992) and “What Moves at the Margin: Selected Nonfiction” (2008, edited by Carolyn C. Denard).

She wrote the libretto for “Margaret Garner,” an opera by Richard Danielpour that received its world premiere at the Detroit Opera House in 2005 with the mezzo-soprano Denyce Graves in the title role.

In 1989, Ms. Morrison joined the faculty of Princeton, where she taught courses in the humanities and African American studies, and was a member of the creative writing program. She went on emeritus status in 2006.
Toni Morrison at her home in Grand View-on-Hudson, N.Y.
CreditCreditKaty Grannan for The New York Times

Morrison always lived, she said, “below or next to white people,” and the schools were integrated—stratification in Lorain, Ohio, was more economic than racial—but in the Wofford house there was an intense suspicion of white people. In a 1976 essay, Morrison recalled watching her father attack a white man he’d discovered lurking in their apartment building. “My father, distrusting every word and every gesture of every white man on earth, assumed that the white man who crept up the stairs one afternoon had come to molest his daughters and threw him down the stairs and then our tricycle after him. (I think my father was wrong, but considering what I have seen since, it may have been very healthy for me to have witnessed that as my first black-white encounter.)” I asked her about the story. “The man was a threat to us, we thought,” Morrison replied. “He scared us. I’m sure that man was drunk, you know, but the important thing was the notion that my father was a protector, and particularly against the white man. Seeing that physical confrontation with a white man and knowing that my father could win thrilled, excited, and pleased me. It made me know that it was possible to win.”

“The thing very few people know about her is how much fun she was, because she wasn’t that much fun with most people,” Fran Lebowitz said of her friend Toni Morrison. “People were afraid of her. And she wanted them to be.”
CreditDarla Khazei/Associated Press

Morrison’s family was spread along a color spectrum. “My great-grandmother was very black, and because we were light-skinned blacks, she thought that we had been ‘tampered with,’ ” she said. “She found lighter-skinned blacks to be impure—which was the opposite of what the world was saying about skin color and the hierarchy of skin color. My father, who was light-skinned, also preferred darker-skinned blacks.” Morrison, who didn’t absorb her father’s racism, continues to grapple with these ideas and argue against their implications. In a television interview some years ago, she said that in art “there should be everything from Hasidic Jews to Walter Lippmann. Or, as I was telling a friend, there should be everything from reggae hair to Ralph Bunche. There should be an effort to strengthen the differences and keep them, so long as no one is punished for them.” Morrison addressed her great-grandmother’s notion of racial purity in “Paradise,” where it is the oppressive basis for a Utopian community formed by a group of dark blacks from the South.

As a child, Morrison read virtually everything, from drawing-room comedies to Theodore Dreiser, from Jane Austen to Richard Wright. She was compiling, in her head, a reading list to mine for inspiration. At Hawthorne Junior High School, she read “Huckleberry Finn” for the second time. “Fear and alarm are what I remember most about my first encounter” with it, she wrote several years ago. “My second reading of it, under the supervision of an English teacher in junior high school, was no less uncomfortable—rather more. It provoked a feeling I can only describe now as muffled rage, as though appreciation of the work required my complicity in and sanction of something shaming. Yet the satisfactions were great: riveting episodes of flight, of cunning; the convincing commentary on adult behavior, watchful and insouciant; the authority of a child’s voice in language cut for its renegade tongue and sharp intelligence. Nevertheless, for the second time, curling through the pleasure, clouding the narrative reward, was my original alarm, coupled now with a profoundly distasteful complicity.”

When she was twelve years old, Morrison converted to Catholicism, taking Anthony as her baptismal name, after St. Anthony. Her friends shortened it to Toni. In junior high, one of her teachers sent a note home to her mother: “You and your husband would be remiss in your duties if you do not see to it that this child goes to college.” Shortly before graduating from Lorain High School—where she was on the debating team, on the yearbook staff, and in the drama club (“I wanted to be a dancer, like Maria Tallchief”)—Morrison told her parents that she’d like to go to college. “I want to be surrounded by black intellectuals,” she said, and chose Howard University, in Washington, D.C. In support of her decision, George Wofford took a second union job, which was against the rules of U.S. Steel. In the Lorain Journal article, Ramah Wofford remembered that his supervisors found out and called him on it. “ ‘Well, you folks got me,’ ” Ramah recalled George’s telling them. “ ‘I am doing another job, but I’m doing it to send my daughter to college. I’m determined to send her and if I lose my job here, I’ll get another job and do the same.’ It was so quiet after George was done talking, you could have heard a pin drop. . . . And they let him stay and let him do both jobs.” To give her daughter pocket money, Ramah Wofford worked in the rest room of an amusement park, handing out towels. She sent the tips to her daughter with care packages of canned tuna, crackers, and sardines.

Morrison loved her classes at Howard, but she found the social climate stifling. In Washington in the late forties, the buses were still segregated and the black high schools were divided by skin tone, as in the Deep South. The system was replicated at Howard. “On campus itself, the students were very much involved in that ranking, and your skin gave you access to certain things,” Morrison said. “There was something called ‘the paper-bag test’—darker than the paper bag put you in one category, similar to the bag put you in another, and lighter was yet another and the most privileged category. I thought them to be idiotic preferences.” She was drawn to the drama department, which she felt was more interested in talent than in skin color, and toured the South with the Howard University Players. The itineraries were planned very carefully, but once in a while, because of inclement weather or a flat tire, the troupe would arrive in a town too late to check in to the “colored” motel. Then one of the professors would open the Yellow Pages and call the minister of the local Zion or Baptist church, and the players would be put up by members of the congregation. “There was something not just endearing but welcoming and restorative in the lives of those people,” she said. “I think the exchange between Irving Howe and Ralph Ellison is along those lines: Ralph Ellison said something nice about living in the South, and Irving Howe said, ‘Why would you want to live in such an evil place?’ Because all he was thinking about was rednecks. And Ralph Ellison said, ‘Black people live there.’ ”

After graduating from Howard, in 1953, she went on to Cornell, where she earned a master’s degree in American literature, writing a thesis titled “Virginia Woolf’s and William Faulkner’s Treatment of the Alienated.” What she saw in their work—“an effort to discover what pattern of existence is most conducive to honesty and self-knowledge, the prime requisites for living a significant life”—she emulated in her own life. She went back to Howard to teach. She joined a writing group, where the one rule was that you had to bring something to read every week. At first, Morrison said, she brought in “all that old junk from high school.” Then she began writing a story about a little black girl, Pecola Breedlove, who wanted blue eyes.

Image result for “The Bluest Eye”
Holt, Rinehart & Winston published “The Bluest Eye” in 1970. Set in Lorain at the end of the Depression, “The Bluest Eye” remains the most autobiographical of Morrison’s novels. In it, she focusses on the lives of little black girls—perhaps the least likely, least commercially viable story one could tell at the time. Morrison positioned the white world at the periphery; black life was at the center, and black females were at the center of that. Morrison wasn’t sentimental about the black community. The writing was lush, sensible-minded, and often hilarious. If Morrison had a distinctive style, it was in her rhythms: the leisurely pace of her storytelling. Clearly her writing had grown out of an oral tradition.

One of the few critics to embrace Morrison’s work was John Leonard, who wrote in the Times, “Miss Morrison exposes the negative of the Dick-and-Jane-and-Mother-and-Father-and-Dog-and-Cat photograph that appears in our reading primers and she does it with a prose so precise, so faithful to speech and so charged with pain and wonder that the novel becomes poetry. . . . ‘The Bluest Eye’ is also history, sociology, folklore, nightmare and music.”

The poet Sonia Sanchez, who taught “The Bluest Eye” in her classroom at Temple University, saw the book as an indictment of American culture. For Pecola, the descendant of slaves, to want the master’s blue eyes represents the “second generation of damage in America,” Sanchez told me. “For this woman, Toni Morrison, to write this, to show this to us—it was the possible death of a people right there, the death of a younger generation that had been so abused that there was really no hope. What Toni has done with her literature is that she has made us look up and see ourselves. She has authenticated us, and she has also said to America, in a sense, ‘Do you know what you did? But, in spite of what you did, here we is. We exist. Look at us.’ ”

Situating herself inside the black world, Morrison undermined the myth of black cohesiveness. With whiteness offstage, or certainly right of center, she showed black people fighting with each other—murdering, raping, breaking up marriages, burning down houses. She also showed nurturing fathers who abide and the matriarchs who love them. Morrison revelled in the complications. “I didn’t want it to be a teaching tool for white people. I wanted it to be true—not from outside the culture, as a writer looking back at it,” she said. “I wanted it to come from inside the culture, and speak to people inside the culture. It was about a refusal to pander or distort or gain political points. I wanted to reveal and raise questions.” She is still raising questions: Bill Cosey, the deceased patriarch in “Love,” is both beneficent and evil, a guardian and a predator.

Ms. Morrison with her sons, Slade and Ford, at her home in 1978. At her death she lived in Grand View-on-Hudson, N.Y.
CreditJack Mitchell/Getty Images

August 5, 2019

Legal Shield for Websites Rattles Under Onslaught of Hate Speech After El Paso & Dayton


NY TIMES


When the most consequential law governing speech on the internet was created in 1996, Google.com didn’t exist and Mark Zuckerberg was 11 years old.

The federal law, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, has helped Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and countless other internet companies flourish.

Image result for 8chan
But Section 230’s liability protection also extends to fringe sites known for hosting hate speech, anti-Semitic content and racist tropes like 8chan, the internet message board where the suspect in the El Paso shooting massacre posted his manifesto.

The First Amendment protects free speech, including hate speech, but Section 230 shields websites from liability for content created by their users. It permits internet companies to moderate their sites without being on the hook legally for everything they host. It does not provide blanket protection from legal responsibility for some criminal acts, like posting child pornography or violations of intellectual property.

Now, as scrutiny of big technology companies has intensified in Washington over a wide variety of issues, including how they handle the spread of disinformation or police hate speech, lawmakers are questioning whether Section 230 should be changed.

Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, has questioned whether Section 230 allows internet companies to be biased against content posted by conservatives.
Last month, Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, said in a hearing about Google and censorship that the law was “a subsidy, a perk” for big tech that may need to be reconsidered. In an April interview, Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California called Section 230 a “gift” to tech companies “that could be removed.”

“There is definitely more attention being paid to Section 230 than at any time in its history,” said Jeff Kosseff, a cybersecurity law professor at the United States Naval Academy and the author of a book about the law, “The Twenty-Six Words That Created the Internet.”

“There is an inclination to look at Section 230 as one lever to influence the tech companies,” he said.
Here is an explanation of the law’s history, why it has been so consequential and whether it is really in jeopardy.

So why was the law created?Image result for The Wolf of Wall Street
We can thank “The Wolf of Wall Street.”

Stratton Oakmont, a brokerage firm, sued Prodigy Services, an internet service provider, for defamation in the 1990s. Stratton was founded by Jordan Belfort, who was convicted of securities fraud and was portrayed by Leonardo DiCaprio in the Martin Scorsese film about financial excess. An anonymous user wrote on Prodigy’s online message board that the brokerage had engaged in criminal and fraudulent acts.

The New York Supreme Court ruled that Prodigy was “a publisher” and therefore liable because it had exercised editorial control by moderating some posts and establishing guidelines for impermissible content. If Prodigy had not done any moderation, it might have been granted free speech protections afforded to some distributors of content, like bookstores and newsstands.

The ruling caught the attention of a pair of congressmen, Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon, and Christopher Cox, a Republican from California. They were worried the decision would act as a disincentive for websites to take steps to block pornography and other obscene content.

The Section 230 amendment was folded into the Communications Decency Act, an attempt to regulate indecent material on the internet, without much opposition or debate. A year after it was passed, the Supreme Court declared that the indecency provisions were a violation of First Amendment rights. But it left Section 230 in place.

Since it became law, the courts have repeatedly sided with internet companies, invoking a broad interpretation of immunity.

On Wednesday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed a lower court’s ruling that Facebook was not liable for violent attacks coordinated and encouraged by Facebook accounts linked to Hamas, the militant Islamist group. In the majority opinion, the court said Section 230 “should be construed broadly in favor of immunity.”

Why is the law so consequential?
Section 230 has allowed the modern internet to flourish. Sites can moderate content — set their own rules for what is and what is not allowed — without being liable for everything posted by visitors.

Whenever there is discussion of repealing or modifying the statute, its defenders, including many technology companies, argue that any alteration could cripple online discussion.

The internet industry has a financial incentive to keep Section 230 intact. The law has helped build companies worth hundreds of billions of dollars with a lucrative business model of placing ads next to largely free content from visitors.

That applies to more than social networks like Facebook, Twitter and Snapchat. Wikipedia and Reddit depend on its visitors to sustain the sites, while Yelp and Amazon count on reviews for businesses and products.

More recently, Section 230 has also provided legal cover for the complicated decisions regarding content moderation. Facebook and Twitter have recently cited it to defend themselves in court when users have sued after being barred from the platforms.

Many cases are quickly dismissed because companies assert they have the right to make decisions on content moderation as they see fit under the law.

What are the problems with the law?

The criticisms of Section 230 vary. While both Republicans and Democrats are threatening to make changes, they disagree on why.

When they were members of the House, Ron Wyden, left, Democrat of Oregon, and Christopher Cox, Republican of California, helped create Section 230. CreditDouglas Graham/Congressional Quarterly, via Getty Images


Some Republicans have argued that tech companies should no longer enjoy the protections because they have censored conservatives and thereby violated the spirit of the law, which states that the internet should be “a forum for a true diversity of political discourse.”

Facebook, Twitter and Google, which runs YouTube, which are the main targets for bias claims, have said they are baseless.

On the flip side, some Democrats have argued that small and large internet sites aren’t serious about taking down problematic content or tackling harassment because they are shielded by Section 230.

Mr. Wyden, now a senator, said the law had been written to provide “a sword and a shield” for internet companies. The shield is the liability protection for user content, but the sword was meant to allow companies to keep out “offensive materials.”

However, he said firms had not done enough to keep “slime” off their sites. There is also a concern that the law’s immunity is too sweeping. Websites trading in revenge pornography, hate speech or personal information to harass people online receive the same immunity as sites like Wikipedia.


August 4, 2019



Back-to-Back Bursts of Gun Violence in El Paso and Dayton Shake a Bewildered Nation to its Core.

On Sunday, Americans woke up to news of a shooting rampage in an entertainment district in Dayton, Ohio, where a man wearing body armor shot and killed nine people, including his own sister. 27 others were wounded.  The assassin was shot to death by police during the shooting and his motive appeared unclear. Hours earlier, a 21-year-old with a rifle entered a Walmart in El Paso and killed 20 people.

In Bellbrook, a quiet suburb of Dayton, that residents described as a “utopia,” the typical Sunday morning peace was disrupted by the police and news media who swarmed the cul-de-sacs and sidewalks of the neighborhood where Connor Betts, the 24-year-old suspect, is believed to have lived. 

Theo Gainey, who lived for 10 years down the block from the Bettses and was a year ahead of Connor Betts in school, remembered him as a “bit of an outcast,” ostracized in large part because of threats he made at school that got him into serious trouble. Mr. Betts had to leave school for the rest of that year. When he returned, “the threat thing followed him, and people didn’t want to hang out with him.”

Some details about Betts began to emerge on Sunday: he attended local public schools in Bellbrook, took classes at Sinclair Community College in the Dayton area and was majoring in psychology. He had been working at a gas station and was registered to continue classes in the upcoming fall semester.

NY TIMES

August 3, 2019


Massacre at a Crowded Walmart in El Paso Leaves 20 Dead, 26 Wounded

The authorities are considering charging the suspect with federal hate crimes, as well as federal gun charges that would carry the death penalty.


NY TIMES

August 2, 2019


Hal Prince, Giant of Broadway and Reaper of Tonys





NY TIMES

August 1, 2019




What We Learned From the July Democratic Debates

  • A widening rift between the party’s populist and centrist wings. Strong messages from the race’s leading progressives. A shaky front-runner.
  • Wednesday night concluded the second Democratic primary debate of the 2020 election, with Sens. Cory Booker (N.J.) and Kamala D. Harris (Calif.) and former vice president Joe Biden as the headlining candidates. None of them turned in a resounding performance.

Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren didn’t debate Wednesday, but they were solid on Tuesday night — and their performances made them look like the winners. They handled the heat better, especially when defending Medicare-for-all.

NY TIMES

Biden’s Foes Back Themselves Into a Corner

JEFF GREENFIELD, POLITICO

July 31, 2019







Winners and Losers of Night 1 of the Democratic Debate. Experts Weigh In

Lower-polling candidates had their moments, but none outshone the front-runners, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
NY TIMES


NY TIMES

July 30, 2019




Sanders and Warren Battle Accusations of ‘Fairy Tale’ Promises 



NY TIMES

Democratic Debate Turns Ferocious Over Health Care


NY TIMES

July 29, 2019


Trump Widens Racist War on Black Critics While Embracing ‘Inner City Pastors’





NY TIMES

July 27, 2019



American Carnage’ Shows How War Between Republicans Led to Their Peace With Trump




NY TIMES