LOST AND FOUND: The Mystery of Alan Gershwin (update: NINE YEARS later!)

Today when I opened my email, I read a comment on a blog post I wrote NINE years ago, carrying on a very long thread about George Gershwin and his "secret son", a man whose birth had been a scandal and hidden away for decades. I still get comments on blog posts from years and years ago, perhaps one or two a week, but it amazes me my stuff is "out there". This seemed almost like magic! Here is the comment, and my reply.

Late to the thread. I had my dna done a few years back and the closest dna relative to me was a fellow named Alan Gershwin (never heard of him) Did some research and learned Alan was born Albert Schneider, and was either my great uncle, or my mother’s first cousin. Mom’s maiden name is Schneider. Albert, my mom and her siblings were all born in Brooklyn. I found and spoke to “Alan Gershwin’s’ son (we matched dna and he is my first cousin) He wasn’t close with his dad and said he only got in touch to borrow money. Kind of a con man. Alan/Albert was never the same after the war, dishonorably discharged and returned convinced he was GGs son. Mom’s turning 100 and has Alzheimer’s and her sibling are dead, so I might never find out why he was never spoken about in our family… he was kept secret.

What an amazing story! Thank you so much for sharing it with me. I've been blogging for 12 years or so (and I know blogs have gone out of style, but so have I) and never got so many responses to a single post. When I get comments on posts I wrote NINE years ago, it truly amazes me. This one is still an unsolved mystery, though it surprises me how many people weighed in on it, each from a different angle and some with an eerily close connection to the enigma. I do wonder if he truly believed he WAS George's son, particularly towards the end of his life, and had been abandoned by his famous father. Or was it indeed just an elaborate con? Surely the myth would gain powerful sympathy from some quarters, and he DID compose one piece of music that we know of. Someone else told me he played the piano, but badly. I have come to the conclusion his story likely wasn't true, but he obviously put great energy into maintaining the narrative. At any rate, wow. This is truly incredible, and to learn all this after nine years has just lit up my morning.

This might be categorized as a Separated at Birth of a very different stripe.

I love a mystery, but this mystery has pushed me back time and time again, leading to more frustration than information.

I've been chopping my way through several of the multitude of George Gershwin biographies. Surely no American composer has ever been more sliced, diced, hashed and rehashed than GG. I finally found my way to the really smutty one (The Memory of All That, 1998) by Joan Peyser, the one that reviewers vilified for being inaccurate and making "outrageous claims", including the insistence that GG sired an illegitimate son with a chorus girl in 1926.

One indignant review of the Peyser book sniffily claims that "the family has never recognized Alan Gershwin's claim to their", etc., etc., blah blah blah, but why would they? The stigma of an illegitimate child could ruin a career back then. No doubt the woods were full of opportunists and pretenders, not to mention gold-diggers. After his death, GG's affairs (literally) were hermetically sealed by Ira and Lee Gershwin, his brother and sister-in-law, who lived a long time and were bound and determined to show only the more brilliant facets of this enigmatic jewel to the public.

That restriction remained in place long after both of them were dead.

Strangely enough, in subsequent reviews and commentaries on Peyser's book, critics have become more forgiving. Over time, her formerly sleazy tell-all has found its way into the Gershwin canon (not the boom-boom kind: I keep telling you!). A three-inch-thick Gershwin tome by Howard Pollack, the "definitive" bio until the next one comes along, admits Peyser's scholarship is a bit wonky, but nevertheless cites her work three or four times in a fairly straightforward manner. It's included, which in itself lends her work validity. By some mysterious process that I don't understand, her controversial, vilified, preposterous and completely discounted biography now "counts".

Could it be that she got it right?

But here's the thing. When I try to dig up some hard, plausible evidence that Alan Gershwin exists, or ever did exist, I can't find anything. There is a glorious photo gallery of "someone" - the photographer claims it's AG - taken when he would have been 88 years old. The fine facial bone structure that has kept him photogenic all these years is a trait he shares with George (who never had the misfortune of growing old). But I can't post these, they're protected by the web site, and there's no text with them that I can find. Nothing to explain the photos. Nothing at all.

The few sites I found that even mention Alan Gershwin now identify him as "son of George", not "supposed" or "alleged" or any of that. No one seems to question it any more. But except for a claim to be a composer in his own right, this man of nearly 90 left very little trace. I found a YouTube video of just one piece he wrote called The Gettysburg Anthem, performed a few years ago at a small church for a commemorative Lincoln event. But the piece was composed FIFTY years ago - a bit longer than the time it took for GG to snatch his notation paper off the piano and perform it in public the same night. In his case, the smoke was still rising, the ink was still wet.

And that is all. No more videos. No more compositions. Nothing. I modestly have to tell you that there is a hell of a lot more of MY stuff on the internet, maybe because I don't know when to keep my mouth shut.

Tantalyzingly, there is a Facebook page that had me racing to find it, but in essence there's nothing on it except a link to a review from the late 1990s of the Peyser bio, one of the very few positive ones that thought her claims of an illegitimate son were valid.

There's also a cropped photo of AG's mouth, the feature that most resembles GG's. Hmmmmm.

If you're to believe this strange and ultimately unproven story, people would see the young Alan Gershwin and nearly fall over backwards because they thought they were seeing a mini-George. Imagine what a shock it must have been after GG's untimely death in 1937. Alan Gershwin was a walking stigma, or else just an oddity with a chance resemblance. But it wasn't just the way he wore his hat, the way he sipped his tea. His gait, his way of inhabiting his lanky body, his nervous energy and the smile that made you hear bells and the intoxicating rattledy-bang of trains - they really did seem to match up.

Or did they?

AG has never submitted to a DNA test. And of course, there are lots of examples of the Separated at Birth phenomenon (many of which I've posted here) that are almost creepy in their similarity.

Might AG be one of these? Now that he has aged, the resemblance isn't quite so startling, except at certain angles. The photo most widely circulated plays that up.

And yet, and yet.

One of the tidbits I found, deep in the archives of a website called The Blacklisted Journalist, was this piece of information, true or not:

Alan Gershwin was born in Brooklyn on May 18th, 1926, his birth certificate recorded in the name of Albert Schneider, with Mollie Schneider, Alan's mother's sister, listed as his mother.
In Alan's early years and during his occasional visits with his famous father, Gershwin could never find the courage to acknowledge Alan as his son and introduced Alan as a "son of a friend".
For what appears to be endless years, Alan waged a futile battle for full acknowledgement. And while the evidence is overwhelming, denials rage on.

After a sad childhood, lacking even a shred of his father's musical genius, Alan approaches the waning segment of his life still hoping the world will, at the very least, announce him as "the son of George Gershwin," not Gershwin's "son of a friend."

Now that the world is paying at least a scrap of attention, at least enough to take his picture and set up an empty Facebook page, perhaps Alan Gershwin (IF he's Alan Gershwin) feels vindicated. Believe me when I say that I am a bloodhound, and if there is any more information to be found, I will find it. But I haven't found it yet.

Some people coat-tail all their lives, and it's sad. Meanwhile, a weird thing has happened: Alan Gershwin has morphed into someone who looks sort of like George's grandfather, if grandsons bore that much resemblance (which they don't).

In fact, in a rare photo of George's father, we see no resemblance at all.

Just when I am ready to write this off as a strange posthumous form of stalking, I think of Charles Lindbergh. Lindbergh was a bona fide American hero, an aviator who flew solo from New York to Paris in 1927. Tickertape parade, picture on the cover of Time, the whole works. (Except Time probably didn't exist then.) Though he was supposedly happily married to the longsuffering Anne Morrow Lindbergh, rumors dogged him throughout his life that he in fact had several families scattered all over Europe, and that he had fathered, according to the garbled information I found, either four, five or nine illegitimate children (along with the six he had with Anne). These rumors seemed as preposterous as the murmurings that he was a Nazi sympathizer, until the surviving children took DNA tests in the mid-2000s and proved to the world that it was all true.

This one is truly bizarre, one of the strangest photographs I have ever seen. I have no idea where it came from, who took it, and why. Like all the other shreds I found, there's no explanation for it. It appears to be a shot of Alan Gershwin's face in profile, directly behind that of his father, perhaps made as a deliberate comparison. This would have been hard to accomplish, I mean technically, back in the day, so it may be a sophisticated form of photoshopping. The scribbles all over it are somewhat similar to the scrawling George liked to do when he gave someone a photo. He was even known to write little musical phrases, like-a so:

Or were the scribbles by George himself? Unlikely - they're big and sloppy and nothing like George's small, neat, upright hand. (Sidebar note: apparently George's original manuscripts were as immaculate as Mozart's, often without a single correction.) They also obscure the photo, which would have driven him crazy. In spite of the dash and verve of his music, his vibe suggests to me obsessive attention to detail and an insistence on order. On top of that, like most geniuses he was an inherently narcissistic personality who needed the world to see that incredibly beautiful face.

So we are left to compare basic features: the flattish face, the aristocratic high-bridged nose with its handsome Jewishness, the long clean jaw reminiscent of a movie star's. The sloping forehead with its receding hairline. The sweet, sad, expressive eyes that one jilted girl friend described as "heavenly". But most of all, and perhaps this is why it is on the FB banner, the "Hapsburg lip", pouty, sensual and a little sardonic. George had a killer mouth, with the kind of insolently brilliant smile that would light up a foggy day in London Town, or anywhere else.

What do you think? Are you with me here? Am *I* even with me here? Due to the frustrating lack of information, I don't think I will ever know for sure.

Visit Margaret's Amazon Author Page!
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001K7NGDA

BONUS! Just found an incredible version of the "superimposed" GG with Alan Gershwin. It was for sale on Etsy, of all things, for five bucks, an "original", and that's all it said. The mystery deepens. . .

THIS IS HUGE! Recently I sadly learned of the passing of Alan Gershwin. But with his death, yet more mystery is emerging. Anyone who is interested in this strange case should read the article by David Margolick from the New York Times. The mystery may be solved - or is AA more enigmatic than ever?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/06/obituaries/alan-gershwin-who-claimed-a-famous-father-is-dead-at-91.html
 comments:

Mathew PaustApril 9, 2015 at 1:22 PM

HmmmmmmmReplyDelete



Margaret GunningApril 9, 2015 at 2:02 PM

Double-hmmmmm!ReplyDelete



MarcJanuary 9, 2016 at 2:02 PM

I met AG at a Bar Mitzvah at which I was performing with my band in 1999. I talked to him for a while, and he sent me an autographed photo of himself at an age when he looked remarkably like GG. The inscription reads, "For Marc Sherman, on behalf of my illustrious father, I am musically yours, Alan C. Gershwin. 10/22/99" I've read the Peyser book, and have always wondered why AG never submitted to a DNA test, unless it was the GG family that refused to cooperate.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningJanuary 9, 2016 at 4:19 PM

Fascinating! I have mixed feelings about this whole subject. The man seems to live through Gershwin, as if being his (perhaps) son has been his whole life. And yet, there is a guy going around who looks more like Obama than Obama. Lookalikes can make a very good living at it. So I am not sure, especially since he balks at the DNA test. I am re-reading the Peyser right now. I have seen some reviews of it (which are still on the internet, a lot of them for some reason) from when it first came out, and everyone blasted it as heresy. The level of fury tended to say there was some denial going on. The critics protested too much, not wanting "their" George sullied by such possibilities as being hung from the ceiling and whipped by Kay Swift. But more recent Gershwin bios are citing/quoting Peyser as if her ideas have gained more credence in the interim. I get the impression GG has been hermetically sealed by the family for a very long time, adding to his mystery. There is so much we still don't know. He seems to have had the x-factor that makes a genius, whereas Berlin, Arlen, et al. aren't much known to the younger generation. I mean: White Christmas, versus I Got Rhythm/Rhapsody in Blue? Anyway, I am deep in another George phase right now and back on the fox hunt, posting like mad. Tally-ho! (Oh, and - did AG ever really write any music? There is one YouTube vid which purports to have a performance of a very old choral piece, but I am not sure about it.)Delete


Reply


MarcJanuary 9, 2016 at 9:59 PM

I don't know if AG has/had any musical talent or not. There is that Gettysburg Anthem that he composed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INFRrUopSIU.
I did see a video of him banging (and I do mean banging) on a piano once.
He declined to sing with my band, and doesn't play any musical instrument as far as I know.
BTW, I performed my mini version of Rhapsody in Blue at 2 concerts today.ReplyDelete



Margaret GunningJanuary 9, 2016 at 11:05 PM

Where do you play? Piano? RiB is immortal, I think.

I am starting to wonder if AG is a pretender. He seems like a sad figure, living only through his "father", and the stories in the Peyser book seem a bit contrived.

She doesn't get into the "was he gay or wasn't he?", to which I answer, WHO CARES?ReplyDelete
Replies

MarcJanuary 10, 2016 at 8:42 AM

I perform in the Philadelphia area and surrounding counties (Bucks and Montgomery), plus South Jersey.Delete



MarcJanuary 10, 2016 at 8:45 AM

You can hear samples of my piano playing here:
http://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/MarcShermanDelete



Margaret GunningJanuary 10, 2016 at 10:48 AM

This comment has been removed by the author.Delete



Margaret GunningJanuary 10, 2016 at 10:52 AM

That's OK, I found the CD site! Enjoying it. My piano teacher told my mother I was "unteachable", so to hear this kind of expertise is wonderful!Delete



Margaret GunningJanuary 10, 2016 at 11:00 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgApJUs7DA4 Don't know if this will work - a YouTube video of Love Walked In, my current fave GG, sung in Russian. Wonderful arrangement, beautifully sung.Delete


Reply


UnknownApril 1, 2016 at 12:28 AM

This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningApril 1, 2016 at 12:46 AM

Then again, AG refuses to take a DNA test, as does William Shatner's "son" who is suing him for x-million dollars. It may be one of the hazards of fame. Another "thing" that comes up with Gershwin is "was he or wasn't he gay?" Personally I don't care, and the answer may be "yes" (both ways), but does it really matter now? We have the music.Delete


Reply


UnknownApril 16, 2016 at 8:19 AM

He is not gay. George or Alan Gershwin. So before you speak stupidly get your facts straight. Alan is a very difficult man but he is very lovely. It is amazing to know him and k would never change that. If you only had the privilege and be as blessed as I am.ReplyDelete



UnknownJanuary 29, 2017 at 10:14 PM

YOU NOT ONLY RESEMBLE HIM PERFECTLY , BUT YOU HAVE THE TOTALITY OF ALL HIS MUSICAL TALENTS .= MARZZY-' the lady's with me 'ReplyDelete



KATHARINE WEBERApril 22, 2017 at 5:28 AM

Alan Gershwin is a living person who has had a very hard life. The nonsense here about his "refusal to submit" to DNA testing gets it exactly wrong. The Gershwin family have never been willing to provide anything for him to be tested against. It has been his lifelong hope to be able to prove his heritage. Joan Peyser searched desperately for a way to get this testing done while she was writing her problematic book (for which the superimposed double profile photo was created). Peyser asked me repeatedly if I possessed anything of my grandmother Kay Swift's that might have George's DNA. She was particularly hopeful for any envelope or postcard that might have a stamp George himself had licked. I had nothing for her, as my grandmother destroyed all letters and photos after George's death in order to preserve privacy. There is no certainty about Alan's claim, but there is much to suggest he is indeed George's son. Kay Swift, who met him when he was a child at least twice, would never make a public statement about this but she certainly never denied his claim.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningApril 22, 2017 at 10:47 AM

Thank you for your comments. I especially value your perspective as Kay Swift's granddaughter. She in some ways reminds me of Mozart's sister Nannerl, who never achieved her rightful place in musical history. Would I be correct in saying the Gershwin family are still trying to negate AG's existence, or at least keep him a secret? Even in the age of Google it is difficult to find any information about his life. At any rate, I found Peyser's book a mixed experience, with some claims that seemed over the top or even downright gossipy. But other bios were almost too reverent, gingerly tiptoeing around anything that would disturb the legend. Others hyperfocused on the music, brushing past problematic areas in GG's personal life. Peyser waded right in there fearlessly, and from what I can dig up, the critics absolutely clobbered her. Now, she is being cautiously reconsidered as a valid biographer, perhaps because of that lack of intimidation (and - just maybe - validation of some of her more outrageous claims). GG's early death must be a factor, and the fact that he was so quintessentially American, reflecting the lavish blooming of musical culture in the '20s-'30s. I also wrote many (many!) posts about Oscar Levant, who in many ways couldn't have existed without GG. But in finding out more about Levant, I couldn't help but gain deeper insight into GG. "Upper berth, lower berth - the difference between talent and genius", indeed.Delete



Gregory MooreMay 17, 2017 at 5:51 PM

Alan is alive and well, having just turned 91 years old this week. He's been a friend of mine for several years. He lives with his long-time 'lady-friend," Blossom Tracy (who's 96--and the last wife of Arthur "The Street Singer" Tracy) in NYC. They're certainly one of New York's most colorful couples. I'm a musical scholar...and do you know what? I believe him! When I look at his face, there is no denying there is a strong physical resemblance. I choose to believe him and give him the benefit of the doubt--as I would hate to have it someday be proven that he IS George Gershwin's son--and I was one of the people who didn't believe him. He keeps a pretty sunny outlook, most times...though he does have sort of a cloud of sadness about him. What an awful thing it would be, to have the world deny you your own birthright, wouldn't it? Incidentally, that photo superimposition was originally run in CONFIDENTIAL MAGAZINE in the mid-1950's--they ran an entire article about him, which I could send you if you're interested. In any case, thank you for shining the light on this under-reported musical mystery. I believe you, Alan!Delete



Margaret GunningMay 17, 2017 at 9:14 PM

Please do! I would love to see it. I find this whole subject fascinating. I wasn't expecting this many intriguing comments, including a recent one from Katharine Weber, Kay Swift's granddaughter. I went through a real GG phase in my writing and tried to see him through various lenses, especially the people around him.http://margaretgunnng.blogspot.ca/2015/04/stalking-gershwin-julias-story.html I do appreciate your comments and believe you're fortunate to know Alan Gershwin. I'm becoming more convinced all the time! Your description of "a pretty sunny outlook, most times. . . though he does have a sort of cloud of sadness about him" reminds me a lot of people's descriptions of George Gershwin. No matter how many biographies you read, it's very hard to get close to a sense of how he really was. To my surprise, I learned that he appeared to many people (including Ira, who was terrified) as a ghost after he died, no doubt due to all that unfinished business. Anyway, thanks!Delete


Reply


JennyMay 23, 2017 at 12:24 PM

Just saw this page. I knew Alan Gershwin when I lived in NY. When I knew him he was selling copies of that double profile portrait ... autograph extra.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningMay 23, 2017 at 12:57 PM

I've received so many comments on this post from people who know/knew Alan Gershwin. He remains a mysterious figure to me. Thank you for your contribution to the enigma.Delete



UnknownAugust 23, 2017 at 1:01 AM

ALAN GERSHWIN IS NOT AN ' E N I G M A ' ; BUT RATHER IS A REAL ' L I V E ' FLESH AND BLOOD INDIVIDUAL , WHOM NOT ONLY LOOKS LIKE HIS FATHER ; ' GEORGE GERSHWIN ' BUT ALSO HAS THE SAME MUSICAL TALENTS OF HIS FATHER ! I KNOW THIS , BECAUSE I'VE HEARD HIS MUSIC . DID YOU KNOW THAT , HE EVEN HAS HIS OWN PUBLISHING CO. ! I FIRST MET HIM IN 1985 AT A LECTURE IN NEW YORK CITY , ON A TOPIC OF MUTUAL INTEREST , AND WE INSTANTLY BECAME ACQUAINTANCES AND LATER , VERY GOOD FRIENDS . YOU JUST COULDN'T HELP BUT LIKE THIS MAN INTENSELY . ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD SAY TO HIM OVER THE YEARS THAT I KNEW HIM , WAS THAT IN ADDITION TO ALL THE WONDERFUL MUSIC HE WROTE , THAT HE MISSED OUT ON HIS OTHER SECOND CALLING IN LIFE ! THAT WAS THAT HE ' ALAN GERSHWIN ' IS A GREAT COMEDIAN ! I OFTEN SUGGESTED HIM TO ALSO TRY DOING THAT FORM OF ENTERTAINMENT , AS A SECOND POSSIBILITY . I'M CERTAIN HE WOULD HAVE BEEN QUITE SUPERB AT IT . I CAN SEE THIS IS BECOMING A LONG ABSTRACT SO THINK OF HIM AS A WONDERFUL ' HUMAN BEING ' FIRST AND THEN TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE NIGHTMARE HE WENT THROUGH IN LIFE , IN JUST TRYING TO ' PROVE HIMSELF ' FIRST , AND THEN WHOM HE REALLY IS AND IN ALL OF HIS 80 + YEARS HAS RAISED CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN , I'D SAY ". . .YOUR A BETTER MAN , FOR HAVING DONE IT ALL. . ." ! PLEASE EXCUSE ANY TYPOS OR GRAMMA MISTAKES , AS IVE ' SLOSHED ALL THIS TOGETHER AT 4AM ! ALSO PLEASE EXCUSE MY USING ' CAP-LOCKS ' AS I TYPE MUCH FASTER AND MORE ACCURATELY WITH THEM ON ! THANK YOU !Delete


Reply


Josh Max's Smash and Grab ComicsJuly 15, 2017 at 5:01 PM

Met and spoke with Alan Gershwin in 2003 at the annual International Al Jolson festival on Long Island. Nice guy, looked exactly like his pa, if his pa was in his 80s.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningJuly 15, 2017 at 9:26 PM

I find that fascinating. So many people have left comments about how they met him or know him, and most are convinced he is indeed GG's son.Delete


Reply


UnknownAugust 23, 2017 at 1:01 AM

ALAN GERSHWIN IS NOT AN ' E N I G M A ' ; BUT RATHER IS A REAL ' L I V E ' FLESH AND BLOOD INDIVIDUAL , WHOM NOT ONLY LOOKS LIKE HIS FATHER ; ' GEORGE GERSHWIN ' BUT ALSO HAS THE SAME MUSICAL TALENTS OF HIS FATHER ! I KNOW THIS , BECAUSE I'VE HEARD HIS MUSIC . DID YOU KNOW THAT , HE EVEN HAS HIS OWN PUBLISHING CO. ! I FIRST MET HIM IN 1985 AT A LECTURE IN NEW YORK CITY , ON A TOPIC OF MUTUAL INTEREST , AND WE INSTANTLY BECAME ACQUAINTANCES AND LATER , VERY GOOD FRIENDS . YOU JUST COULDN'T HELP BUT LIKE THIS MAN INTENSELY . ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD SAY TO HIM OVER THE YEARS THAT I KNEW HIM , WAS THAT IN ADDITION TO ALL THE WONDERFUL MUSIC HE WROTE , THAT HE MISSED OUT ON HIS OTHER SECOND CALLING IN LIFE ! THAT WAS THAT HE ' ALAN GERSHWIN ' IS A GREAT COMEDIAN ! I OFTEN SUGGESTED HIM TO ALSO TRY DOING THAT FORM OF ENTERTAINMENT , AS A SECOND POSSIBILITY . I'M CERTAIN HE WOULD HAVE BEEN QUITE SUPERB AT IT . I CAN SEE THIS IS BECOMING A LONG ABSTRACT SO THINK OF HIM AS A WONDERFUL ' HUMAN BEING ' FIRST AND THEN TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE NIGHTMARE HE WENT THROUGH IN LIFE , IN JUST TRYING TO ' PROVE HIMSELF ' FIRST , AND THEN WHOM HE REALLY IS AND IN ALL OF HIS 80 + YEARS HAS RAISED CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN , I'D SAY ". . .YOUR A BETTER MAN , FOR HAVING DONE IT ALL. . ." ! PLEASE EXCUSE ANY TYPOS OR GRAMMA MISTAKES , AS IVE ' SLOSHED ALL THIS TOGETHER AT 4AM ! ALSO PLEASE EXCUSE MY USING ' CAP-LOCKS ' AS I TYPE MUCH FASTER AND MORE ACCURATELY WITH THEM ON ! THANK YOU !ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningAugust 23, 2017 at 9:52 AM

I'm amazed at the comments I still get on this subject after more than two years. It seems that many people have met him, know him, and love him. I can believe he has had a very hard life living in this shadow, though it must be a source of pride. Thank you for your comments, I appreciate them. I don't usually make it to 4:00, but I've been known to be up til 2:00. I find I can't type slowly as I make too many errors. My fingers have to forget what they're doing.Delete


Reply


UnknownDecember 5, 2017 at 4:46 AM

Alan gave me one if those superimposed Alan/George pictures once. I also have a cassette tape of Alan's songs. He'd come into a Greenwich Village bar I played at and immediately start requesting that I play one of his songs. The only one that wasn't utter hack work was called "This Is Only The Beginning." I must have been the only person playing any of his songs in the entire decade.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningDecember 5, 2017 at 10:50 AM

I'm beginning to get a very complicated picture here. Some have echoed your thoughts about AG as an untalented wanna-be, but others insist he's the real thing. At this point I don't know what to think, but I do appreciate all the comments, including yours.Delete


Reply


Pam JonesMarch 1, 2018 at 6:25 AM

I know a girl that claims to be the granddaughter of Alan Gershwin. I see no mention of his having married or if he had children. I would like to be able to speak to someone who would really be able to tell me if this girl is correct. She also told us that he had passed away on 2/22/18. Can anyone speak to the validity of any of this information?ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningMarch 1, 2018 at 10:39 AM

Thank you for your comments. This mystery is far from solved! So far this is all I’ve found:

http://www.shalomjewish.com/Services.html

https://www.facebook.com/alancgershwin/

This seems to indicate that he passed fairly recently. Information on GG is very, very scant. The Facebook page hadn’t been updated in four years and had almost no information, but the comments were intriguing. I do recall trying to contact Marty Freedman and being told it was the wrong person, though I don’t remember any more details. But there is some actual contact information here that you might want to follow up on. I can’t believe the number of comments I’m still getting on this, so I will keep looking and post whatever I find. So many people are interested in this man! My gut feeling now is that he wasn’t Gershwin’s son, but that’s just from what I’ve read and seen.Delete



Pam JonesMarch 1, 2018 at 1:04 PM

Super interesting. Not surprised that every aspect of Allen Gershwin's life is shrouded in some sort of mystery. it does make it feel a bit fabricated but who really knows. I hope that someone can eventually speak knowledgeably about AG's death and the possibility of his having children of his own.Delete


Reply


Katharine WeberMarch 6, 2018 at 9:49 AM

NYT obituary by David Mrgolick should be running tomorrow.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningMarch 6, 2018 at 10:47 AM

Could you send a link, please? You can email me at magunning@telus.net. Thanks.Delete


Reply


UnknownMarch 6, 2018 at 3:47 PM

In the mid-1970's, I met Alan Gershwin in "Pam Pams" a former Greenwich Village eatery on Sheridan Sq. After that, we would meet there occasionally,have coffee and talk and speak on the phone. His address,The Parc Vendome on W.57th St., and ph.# are still in my old address book. He was a nice, gentle man who talked about who he was and his attempts at getting the Gershwin family to recognize him. He was a big fan of Nicholas Tesla and was writing a book on him. I had no reason to doubt his claim at the time.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningMarch 6, 2018 at 4:36 PM

I think this subject has drawn a record number of comments (since my blog usually doesn't get comments!). This especially surprises me in light of the fact that the original post ran three years ago. I had a thought that, though he believed he was Gershwin's son, someone may have convinced him of it for reasons unknown. That's not the same thing as being an impostor. So many people who commented here say they met AG him or knew him, and all of them mention his deep attachment to GG. Some have very flattering things to say about him, some not so flattering. Now that he is gone, we may never have conclusive evidence either way. Emotionally and spiritually, I think he was GG's son, but I am not sure about literally. It does seem to have been the central concern and pursuit of his life. GG's life was strange enough, and had he lived a normal span, perhaps this mystery would have been closer to resolution. Thanks for commenting!Delete


Reply


Margaret GunningMarch 6, 2018 at 4:51 PM

An excerpt from a recent obituary/article in the NY Times. Since I can't post a live link here, I'll post it at the end of my piece: "Ms. Peyser’s case for Mr. Gershwin was also skewered, and with a redemptive paperback edition in mind, she set out to buttress it with irrefutable DNA.

There were setbacks: Blood tests revealed that the cousin with whom Mr. Gershwin claimed to have been reared was his brother after all. (He then argued that George Gershwin must have fathered the brother, too.) Meantime, assisted by a Yale medical school professor, Ms. Peyser tried procuring slides of George Gershwin’s brain, from which genetic material might be extracted. An investigator paid nearly $3,000 for a postcard that George Gershwin had sent from Atlantic City in 1918, propelled by a stamp he had presumably licked.

Most dramatically, in January 1999, moments before the place closed for the day and her body was removed, a former F.B.I. agent who had been enlisted in the cause yanked a small tuft of hair from the head of George Gershwin’s sister, Frances Gershwin Godowsky, as she lay at the Frank E. Campbell Funeral Chapel on Madison Avenue. The hair, paired with a swab taken from the reluctant Mr. Gershwin’s mouth, was sent to a lab in Boston.

Mr. Gershwin’s lawyer had devised a sliding scale to calculate his take once he had proved Mr. Gershwin’s case, running from 40 percent of the first $5 million Mr. Gershwin collected to 35 percent of the next $5 million, down to a quarter of anything over $25 million. But the lab dashed all such dreams: Ms. Godowsky and Alan Gershwin, it found, were not related."

You can't make this stuff up!ReplyDelete



Margaret GunningMarch 6, 2018 at 5:05 PM

Obituaries New York Times

Alan Gershwin, Who Claimed a Famous Father, Is Dead at 91

By DAVID MARGOLICK MARCH 6, 2018

You may be able to find the piece by googling this information. It's a fascinating piece.
ReplyDelete



MJMarch 7, 2018 at 9:42 AM

I can't understand why Alan never put the story to rest in his later years. I guess everyone likes a good hoax. My favorites are the Cardiff Giant and the girls from Cottingly with their fairy photos. In those cases and in most really GOOD hoaxes, eventually the people behind them admit it.

Often, it doesn't matter, since some people will continue believing. I wonder if Alan figured it wouldn't matter if HE admitted that it was just a story. The fact that he refused to allow a DNA test for so long should have been the end of it, it seems, but it wasn't. People still believed and, no doubt, continue to believe now that the evidence is in.

The only thing I can figure is that he had to keep it up because it was pretty much his whole life. It sounds like he dedicated nearly his entire run as a living person to the hoax. It also sounds like he will continue the tale as a non-living person. Just another example of if you say something enough times, people will think it's true.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningMarch 7, 2018 at 11:17 AM

And then there's Piltdown Man, who wasn't even a person! Scientists believed it was an authentic human fossil for - how long? How many years? It's like the painting hanging upside-down in the Louvre. People see what they are convinced is real. From the comments I've received, those who knew AG claimed he talked almost exclusively about being GG's son. He made it into his 90s exuding that sense of exiled royalty (the stuff of fairy tales), which was his raison d'etre. A sorry figure, except now that he's gone I can say that I found him obnoxious. I have a photo of the "exclusive" magazine spread from the '50s and I'm going to try to blow it up and get some text off it. What a weird case, but great writing material! Thank you for your comments.Delete


Reply


UnknownMay 28, 2021 at 2:26 PM

Goodness, could Alan LOOK more like his father? Who cares what the NYT and The Gershwin Estate and Google try (Why, I don't really know?) to de-tract. Its Biology 101 and Human History. God Bless Alan Gershwin for having the courage to speak up and identify himself against all odds. Kind of disappointed that the Gershwins would be so shady. Tried to find photos of Alan's 4 children and grand children...or George's great-grandchildren, but could not locate on Google. Why...why?ReplyDelete



Tracey SternMarch 20, 2024 at 10:35 PM

Late to the thread. I had my dna done a few years back and the closest dna relative to me was a fellow named Alan Gershwin (never heard of him) Did some research and learned Alan was born Albert Schneider, and was either my great uncle, or my mother’s first cousin. Mom’s maiden name is Schneider. Albert, my mom and her siblings were all born in Brooklyn. I found and spoke to “Alan Gershwin’s’ son (we matched dna and he is my first cousin) He wasn’t close with his dad and said he only got in touch to borrow money. Kind of a con man. Alan/Albert was never the same after the war, dishonorably discharged and returned convinced he was GGs son. Mom’s turning 100 and has Alzheimer’s and her sibling are dead, so I might never find out why he was never spoken about in our family… he was kept secret.ReplyDelete
Replies

Margaret GunningMarch 21, 2024 at 11:23 AM

What an amazing story! Thank you so much for sharing it with me. I've been blogging for 12 years or so (and I know blogs have gone out of style, but so have I) and never got so many responses to a single post. When I get comments on posts I wrote NINE years ago, it truly amazes me. This one is still an unsolved mystery, though it surprises me how many people weighed in on it, each from a different angle and some with an eerily close connection to the enigma. I do wonder if he truly believed he WAS George's son, particularly towards the end of his life, and had been abandoned by his famous father. Or was it indeed just an elaborate con? Surely the myth would gain powerful sympathy from some quarters, and he DID compose one piece of music that we know of. Someone else told me he played the piano, but badly. I have come to the conclusion his story likely wasn't true, but he obviously put great energy into maintaining the narrative. At any rate, wow. This is truly incredible, and to learn all this after nine years has just lit up my morning.Delete


Reply

Hey, hey, hey. . . KATE's OKAY!

 

I wasn't going to deal with this at all, except. . . it's been a slow week, I've been sick with the double-whammy of a nasty headcold and fierce spring allergies, and what the hell. I needed a distraction from "it", which is what I now call the so-called-Sussexes, those supremely boring ex-royals in which I've completely lost interest. But then this popped up!

After not being seen in public since Christmas, amid the usual swirling rumors about what the hell has happened to her, THIS photo of Kate Middleton with the kids was released, and right away everyone thought it was fishy.

Which it is.

A few teeny-tiny mistakes were made in the photoshopping - and yes, indeed, the image was photoshopped TWICE according to the "metadata", the digital information every public photo now yields.  With Adobe, which is the one I use, for God's sake - the equivalent of manipulating a photo using your thumbs.

Worse than that, the news agencies looked at it and immediately became alarmed, then "killed" it (pulled it from all the papers, wire services, etc.) - something that generally only happens with suspicious images from North Korea or the Oval Office.  So what was actually going on? All too soon, a very lame-sounding "apology" was issued implying Kate herself had botched it up. Which is, to quote the Brits, "not bloody likely".

This has led to some alarming theories, not to mention some highly-entertaining memes on social media, along with newly-fired-up speculation about where and how Kate actually is (IF she is - some say the worst has happened already). Now rumors are surging to the forefront about Prince William's affair with his old flame, Rose Whateverhername is, and the fact she is now pregnant with their SECOND love child.

I told you it was weird.

I must say that Kate makes a rather handsome man, which is more than I can say about most "trans" men who still look like women. That beard is rather striking. But not "manipulated", surely?

But this is my personal favorite. No doubt naughty Kate cut-and-pasted this one, late at night, with her thumbs, just in time for Mother's Day, which in Britain is on March 10 for some reason (and the brilliant green leaves and grass in the background added yet another element of unreality to the thing).

But never fear, I've found a number of charming photos which prove that there's nothing to see here at all. I've titled my gif presentation:  Hey, Hey, Hey. . . KATE'S OKAY!

And if she really DID photoshop these, she has obviously learned from her mistakes.

I'm in a Pogo state of mind. . .

 

Today I'm just in a Pogo state of mind. Hardly anyone remembers Pogo now, as even in his heyday in the 1950s, it was a sort of niche market. Though Walt Kelly's artwork was brilliant and sometimes breathtaking, people complained about all that darned TEXT. The things those characters SAID, the way they talked with each other and expressed things about life that were so neatly nutshelled, no one really appreciated how brilliantly succinct they were. 

He made it look easy.

This one is a personal favorite because it makes us laugh, and then it makes us - oh. 

Oh, so true.

Right now, the Church of Pogo is about the only religion I have, and the only one that hasn't totally disillusioned or even damaged me. How to say it in a handful of words? Human beings have taken something which MIGHT have been a wonderful concept, and utterly poisoned it. We just do not know how to access a state of grace, which to me is what "God" represents.


But even then, Pogo knew.

This one, perhaps the most famous Pogo-ism of all, has kind of a strange backstory. Kelly was invited to speak at some sort of event, and to conclude it he said, "We will soon discover that we have met the enemy - and not only may he be ours, he may be us." Or words to that effect. Only then did people latch on to it, and only then did he incorporate it into one of his most famous cartoons.

This one just spoke to me the other day when I was so royally pissed-off at a family member I have never liked, but who phones me several times a year (I have never once phoned her in 30+ years, because I never want to talk to her). I finally did what I should have done decades ago and cut her off. Now she's furious and feels I owe her an apology and insists she was only trying to HELP me, for God's sake, be an advocate for all my experiential fuckups. ., . never mind. She is gone out of my life forever, as far as I am concerned, and high time, too.

YOU GO, POGO!

All, Some, None (or "this but not that") - words to live by, especially now

 

After a particularly hair-raising and horrendous phone call from a relative I secretly can't stand (and whom I have never once phoned myself, though she calls me at least several times a year and begins to bombard me with highly-personal questions), I wrote this Facebook post and ran it with the photo above. I won't break up the text with images this time, as I like to do, because I really don't have the energy right now. It comes at a time when I already feel vulnerable due to another family member's sensitive crisis, and information that has been entrusted to me which I now realize I cannot and will not violate.

Maybe I should title this "things you shouldn't share on social media". It's a timely subject, particularly in light of the fact that we're now realizing that "delete" doesn't really mean "delete", that people can screenshot and save anything you post and use it for whatever purpose they choose, even years and years later - and in whatever distorted form they want to.

I have no complaint with sharing stuff that's sensitive, and I've done quite a bit of it myself over the years. This has led some people to believe that because I brought up certain subjects, I am quite willing to share EVERYTHING that has EVER happened to me in that area, including things that I went through literally decades ago.

Am I still the shy, smiling young girl you see in this picture? Well, no - and bringing up some of the worst things that ever happened to her is - what shall I say? - not productive. This is particularly true if the person unearthing these archival incidents is not sharing ANY of their own personal struggles, but is hiding behind a sort of social worker position. When that happens, I feel "studied", and it's not sharing on any meaningful level. It is not identification, and it is the farthest thing from empathy that I can imagine.

I learned some valuable things about boundaries many years ago, little gemstones I carry around in my pocket, which have never been more useful than they are right now.

"This but not that." Does that sound simple? It is, but not easy to actually do. In other words, I may be comfortable sharing THIS feeling, incident, situation, etc., but not THAT one. The topic is not wide open for discussion simply because I have brought it up. Most especially, it's not helpful if the incidents the person is bringing up are things I would obviously rather forget.

This is a related issue, but very important. If someone asks you to do something (and especially, if you ask YOURSELF to do something), you can do ALL, SOME, or NONE of it. These are all good choices, and each one of them serves you in the moment. But it is entirely your own choice, and if you get pushback from people (especially wanting ALL when your choice is SOME or NONE), that is their concern and not yours. This has nothing at all to do with them. And "no" is a complete sentence.

We talk about boundaries, but in the Wild West of social media, it seems like boundaries are beginning to dissolve. I have shared some things on my blog that I honestly thought were OK to repost here (it's easy and can be done with the click of a button) - but my blog is personal, my following small, and generally speaking the content won't be held up for scrutiny in the same way.

Another issue that comes up a lot is the value of going public. It used to be seen as really admirable, but it's a whole new ballgame now. Back when I wrote columns for community newspapers, one or two people might appreciate what I wrote or how much of myself I shared. Now it's simply "out there", or up there, where people can either misinterpret it, or just assume I am willing to reveal more (and more and more!) about myself.

This but not that. All, some, none. It's time for me to pull those valuable gemstones out of my pocket once again.

On social media you can be anyone you want to be. You don't even have to use your real name. The person asking you all those uncomfortable questions or digging up incidents from forty years ago can easily take on the safely-defended role of a "mental health professional" (even though they're usually not), safely removed from the actual messy reality of your own experience. But something worse might happen next, and often does. That person then uses your moment of vulnerability to benefit themselves.

Several years ago I dumped Facebook because it had become a drag that wasn't adding anything to my life. Now I honestly wonder how much it might be taking away. I know a lot of people who have stopped posting, perhaps wisely. If I do partake of this, I won't assume things I wrote five or ten years ago will have the same impact. Things have changed radically, and we must watch out for people who are, in a subtle way. predators.

Maybe cat videos and the odd family photo might be safer for me here, as I realizes now I don't want to be public property, even in the most minor way. I'll also make an effort to pay more attention to my own discomfort, and not allow even the most subtle form of exploitation to take place.

For that is what it is.

Why I hate "mental health"

 

I hate buzzwords and fads, and they exist in every single area of human endeavour. The one I hear repeatedly now is "mental health". But what does it mean? Scratch a little deeper, and it usually refers to a celebrity or public figure "admitting" he or she experienced depression, but always in the deep past, at a safe distance.

Anxiety is big these days - it always has been - but it's just what folks get when things are this bad, hard-wired into our brain evolution. But what about schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and - the big, bad boogeyman of "mental health" - PSYCHOSIS?

One day I tried to count the number of times I heard or read terms meaning "crazy", and I stopped after fifteen. It includes nut case, whack job, cracked, batshit crazy, psycho, and on and on (I don't even need to tell you, do I?), with facilities to house these undesirables called the nut house, the booby hatch, the funny farm, the whatever. 

Want to know what Merriam-Webster's dictionary has to say? I've copied and pasted all the synonyms, verbatim. Buckle in.

Insane

as in psychotic

having or showing a very abnormal or sick state of mind 

"only an insane person would intentionally jump off a skyscraper"

Synonyms & Similar Words

psychotic 

lunatic
mad
nuts
crazy
maniacal
maniac
mental
gaga
paranoid
crazed
psycho
paranoidal
deranged
looney
whacky
disturbed
demented
strange
irrational
unhinged
loony
whacko
nutty
unbalanced
cuckoo
wacko
screwy
eccentric
certifiable
wacky
ballistic
batty
bonkers
cracked
bedlam
daft
unreasonable
around the bend

haywire
kooky
foolish
odd
barmy
depressed
daffy
loony tunes
obsessed
crackbrained
bughouse
meshuga
out to lunch
moonstruck
loco
crackpot
unsound
scatty
non compos mentis
brainsick
kookie
hysteric
bats
meshuggah
frantic
looney tunes
distraught
meshugah
hysterical
distracted
schizophrenic
balmy
meshugge
delusional
fruity
off
wud
paranoic
neurotic
delirious
cranky
loopy
fey
sociopathic
schizoid
out of one's mind
off one's rocker
obsessive-compulsive
paranoiac
delusionary
off one's gourd
crackers
queer
disordered
off one's head
oddball

aberrant
tetched
out of one's head
nuclear
touched
dotty
berserk
witless
pixillated
pixilated
amuck
raving
senseless
monomaniacal
frenzied
potty
teched
ape
amok
wigged-out
monomaniac
fixated
bananas

These nasty epithets have INCREASED in the past couple of years, and I sense that public contempt for "crazies" has grown exponentially. At the same time, every day and in every way, we hear the term bandied about: mental health, mental health, mental health. I suspect there is considerable schadenfreude involved, in that people love to watch other people's crises. It's a great spectator sport. And it's almost (but not quite) a badge of honour now for a celebrity to take a little break from their multi-billion-dollar career to "work on their mental health".

But they don't know what they are talking about. 

These people who so delicately refer to "mental health" know nothing at all of the real deal, how it can be life-threatening, and how it can take every fibre of your being to put your life back together after an "episode". The confusion and the lurching moods, the baffled and frightened loved ones, the endless trials on medications that seem to make matters worse - but this is only part of the story.

I don't know how many times I've been in psychiatric wards, because I don't remember those horrendous passages in my life very well, nor do I wish to. But there were no cards, no flowers, and most definitely, no visitors. Who would want to go there? Or did they just assume someone in that "state" did not want or require visitors? The people around me just pretended it hadn't happened, or told people I was "away".

No doubt if I'd had my tonsils out, it would have been a different story. But it's obvious that something as horrendous as a  tonsillectomy would require sweet gifts and cards and visits, whereas that other thing - well - 

I remember sitting in a women's group in which we were encouraged to "share" some particularly vulnerable experiences in our lives. I made the huge mistake of saying I had recently been in the hospital, and as I talked, I noticed the woman sitting next to me was acting as if she had suddenly developed an all-over body rash. Then she said, "I'm sorry", got up from the chair and moved away from me. She apologized profusely, saying "I'm sorry, I just can't hear stories about the psycho ward." No one objected, and the group went on talking, though the temperature of the room had dipped slightly.

I've heard people blow off "psychos" with such utter contempt that I have been tempted to grab them by the collar and say, "Look into my eyes. You are talking about ME." Not only that, it might be YOUR closest, dearest loved one, or even YOURSELF who may be next to bear that label of utter disgrace and contempt. 

There is no disgrace in a condition which has been part of humanity forever, and which is poorly-understood at best, even by professionals. Why people are now pretending so hard to understand it, or at least pretend to be more compassionate about it, is beyond me. I guess it's better than nothing - but not much. Maybe it's just an updated version of "thoughts and prayers", 

I say fuck the genteel, sanitized label of "mental health", particularly to display how compassionate and enlightened you are, and instead STOP referring to whack jobs and nut bars and try to see human beings as human beings. Is that such a tall order?

AAAAAND, just for reference, here are the ANTONYMS of "insane" from the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

sane

reasonable

sound

balanced

rational

clear

normal

wise

sensible

lucid

uncrazy

judicious

compos mentis

healthy

well-adjusted

unneurotic

Doesn't quite match up. Does it?

POST-BLOG THOUGHTS. I wrote this post several years ago, and if anything, it's even more true now. I believe you can still order "mental patient costumes" online for Halloween, and in my very own neighborhood, I've seen lawn decorations that said things like "DANGER! ESCAPED MENTAL PATIENT" (or looney or whack job or whatever the epithet of the day is). "The Mentally Ill" (a separate species, apparently) are still the stuff of horror, violence, and dread. The more extreme depictions in pop culture are virtually indistinguishable from that other celebrated cultural icon, the zombie.

That means I'd better join the club, or grab a club or something, and start stalking the neighborhood. But I will ONLY pursue people who spew the meaningless term "mental health" left, right and centre - because everyone else is saying it now. It's just the thing to say.

This Cat is DRIVING a CAR!

Maybe it's the mental space I'm in, but lately I am obsessed with cat memes. These are ludicrously primitive animations which have been cropped out of cat videos (and primitive animation is right up my alley!), with cats usually having conversations with each other, or, in this case, confidently and casually driving a car. I think most of them appear on TikTok, which means they make their way to YouTube as well. Who knows how long my obsession will last, but I'm enjoying this one, and it's so much better for me than cults or bad religion (two more of my obsessions). 

"Yayayayayayayoo!" Green Screen Cat Memes

Given that I have decided to DUMP anything remotely royal on YouTube (at long and bitter last), I had to fill the void with something. Then - somehow, some way - I discovered CAT MEMES, featuring the same two cats having a "conversation" which  never varies:

"Yayayayayayayoo"

"Aiw"

"Yayayooyayaaaayyayo"

"Aiw

  R-aiw"

There are a number of variations on this, but for the most part, the only thing that varies is the background and subtitles. Since then, I can't stop watching these, even though most of them are ten seconds of non-sequiturs. But that's the whole point, that they aren't very good, that they don't ask anything of me - and already, I'm making some of my own.

These are silent films, of course. . . I don't yet have the technical know-how (do you love that "yet" part, as if I ever will?) to add a soundtrack to a gif. The green screen is supposed to allow you to add your own background, subtitles, other cat memes, etc., but I doubt if I'll bother. 

But making the gifs is such fun! And some of these are being converted into YouTube videos, with the usual abysmal results. My views are in the toilet now, whereas that ONE video, a really stupid one, is now at nearly THIRTEEN MILLION views, with tens of thousands of comments. But the ones I spend hours on just crash and burn. 

I will undoubtedly reach 20,000 subscribers in the next few weeks, because the stupid 13M one has pushed the count up by 650+ in four weeks. I still don't know why, but even more than that, I don't know why my lovingly-created videos are getting 15 views. If that. But I swore I wouldn't get into this! YouTube is a hobby, and it should be an enjoyable one. It's not the same game at all however, and the changes in the past year or so are alarming. It's just a mad scramble for views, likes, subs, etc. etc. And there are so many things you can't say, or show, or do. 

But these were still fun to make. And fiddling around with cat meme gifs is easier on my soul than the terminal boredom and endless irritation of "it", the issue I just had to dump after realizing it was basically the same story endlessly repeated for five years. If anything actually HAPPENS, I may start watching again.

Or not.

KING of the WIND: The Glorious Horse Art of Wesley Dennis

The horse stories of my childhood were brilliantly illustrated by Wesley Dennis, who captured movement and even facial expressions in a way that was almost uncanny. Marguerite Henry's horse stories, which now seem terribly sentimentalized, were brought to life by Dennis's whimsy and fierceness. Misty of Chincoteague and King of the Wind would not have been the same without these works of art. 

🌞RETURN of the KEYBOARD CAT!🌞

One of the very first videos I saw on YouTube, back in about 2008 when the whole thing was new, was this Keyboard Cat. I found it in green screen and was able to add my own soundtrack (Darktown Strutter's Ball), which syncs up surprisingly well!

😀CLASSIC Maxwell House Commercial: A Cup-and-a-Half of Flavor!☕

As a child, I thought this ad was pretty magical and didn't know how they achieved the effect. Now that I'm an adult - I still don't! In the era before special effects, it was some accomplishment. Maybe I should research how they did it. 

OK THEN!!! I'm back. I did a bit of googling around, and different people had different ideas (no one has kept a record of how they actually did it), but I like this long, impossibly convoluted explanation (from an obscure 2007 message board) the best:

My first reaction was that they had used a slightly buoyant black plastic cylinder with a small hole in the bottom. If the coffee was poured in at roughly the same rate as it exited the hole (trial and error), it would have floated on top of the coffee pooling under it. Of course, this would work in a mug, but not the kind of cup shown, and we seem to be able to see well into the cup before the coffee is poured.

I was about to dismiss this theory when I noticed the large vortex that actually continued to grow after the coffee was no longer being poured – as if there were a hole in the bottom of the cup. It’s visible through the coffee, too, once it rises above the rim.

So here’s the sketch of a possible method:

1.      two white cups, say a coffee cup (which we will now ignore) and a cylindrical mug, filmed separately in almost the same spot, so the lips of the two coincide against the background.

2.      The cylindrical mug contains a black plastic buoyant cylindrical cup in it. (Think: an inverted cap from an aerosol can.) There is a hole in the center of the bottom of the black “cup”, blocked by a spring-loaded flap valve, adjusted to open under a pressure equal to the pressure of coffee filling the cup almost to the rim.

3.      The black cup has a high, but adjustable, buoyancy due to a styrofoam disk (with a hole for the valve) affixed under it. The total mug.valve/cup assembly can have any height: we will only see the very lip of the white mug, and the black cup as it rises out of the while mug

4.      Coffee is poured into the assembly at a rate that matches the outflow through the hole. The black cup, perpetually almost full of coffee, rises out of the white mug, floating on the coffee that flowed out through the flap valve. Outflow stops when no more coffee is added, but the “bathtub whirlpool” remains, and actually consolidates and grows a little without the interfering flow of poured coffee.

5.      A static (still) matte is created of the white “coffee cup”, up to the rim, and composited against each frame of the film of the (lip of the) white mug/black cup/poured coffee.

If the mechanical effect seems finicky, please recall that this was an analog/mechanical era. Every man wore a mechanical watch, and most woke to mechanical alarm clocks. All car ignition and control systems were mechanical, and adjusted by he man of the house every few months. Now that I think about it, the cup system I just described would have seemed familiar to the average carburetor-float-adjusting, toilet-fixing 1960s man

The still vs motion composite I suggest would have been far cheaper and less complicated than a masked motion vs. “phaser beam” composite ing 1966 Star Trek or even the motion vs. Motion compositing of the “identical cousins” on the 1963 sitcom The Patty Duke Show.

In the mechanical/analog film age, masking and compositing wasn’t just for Sci-fi effects. Cathy and Patty Lane (both played by Patty Duke) appeared together several times in every episode, on a sitcom budget. It was pretty much the whole gimmick of the show. Also Cathy’s and Patty’s fathers were identical twin brothers, both played by William Schallert – so the producers clearly weren’t worried that it’d break the budget.

Heck, it’s much easier, faster and cheaper than 1920s-80s rotoscoped or hand-drawn animation or claymation, all widely used in 1960s commercials.