The Column of Lasting Insignificance    Ojai Orange    Books    Marijuana    Press    Contact
Ojai Orange

October 1, 2016 by John Wilcock

Manhattan Memories

Chapter 26:
The Last Word
(part 4)

Flash forward to the [Village] Voice’s 50th anniversary issue in 2005. One of the stories they ran was my seminal piece about Andy Warhol’s moviemaking. Was I recompensed or otherwise mentioned? No, and no.

Thus my letter to Tony, requesting that the fatwah be lifted and that my name be mentioned in the paper itself, as they continued to use my 50-year-old 2c words. This was his response:

John, Got your letter. I have to assume that you’re not aware of the pinch that the print industry is in at the moment. We’re printing extremely tight paper versions right now as we struggle through the Bush economy, and there’s plenty of stuff happening right this minute that I don’t have room for. And that’s why I’m glad we have all the room in the world on-line, where I can do things like celebrate your old columns, which I very much enjoy.-- Tony O.

That current issue of the Voice, by the way, was more than 200 pages. I tried again a couple of months later, hinting that as they were unwilling to devote a paragraph to telling their readers about my book, maybe for old time’s sake they might give me a break on an ad. Sure, they replied, just send five hundred bucks. They were still re-using the old columns.

 
Diary

Time flies so fast as we get older, the weeks almost seeming to merge. I once heard somebody joke that he was traveling so fast in a car that, “the milestones began to seem like a fence”, and that’s how quickly the days seem to go by. (What, it’s Saturday again?) Many of you will know, or will soon find out, that the supposed wisdom imparted by advanced years is no compensation for the diminution of one’s faculties.       

Teeth are lost, eyesight is impaired, arthritis affects the knees. And, of course, hearing fails to the extent that the first impulse is to get a hearing aid—which doesn’t help very much. My doctor told me that nine out of every ten of his patients who acquire a hearing aid tend to give it up within two years because of the inconvenience. And I am one of the nine.

The interesting thing is that diminished hearing doesn’t entail loss of sound but of clarity; you just can’t make out the words. One compensation is that often what you don’t hear doesn’t actually matter and this isn’t just a rationalization because, with obvious exceptions, even when I could hear very well I often didn’t pay attention to what was being said, particularly when many people were part of the conversation. I found that if something was really important, that I would become aware of it one way or another, and the rest of the time, the best filter was inattention.

I was always impressed by the tale of the man who liked “to walk through the woods with a lot of people”. Yes, and why was that? Well some, he said, would note the dew on the leaves, and some the mushrooms on the ground, and others would rave about the sun shining through the trees….

Although immortality is beyond our scope we’d all like to think that our good works, our power, will long outlast us, but sadly almost all of us will be remembered after we’ve gone only by family and a handful of others. Within days of our death we’re out of sight and out of mind. Some folk believe in reincarnation and that karma will determine how our new life will be, but there’s never been any evidence that we return to this earth in any form. So enjoy life while you can—carpe diem —and at least try to ensure that any memories you leave are nice ones.

If we have creative talents we can at least leave something behind which is why I published a layout in my magazine of some of my mother’s art.

Before I die I hope to see this book in print.


Ojai Orange

 

Nobody, as we know, has a monopoly on the truth or what’s the most sensible policy about almost anything. I have found myself agreeing occasionally even with the likes of Dr. Laura or Bill O’Reilly (but never with Rush Limbaugh).

It long ago became obvious that the difference between Republicans and Democrats was simply that between the haves and have-nots, the former were motivated almost entirely by the constant need for more, no matter how much they had already. They were totally insensitive to the fact that poor people are rarely poor by choice and that the solution for them is not—as Limbaugh might maintain—for them to get off their asses and work. When Bush first decided to ignore the need for money by schools, hospitals and the infrastructure, in favor of giving obscenely rich people yet another tax break, I asked the Montecito Journal’s Jim Buckley: “How could he do that?”

“Well they paid the money” blustered Jim indignantly, “why shouldn’t they get it back?”

Isn’t that a bit selfish?

“Oh don’t give me any more of that Socialist left wing garbage” Jim replied.

Jim’s approach to life and his politics were perfectly aligned. Fundamentally, he seemed to believe that anything you could acquire and hang onto was deserved. It was entirely legitimate, no matter how you acquired it. The sacred belief of Republicans is that nobody should then be allowed any part of it. With manipulation, indeed, more can be acquired. For Republicans, greed has no limits; they never have enough. The would-be sharer is a pariah.

People are poor? Tough luck, serves them right for not being as smart as I am. Taxes? Outrageous! Why should I give up any of my money for the common good?

For Republicans there is apparently no common good, only one’s personal avariciousness.  Note how often rich companies, rich people stash their money out of the U.S. so they won’t have to pay taxes to the country that made them rich. Taxes could help everyone. But greed heads don’t want to benefit anybody but themselves.  My idea of a classic Republican—apart from that blustering, bullying blowhard ElRushbo—is Rupert Murdoch. Watch how he changes his nationality to fit his business…how he changes political sides for the same reason… how he censors his newspapers and broadcast interests when and wherever true free speech could cost him money.

JIM HAD INVITED ME to write for his new paper, the Montecito Journal when it began back in the early ‘90s.  I was paid nothing at first, then $30 a column. After ten years I asked for a raise. He told me with some indignation that he was already being generous as he could buy material better than mine from a syndicate for less money.  Not long afterwards he turned his thriving paper over to his son who, surprisingly, turned out to be an even bigger fan of George Bush than his father The bullying son dropped my column after accusing me of being a hated liberal because I occasionally quoted the Nation (among 100 other sources). He sought to avoid paying for the last two—but Jim (my ‘friend’ of 35 years) said not a word in my defense.

Maybe I shouldn’t focus so much on Jim, who, after all, is a decent and likeable human being, but he seemed to me to epitomize everything that I hate about Republicans, whose creed seems to be that virtue and merit is due only to those who have proved themselves financially successful. Anybody lacking such aims deserved all they (don’t) get.

But in many ways he epitomized the socially-ambitious style of so many persons of moderate talent who thought and voted Republican because they were so focused on their own interests that “the poor” were beyond their ken. I have no idea how much, if anything, Jim ever gave to charity and I never asked him how he felt about Franklin Delano Roosevelt but I can imagine his knee-jerk response to the concept of helping the under-privileged. He was, of course, a fan of that dittohead who persistently reiterates that anybody who isn’t rich has only himself to blame.

Dear reader,

Today's column is on of the almost 500 columns I ran on the Ojai Orange site between 2006 and 2014. These will, of course, be free as is everything on my sites, and has been for the past decade or so. But, I do request that if you find these columns interesting, that you consider sending a donation, which you could possibly write off as a gift for my birthday on August 4, when I will be 90.

Chapters from my autobiography, Manhattan Memories will continue to run on ojaiorange.com.
—JW

...

John Wilcock
The Gables
701 N. Montgomery St.
Ojai, CA 93023

For most of my early life it was a given that we’re all in this together, and rich and poor both had a stake in creating a smooth-running and reasonably equitable society. But greed has increased exponentially in the past few years (William Greider described, in the Nation, the New Right’s agenda as “rolling back the 20th Century”). Now we have a society that has become largely acquiescent about inequality. These are the times when rich people establish their bases in other countries rather than be taxed in their own… who spend more on lawyers showing them how to evade taxes than many people earn in a lifetime. The latest estimate of executives’ pay, reveals it to be 179 times what their workers earn—almost double what it was a decade ago.

The titles of two books that appeared last spring say it all: Free Lunch; How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (and stick you with the bill) by David Cay Johnston and The Politics of Inequality by Michael J. Thompson. The latter quotes Thomas Jefferson who was already beginning to see a trend: “I hope we shall crush in its birth” he declared, ”the aristocracy of our money corporations which dare already to challenge our government”. Substitute ‘tycoons’ for corporations, and ‘dominate’ for challenge, and you have a picture for today.

Virtually every member of the “haves” is totally out of touch with the rest of us. Some Republicans, for example, airily dismiss $200,000 as “a middle class income”. Apparently they’re totally unaware that multi-millions of people live on about one quarter of that. They’re the same elitists who lap up the words of food critics telling them about “bargain meals” that are under $50.

Why do the Democrats always allow the Republicans to demonize and define them? It’s sometimes with the same old trick—accusing your opponents of what you are yourself guilty of (the Nixon defense) and also a case of negatively emphasizing words like ‘liberal’ or ‘socialist’ often enough that people begin to accept them as negative.

And if the high octane speaker is always blustering and almost screaming, in Limbaugh fashion, it cows and overwhelms the audience, a naturally tendency to feel that anybody with such forceful emphasis must be right.

More than one (GOP) party chairman suggested Republicans had “lost their way” but opinions ranged widely on the reasons, from the suggestion that their policies had been too moderate (“compassionate conservatism was a disaster” said one). Phyllis Schafly said she’d spent much of her life trying to tell people that the Republican party was not the party of the rich and big business (but) “there just seem to be some people who are trying to make it that way”. Does this woman hear what she’s saying?

Thomas Frank went a long way to explaining in What’s the Matter With Kansas? why less privileged people vote for people who represent the opposite of their apparent interests. Because of so-called cultural prejudices. In his recent book, The Wrecking Crew: How Conservatives Rule, Frank argues that, “Fantastic misgovernment of the kind that we have seen, is not an accident, nor is it the work of a few bad individuals”. It’s the very essence of conservative rule, “by a movement that understands the liberal state as a perversion and considers the market the ideal nexus of human society”.

The right wing made much of how their election opponents were, or were supported by, people who weren’t “real Americans”, citizens who lacked patriotism,  “the me first-country second” crowd. Of course they weren’t referring to their rich patrons who believed it to be real American to invest one’s money out of the country to avoid paying real America any taxes.

...

NEXT:
Chapter Twenty-Six—The Last Word

Part 4


...

Manhattan Memories is available at amazon.com.

An updated A Guide to Occult Britain, complete with new illustrations, is also available at amazon.com.

...

comments? send an email to John Wilcock


Now Available in Print!!

John Wilcock: New York Years, Book One

A comic book history of the rise of the 1960s underground media.
by Ethan Persoff and Scott Marshall

Don't let a real-life comic strip sneak by unnoticed. This one's too unusual (and brilliant) for that!

http://www.ep.tc/book



also available on amazon.com...
Marijuana—The Weed That Changed the World

National Weed (1974, issue #3)

A Guide to Occult Britain

Forty years ago the second of my three books about magic was published, A Guide to Occult Britain (Sidgwick & Jackson) covering a wide range of sites from Stonehenge to Loch Ness and King Arthur country to the witches of Pendle Hill. It is now available as an eBook on amazon.com.


Over the past year, my combined medical and support costs from a stroke I had in April 2014 have been more than $100,000. If you'd like to help, use the Paypal donate button, or better yet, buy my books, and thank you. —JW

Now on Boing-Boing!

An authorized comic book biography of John Wilcock, 
art by Ethan Persoff and Scott Marshall

An authorized comic book biography of John Wilcock,
art by Ethan Persoff and Scott Marshall

This IS a book-length comic series on John Wilcock. People who enjoy focusing on underground and alternative media are occasionally familiar with John's work, but most often the response is "who's that?" Outside of small press historians and collectors, John remains very unknown. Which makes no sense, the more you learn about him. We're very excited about the opportunity to tell his story. Art for THE STORY OF JOHN WILCOCK is by me and co-conspirator Scott Marshall. Story comes from an extended and ongoing year-long interview with Wilcock, himself. The focus is John's years in New York, roughly 1954-1971.

(read more)



January 2, 2011


John WIlcock at home in Ojai
Photo Credit: Carmen Smyth/News Press

A way with Andy Warhol : John Wilcock recalls life in iconic pop artist's inner circle
Marilyn McMahon, Staff Writer
Santa Barbara News Press

During a journalism career that began when he was 16, John Wilcock has interviewed celebrities — Marilyn Monroe, Marlene Dietrich, Milton Berle, Steve Allen and Bob Dylan, to name a few — was part of enigmatic pop artist Andy Warhol's intimate circle in the 1960s, traveled to exotic locations all over the globe, has written dozens of books ranging from frugal travel to magic, was one of five founders (Norman Mailer was one of them) of the Village Voice and co-founded Interview magazine (still in circulation) with Mr. Warhol.

Today, the 83-year-old writer, who has been described by others in his field as "a libertarian-anarchist" and "a talented Bohemian counter-culture journalist," lives a tranquil life in a rustic cottage he rents on the outskirts of Ojai.

(click here to access the Santa Barbara News Press online where the full text of the article is available by subscription)




January, 2011


The Return of the World's Worst Businessman

Sneak Peak “The Return of the World's Worst Businessman”
Tyler Malone
PMc Magazine

John Wilcock is not what you would call a household name, and yet, he has had a measurable impact on art, journalism and culture-at-large over the last century. He co-founded Interview with Andy Warhol. He also was one of the co-founders of The Village Voice. He has written for countless print and online publications: Frommer’s, The Daily Mirror, The Daily Mail, The East Village Other, The Huffington Post, The New York Times, The Ojai Orange, etc. So why, one feels inclined to ask, is he relatively unknown? The answer seems simple: Wilcock has called himself “the world’s worst businessman.” This self-description makes sense because listening to him one hears the voice of a writer and a traveler and an enthusiast, not at all the voice of a businessman. In an age when it seems like everyone is all about business—art as a business, fashion as a business, everything as a business—it is refreshing to hear someone self-identify as “the world’s worst businessman.” It seems less like he has failed as a businessman and more like he has refused to become one. In addition to all his other accomplishments,...

(read more)



Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Jewcy Top 10 Art Books of 2010
Margarita Korol

This brilliant remake of a pop primary document is brought to you by John Wilcock, probably the Most Interesting Man in the World in the realm of writers. The Village Voice cofounder had also edited Warhol’s seminal mag Interview in the 70s. The fruit of the book is in the genius of its redesign. After 40 years out-of-print, the newly edited edition is “beautifully redesigned in a bright, Warholian palette” that surrounds a trail of Harry Shunk’s internationally Pop-art-informed camera as well as transcribed interviews with those closest to Warhol that ultimately make up an oral history of the artist’s Factory period. By looking at him through the scope of his peers, this book is the equivalent of Pittsburgh’s Warhol Museum in illuminating qualities of Warhol’s warped mirror on which our American culture was briefly reflected.

Said John Wilcock in explaining the book, “A lot of people really misunderstood him then and indeed still do, although there’s hardly a day when Andy’s name is not mentioned in the paper.” Especially interesting is the timing of Warhol’s booming popularity as it comes half a century after pop rushed the 60s, a period similar to our own with fluxes in economic, political, and civil rights climates.

(read more)




Monday, November 15, 2010

A Reader Comment from the recent New York Times Frugal Traveler post
RN—Sydney, Australia

Not only did John Wilcock shake up staid publishing in the USA, from the Village Voice to the East Village Other, his influence extended to several continents, including Australia & the UK, where - in his mild mannered way - he pushed the boundaries of image and speech. The counter culture was nothing but a dull puddle, until John kicked out the jams and ignited the Underground Press, which attracted absurd prosecutions, that of course boosted circulations. An unsung hero of the sixties,

indifferent to self promotion and the hoarding of gold, it is great to see John get a dash of recognition.

(read more)



Wednesday, October 27, 2010

A Budget Travel Pioneer on a Time When $5 a Day Was Real (Frugal) Money
nytimes.com: Frugal Traveler

by Seth Kugel
John Wilcock at the New York Times

It was the first handwritten letter I’d received in 5 years. Or maybe 10. Signed by John Wilcock, a man I’d never heard of, and postmarked Ojai, Calif., it was waiting for me when I returned from my Săo Paulo-to-New York summer trip. Mr. Wilcock wrote that he had been an assistant editor at The Times Travel section back in the 1950s, and had written the first editions of “Mexico on $5 a Day,” “Greece on $5 a Day” and “Japan on $5 a Day” for Arthur Frommer in the 1960s.

By George, I thought. This man was the original Frugal Traveler.

(read more)



available in print...

Manhattan MemoriesManhattan Memories
An Autobiography
by John Wilcock

“A GOOD WAY to describe John Wilcock is to say that he is a talented bohemian counter-culture journalist who once played a major role in the emergence of America’s underground press. Born 1927 in Sheffield, England, he left school aged 16 to work on various newspapers in England, and on Toronto periodicals before moving to New York City. There in 1955 he became one of the five founders of the Village Voice in which he and co-founder Norman Mailer wrote weekly columns. Wilcock called his column “The Village Square”, an intended pun. He and young Mailer were not quite friends, although Wilcock was at times annoyed, but always amused, by Mailer’s monstrous ego.”

-From the preface of Manhattan Memories, by Martin Gardner
order from lulu.com
also available at amazon.com (in paperback or for your Kindle)
and other online booksellers