On This Day: December 16, 1773: “This Destruction of the Tea is so bold, so daring, so firm, intrepid, and inflexible, and it must have important Consequences, and so lasting, that I can’t but consider it as an Epocha in History.” – John Adams

btp

On November 28, 1773, the Dartmouth sailed into Boston’s port. The ship was full of tea. There had already been trouble in Philadelphia when the ship had tried to unload its cargo. A ship had been blown away from the port in New York by a storm. A confrontation was imminent.

Late November, early December, 1773, broadsides were distributed throughout Boston:

Friends! Brethren! Countrymen! The worst of plagues, the detested TEA … is now arrived in this harbor. The hour of destruction, or manly opposition to the machinations of tyranny, stares you in the face. Every friend to his country, to himself and posterity … is now called upon … to make a united and successful resistance to this last, worst, and most destructive measure of administration.

Samuel Adams spearheaded the campaign to fire up the populace. The Sons of Liberty posted armed guards around the wharf, to make sure that that tea was not unloaded.

Abigail Adams wrote to Mercy Warren on December 5:

The Tea that bainfull weed is arrived. Great and I hope effectual opposition has been made to the landing of it. The proceedings of our Citizens have been united spirited and firm. The flame is kindled and like lightning it catches from Soul to Soul. I tremble when I think what must be the direfull consequences. And in this Town must the Scene of action lay, my Heart beats at every Whistle I hear, and I dare not openly express half my fears.

On December 16, 1773, Samuel Adams called a town meeting at the Old South Meeting House. The three tea ships sat in the harbor, full of cargo, not allowed to unload, not allowed to leave. A message was sent to Thomas Hutchinson, Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts, who had continuously refused to let the ships leave the harbor until they had unloaded, or until the duties were paid. The town meeting raged on about “that bainfull weed” sitting there in the harbor. A messenger returned with word from Hutchinson:

Clearance for the tea ships is refused.

Catherine Drinker-Bowen describes in her wonderful book John Adams and the American Revolution what happened next:

Sam Adams read the message, then addressed the people briefly: “This meeting can do nothing more to save the country,” he said. The words were a signal to the crowd outside. Instantly a warwhoop was heard, and the general shout, “To the docks!” Several hundred men, most of them disguised by prearrangement in Indian paint and feathers, headed north for Griffin’s wharf, boarded the three ships and dumped three hundred and forty-two chests of tea into the Harbor.

Not a life was lost, not a man hurt, no drop of blood was shed. In the moonlight a vast crowd assembled on the dock, watched almost in silence while the “Mohawks” did their work. The stillness was extraordinary; the crash of hatchets could plainly be heard across the line of water, and occasional perspiring grunts as men tipped the heavy boxes over the bulwarks. Admiral Montagu’s two frigates lay in the outer Harbor, but the tide was on the ebb and they did not try to approach. None of the “Mohawks” kept so much as a fistful of tea to himself; one or two who tried it were quickly and summarily dissuaded. When morning came, tea marked the edge of high tide on beaches as far south as Nantasket … One Mohawk, it was true, found his shoes full of tea when he got home; he put a little of it in a jar as a souvenir.

John Adams wrote in his diary on December 17, 1773:

Last Night 3 cargoes of Bohea Tea were emptied into the Sea. This Morning a Man of War sails. This is the most magnificent Movement of all. There is a Dignity, a Majesty, a Sublimity, in this last Effort of the Patriots, that I greatly admire. The People should never rise, without doing something to be remembered – something notable and striking. This Destruction of the Tea is so bold, so daring, so firm, intrepid, and inflexible, and it must have important Consequences, and so lasting, that I can’t but consider it as an Epocha in History… Many persons wish that as many dead carcasses were floating in the harbor, as there are chests of tea. What measures will the ministry take? Will they punish us? How? By quartering troops upon us? by annulling our charter? by laying on more duties? by restraining our trade? By sacrifice of individuals? or how?

Alexander Hamilton (John Adams’s future nemesis) had just begun school at King’s College in New York (a British-sympathizing stronghold). The Boston Tea Party galvanized him. He was opposed to mob rule in principle (he had a dread of riots and anarchy), but he thought that the tea party was a splendid symbolic gesture. Robert Troup, Hamilton’s good friend in college, later remembered, “The first political piece which [Hamilton] wrote was on the destruction of the tea at Boston in which he aimed to show that the destruction was both necessary and politic.”

Almost a year to the day after the Tea Party itself, Hamilton published his first major political work on December 15, 1774: “A Full Vindication of the Measures of Congress.” It is a blistering and brilliant response to the grumblings about the “traitors” who had met in Philadelphia that fall. Hamilton is still a teenager at this point, unbelievably, not even 20 years old yet. He referenced the Tea Party in this 35-page attack:

But some people try to make you believe, we are disputing about the foolish trifle of three pence duty upon tea. They may as well tell you, that black is white. Surely you can judge for yourselves. Is a dispute, whether the Parliament of Great-Britain shall make what laws, and impose what taxes they please upon us, or not; I say, is this a dispute about three pence duty upon tea? The man that affirms it, deserves to be laughed at.

It is true, we are denying to pay the duty upon tea; but it is not for the value of the thing itself. It is because we cannot submit to that, without acknowledging the principle upon which it is founded, and that principle is a right to tax us in all cases whatsoever.

But being ruined by taxes is not the worst you have to fear. What security would you have for your lives? How can any of you be sure you would have the free enjoyment of your religion long? would you put your religion in the power of any set of men living? Remember civil and religious liberty always go together, if the foundation of the one be sapped, the other will fall of course.

Call to mind one of our sister colonies, Boston. Reflect upon the situation of Canada, and then tell me whether you are inclined to place any confidence in the justice and humanity of the parliament. The port of Boston is blocked up, and an army planted in the town. An act has been passed to alter its charter, to prohibit its assemblies, to license the murder of its inhabitants, and to convey them from their own country to Great Britain, and to be tried for their lives. What was all this for? Just because a small number of people, provoked by an open and dangerous attack upon their liberties, destroyed a parcel of Tea belonging to the East India Company. It was not public but private property they destroyed. It was not the act of the whole province, but the act of a part of the citizens; instead of trying to discover the perpetrators, and commencing a legal prosecution against them; the parliament of Great Britain interfered in an unprecedented manner, and inflicted a punishment upon a whole province, “untried, unheard, unconvicted of any crime.” This may be justice, but it looks so much like cruelty, that a man of a humane heart would be more apt to call it by the latter, than the former name.

He signed it “A Friend to America”. The broadside made a huge sensation when it was published in the New York Evening Post.

On December 31, 1773, Samuel Adams wrote to a friend:

You cannot imagine the height of joy that sparkles in the eyes and animates the [faces] as well as the hearts of all [Bostonians].

Admiral John Montagu of the British Navy called out to the “Mohawks” as they did their damage: “Well, boys, you’ve had a fine, pleasant evening for your Indian caper. But mind, he who dances must pay the fiddler.” One of the “Mohawks” shouted back, “Oh, never mind, Admiral. Just come out here, if you please, and we’ll settle the bill in two minutes!”

Following the tea party, a broadside was widely released containing a song/poem written about the tea party. It is speculated that Samuel Adams had a hand in writing it. Sounds like his high-energy blazing style.

TEA, DESTROYED BY INDIANS
YE GLORIOUS SONS OF FREEDOM, brave and bold,
That has flood forth —- fair LIBERTY to hold;
Though you were INDIANS, come from distant shores,
Like MEN you acted — not like savage Moors.
CHORUS
Our LIBERTY, and LIFE is now invaded,
And FREEDOM’s brightest CHARMS are darkly shaded:
But we will STAND — and think it noble mirth,
To DART the man that dare oppress the Earth.
Bostonian’s SONS keep up your Courage good,
Or Dye, like Martyrs, in fair Free-born Blood.

How grand the Scene! — (No Tyrant shall oppose)
The TEA is sunk in spite of all our foes.
A NOBLE SIGHT — to see th’ accursed TEA
Mingled with MUD — and ever for to be;
For KING and PRINCE shall know that we are FREE.
Bostonian’s SONS keep up your Courage good,
Or Dye, like Martyrs, in fair Free-born Blood.

Must we be still — and live on Blood-bought Ground,
And not oppose the Tyrants cursed found?
We Scorn the thought — our views are well refin’d
We Scorn those slavish shackles of the Mind,
“We’ve Souls that were not made to be confin’d.”
Bostonian’s SONS keep up your Courage good,
Or Dye, like Martyrs, in fair Free-born Blood.

Could our Fore-fathers rise from their cold Graves,
And view their Land, with all their Children SLAVES;
What would they say! how would their Spirits rend,
And, Thunder-strucken, to their Graves descend.
Bostonian’s SONS keep up your Courage good,
Or Dye, like Martyrs, in fair Free-born Blood.

Let us with hearts of steel now stand the task.
Throw off all darksome ways, nor wear a Mask.
Oh! may our noble Zeal support our frame,
And brand all Tyrants with eternal SHAME.
Bostonian’s SONS keep up your Courage good,
And sink all Tyrants in their GUILTY BLOOD.

On December 31, 1773, the Boston Gazette printed a message for the New Year from Samuel Adams:

To all Nations under Heaven, know ye, that the PEOPLE of the AMERICAN WORLD are Millions strong – countless Legions compose their ARMY OF FREEMEN … AMERICA now stands with the Scale of JUSTICE in one Hand, and the Sword of VENGEANCE in the other … Let the Britons fear to do any more so wickedly as they have done, for the HERCULEAN ARM of this NEW WORLD is lifted up – and Woe be to them on whom it falls! — At the Beat of the Drum, she can call five Hundred thousand of her SONS to ARMS … Therefore, ye that are wise, make Peace with her, take Shelter under her Wings, that ye may shine by the Reflection of her Glory.

May the NEW YEAR shine propitious on the NEW WORLD – and VIRTUE and LIBERTY reign here without a Foe, until rolling Years shall measure Time no more.

When rioting happens today, in whatever context, you often hear people reference the Boston Tea Party as a “riot”, i.e. “this country was started by a riot” or “everyone criticizing the current riots somehow forget the Boston Tea Party”. These people making these comparisons are just showing their ignorance, which isn’t really their fault: their education is half-baked and incomplete. The Boston Tea Party was not a riot. It was a carefully orchestrated meticulously executed symbolic political gesture. A spontaneous outburst of anger has its political uses and speaks loudly as well. I’m not saying that. I’m just saying that the comparison is incorrect. History matters. Facts matter. You feel me?

References:

Posted in Founding Fathers, On This Day | Tagged , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Falling in love in itty-bitty cars

Claudette Colbert and Don Ameche, Midnight (1939; d. Mitchell Leisen)

Daniel Day-Lewis and Vicki Krieps, Phantom Thread (2017; d. Paul Thomas Anderson)

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Dynamic Duo #37

Jitka Cerhová and Ivana Karbanov, Daisies, 1966 (directed by Věra Chytilová)

Posted in Actors, Movies | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Rogerebert.com: The Ten Best Films of 2022

The annual Rogerebert.com contributors’ collective Top 10. We each submit an individual list, and then we’re given assignments based on the tally. Some of my faves are included, and one of my least faves is also included. What are ya gonna do. I was so happy to write about S.S. Rajamouli’s wild exhilarating epic, RRR. You can read the full list here.

Posted in Movies | Tagged | Leave a comment

Jackass: Meaningless Bravery, by Brendan O’Malley

I have been wanting to share this for some time. If you read me, then you know I posted my brother’s music writing, periodically, over 2019 and 2020. My brother had a blog, years ago, and he’s such a good writer: I wanted to resurrect those old pieces to share with people. First, I posted his 50 Best Albums list, one by one. You can read the full archive of Bren’s music writing here. Bren didn’t just write about music. He wrote about books, too. And then this. His essay on the Jackass franchise, which I maintain is one of the best and most insightful pieces written about Jackass (and that’s a very crowded field. The Jackass shenanigans has a way of encouraging writers to go deep, because you HAVE to in order to explain the cumulative stealth profundity this wacko franchise expresses). So many people judge the surface, so many people judge the films without even seeing them. Example: my friend Mitchell – who is gay, committed to justice, infuriated at the oppression of LGBTQ people, vocal about it, politically active, socially conscious – okay, you got all that? – he adores the Jackass movies, and he once e posted about it on Facebook, and someone commented beneath: “These films are the epitome of toxic masculinity. I’m really dismayed to hear you endorse that.” It took one exchange to reveal this woman had not seen any of them. Mitchell said, “These films are the OPPOSITE of toxic masculinity.” Literally the exact opposite. There’s an inherent almost brain-washed distrust of straight goofball jock men, and … straight goofball men are my particular milieu. They are my family members. They are, historically, my boyfriends. I know guys like this. They are kind, and generous, and crazy-funny. They will do anything for their friends and family. They are self-deprecating. They aren’t misogynistic. (I’ve said it before 100s of times: I have experienced more blatant misogyny and condescension from beta-nerd-boys than swaggering goofball alphas. At least the swaggering goofball alphas LIKE women. Beta-nerds need to check themselves and clean up their own particular house before sniffing dismissively at “jocks”. Making generalizations about guys like this is just as lazy as making generalizations about any other group. So you had a bad experience with a jock football player in high school. Get over it. They’re not all like that. People are specific. Bullies exist in every group of people. Bullying is a human thing. No one group owns it. Stop generalizing. Jackass is, for sure, not for everyone. But if you judge without having seen, then you need to ask yourself why. I am not perfect and I often pre-judge things before I’ve even seen them. This is something I have to keep an eye on, and course-correct if I go down that path. It’s a constant thing. It requires vigilance, particularly in my line of work. You have to be open, you have to admit when you were wrong, you have to be available to be swayed. You have to be susceptible. Not blindly loyal. No. That’s its own kind of trap. If I already know what you will like and not like and why – and you fulfill those expectations with every single piece you write – I probably won’t be reading you for long. (Unless you are a world-class writer, and very few people are.) I prefer reading people who are capable of being surprised. I prefer reading people where I have NO IDEA going in what they will like and not like – because they aren’t trying to prop up some ideological point with every piece they write. One of my favorite experiences as a reader is going into a piece by a writer I like, assuming I know what they’re going to say, only to find I’ve been totally wrong. Another favorite experience is discovering something new, because I’ve followed the advice of a writer I admire. Avoid buzzwords like “toxic masculinity”. Toxic masculinity is toxic … if it’s toxic. Travis Bickle is toxic. Okay? A bunch of goofballs skateboarding on ramps held up by human bodies, and cheering when the stunt is accomplished, or giving each other wedgies or roaring with laughter when someone falls on their face, is not toxic. It’s so good-hearted, it’s not mean-spirited, there’s ZERO bullying. They’re all consenting. No one is coerced. Everyone is the butt of every joke. Nobody’s singled out. No one is mean. I repeat: No one is mean. They may be reckless and unhinged, but they are not mean.

This is why I say Jackass is a Utopia. We all generalize, and it is something to be aware of and do our best to combat. This combat is FUN, because it means you are OPEN to the fact that you might be missing something. At this point, I don’t think Jackass needs defending. It’s not some NICHE taste. These movies regularly show up on Top 10 lists written by critics. And maybe, instead of scoffing before seeing, you should experience these films for yourself. They’re probably not what you think.

My brother is very honest about how he pre-judged before seeing. He was turned off by the commercials. And then … he watched. I love this essay so much so I am happy to share it.

Jackass 3: Meaningless Bravery, by Brendan O’Malley

I once saw a portion of a documentary about a South American tribe. Part of their ritual passage to adulthood involved elaborate stunts designed to bring the youth face to face with fear. They stood on top of tree trunks that had been shorn of all branches. The trunks were held in place by guide wire. Which were then removed. The teen had to scramble to hold onto the falling trunk. The philosophy behind it was to prepare the teen for the perils of adulthood and hunting.

I studiously avoided “Jackass” while it was on television and by the time they’d transitioned into movie theaters I was full-on into parenting and was only seeing Pixar films.

Oh, I’d seen snippets here and there and knew who all the reprobates were but I’d not been IMMERSED.

My outlook on them, I’ll admit, was shaped in large part by the traditional media response. They were degenerates, this was everything that was wrong with America, these no-talent attention-whores needed to be stopped.

I was reminded of how much heat skateboarders took when that craze started hitting the streets. Apparently it was okay to join a group of kids and pursue an activity but going out and doing it ON YOUR OWN IN PUBLIC was beyond the pale.

So I am a bit ashamed of the knee-jerk conservatism that I was espousing.

Imagine my surprise when I finally watched the movie “Jackass”. Melody was bartending and I was in NYC for a few days visiting. The bar had a downstairs private room with a TV and VCR. Yes, vcr. The only tape? “Jackass”.

I figured I should watch this piece of trash. An hour and a half later I was exhausted from crying and laughing and recoiling in horror. They changed my mind entirely that night.

Human beings love to witness acts of bravery. We re-tell them, we fictionalize them, we invent them in order to shine a spotlight on the best facet of human behavior. Our willingness to ignore peril if need be.

The image of the firefighter rushing into a burning building is the perfect example. An act like that reassures us that we are NOT simply beasts, that we have a higher level of morality, that we can operate heroically INSIDE of fear. In fact, this might be one of our defining characteristics. Animals do amazing things in response to danger but they don’t have the same knowledge of mortality that we do.

I find there to be a deep beautiful philosophy at work in the “Jackass” catalog. And I am one-hundred-percent serious.

They isolate that characteristic – the human ability to face grave danger with aplomb and they REMOVE THE CONTEXT FROM IT. I find this to be endlessly fascinating.

In “Jackass 3”, Johnny Knoxville does a stunt called “Invisible Man” in which he is painted to fit perfectly into a mural of a rainbow spread across a field with a tree in it. Knoxville stands in front of the mural and the camera is lined up so that he essentially disappears.

A bull is then let loose into the corral. The hope is that he will be “invisible”. But of course, the bull isn’t perfectly lined up like the camera. Bulls can’t see color. Knoxville is a sitting duck. He successfully evades a goring but then the bull sneaks around the back of the mural and roars out at Knoxville. He leaps to avoid the bull but the bull rams his legs, sending Knoxville head over heels into the mud, receiving a nice kick in the head for his trouble.

As Knoxville is standing there and hoping against hope that the bull will not see him, his fear is palpable. The charming thing about all of the “Jackass” crew is that they allow us to see their fear. They don’t hide it with false bravado like so many of the youtube pretenders who intentionally hurt themselves for attention.

And that is why I can occasionally find myself very moved while watching instead of just horrified or grossed-out. It is as if they are showing us that we don’t have to be so afraid of pain, that we are stronger than we think.

If you transplant these staged stunts into real life, a whole layer of respect and admiration would come into play. A man was inadvertently left in a corral and withstood a brutal bull charge! The strength! Two members of a marching band were attacked by a ram! The trumpet player distracted the ram from the tuba player who was almost unconscious on the ground!

Meaningless bravery.

And total acceptance of your friends. There is a running gag in “Jackass 3” called “Rocky” in which Bam Margera sneaks up on someone from behind. He throws water at one side of their face to distract them and punches them from the other with a boxing glove.

Do fights ensue? No! The person rolls around on the ground in pain for a while and then they laugh and hug.

I know it sounds stupid but for me, it accentuates how capable we are of forgiveness, how willing we are as human beings to incorporate flaws into our relationships. The acceptance of these ambushes is very telling.

My favorite portion of “Jackass 3” comes when we see Ryan Dunn sitting in a comfy leather chair in a re-enactment of the famous speaker ad. He seems to be in a comfortable living room. The air from the speaker becomes so intense that he is actually blown from the chair. We then see that the “speaker noise” is being generated by the tail end of a jet airplane which is about 30 feet from Dunn.

He is blown across the airfield. He attempts to get up. He is blown further back. He is blown along the ground for several yards. He struggles to position himself so that he can even attempt to stand up. After a few agonizing moments he achieves upright status. But it is clearly taking every ounce of his will to do so.

After that massive effort to stand up, what does he do?

He jumps into the air so that he will be hurled backwards again. Because he knows it will make his friends laugh. What I was left with was the image of a small creature buffeted about by a force impossibly greater than its own. And that creature didn’t crawl away in disgrace. He got up time and again to continue to face it. And tried to get a laugh doing it.

Consider me a jackass.

Posted in Movies | Tagged | Leave a comment

Screen Slate’s Best Movies of 2022 poll

Screen Slate puts together a poll at the end of the year, which they send out to a truly impressive number of people, not just critics, but artists too. When you have 100+ people participating – from around the world – not just America-centric people – you get a fascinating variety of responses. This is one of the most interesting Top 20s I’ve come across. The fact that Cronenberg’s Crimes of the Future is #1 on our collective international list speaks volumes. I also love that Jackass Forever made the cut, nestled there on a list including Petite Maman and two Hong Sang-soo films. This is art and entertainment as it should be! Here’s the 2022 Best Movies results. As fun as that is, Screen Slate also conducts a separate poll for First Viewings & Discoveries of 2022, and that’s where things get really interesting. I have been having so much fun scrolling through the responses, and seeing what people discovered – people like Michael Mann, Paul Schrader, Bela Tarr …. (Bela Tarr’s response is funny). Nice to be on a list with those fine gentlemen (and many others).

I’ve heard a lot of people say this was a “soft” year for good movies. The only response I can come up with is the obnoxious: Watch more movies.

Posted in Movies | Tagged | Leave a comment

Movies I Loved in 2022

It is the month of Top 10 Lists. I’ve submitted a few to different sites. And … each list is slightly different. Because I’m not a list person and I don’t rank things and I really don’t like to argue about lists. I look at lists this way: they are a road-map, and a detailed one. The map doesn’t just show the freeways, but every lane and path and small county road. I use other people’s lists as a way to go, “Oh wow, I guess I should check that out.” When I saw that so many critics put Paddington 2 on their Best of 2018 lists, I was like, “Jesus, I haven’t even seen it.” (Many people stop there. “Why do so many critics have movies I HAVEN’T EVEN HEARD OF LET ALONE SEEN on their lists?? Fuck them! What about MY PERSONAL FAVORITE?” But that’s no fun! They’re providing their own personal road map, showing you the little country lanes THEY have discovered when wandering around. So why not check it out?) I hadn’t seen Paddington 2, never gave it a single thought, but then there it was, showing up on so many people’s lists, so I went and saw it immediately. And I fell so in love with it I had to re-arrange my own Top 10 to include it. I love it when that happens! And so, when I submit a Top 10 for one site, I’ll toss together a list. If I’m asked to put together a list for another site, I’ll subtract a couple titles to include some titles I couldn’t include on the OTHER list. Like I said, I’m not big on LISTS, at least not in terms of considering them etched in stone like the 10 Commandments. I like to think of it more like … Here are the movies I loved this year, and there are definitely some movies that made it to the Top of my list and never left, that’s for sure – not EVERYthing is in flux – but the rest is up for grabs. How can I choose between, say, Holy Spider and All the Beauty and the Bloodshed? How can I say one is BETTER than the other? I refuse! Also, I am still catching up. There are a couple of titles I still need to see because I missed the press screenings for this that and the other thing.

So. Here are some of the movies I loved this year. This is un-ranked although the first five haven’t really changed since I first put them on there.

List after the jump.

Continue reading

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 30 Comments

2022 Mirror moments, part 2

Moonage Daydream, directed by Brett Morgen

Benediction, directed by Terrence Davies

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Dynamic Duo #36

Edith Sitwell and Marilyn Monroe, 1953

Posted in Actors, writers | Tagged , , | 7 Comments

2022 Mirror Moments

You know me and movie-mirror-moments. 2022 has had quite a few, and they are similar in character.


Saint Omer, directed by Alice Diop


The Eternal Daughter, directed by Joanna Hogg


Corsage, directed by Marie Kreutzer

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments