Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Curious

Expand Messages
  • canoeist35
    Keith, I appreciated your first reply and this additional post. I had read the timeline on your website line-by-line before I ever asked any questions about
    Message 1 of 14 , Sep 14, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Keith, I appreciated your first reply and this additional post. I
      had read the timeline on your website line-by-line before I ever
      asked any questions about Don. Parts of the timeline seemed to fit
      the classic "closeted" life--unfortunately for DB. So did some
      aspects of the poems I read, plus some of the photos--just in my
      opinion, of course. I am a little dubious about even the bi-sexual
      aspect, personally, but I am a newbie on all this. I don't think
      any of this diminishes or demeans Don Blanding in any way--if
      anything, it only adds to the complexity and interest his life
      presents, IMO. It may affect how some of the poetry needs to be
      read, though. If I can venture one more thought, it seems worth
      recollecting that he began as an ad man who knew how to craft an
      image. Maybe he continued to feel he had to do that with some of
      his poetry? In any event, his tenderness, humor, and decency come
      pouring out of most of the poems and articles I have read. And,
      later, his sadness, too. I get the impression DB's was far from a
      simple story. My two cents here.

      Michael



      --- In aloha-donblanding@yahoogroups.com, "keith2draw"
      <keith2draw@...> wrote:
      >
      > Aloha Mike & Michael,
      >
      > You've made good points, and they are all well taken.
      >
      > There are about 4-5 Blanding researchers who frequent this board,
      and we are all busy
      > piecing together his life from obscure newspaper accounts,
      magazine articles, long lost
      > interviews and ebay ephemera. Blanding was after all born 114
      years ago and has been
      > gone for half a century. We do not have the luxury of having
      previously written and
      > researched volumes of details on his life, such as you would
      already have for say someone
      > like Thomas Edison, Edgar Allen Poe or Gertrude Stein (because,
      frankly, he wasn't as
      > important as these folks). The people who knew Don well are now
      dead themselves. There
      > are some old-timers that knew him in his later years...but
      obviously no-one alive who
      > shared his early, developmental years.
      >
      > To us, the thrill of the hunt is as enjoyable as the actual body
      of work that Don left behind.
      > So when one of us discovers a new clue (however small), and posts
      it on this board, it's the
      > detective in us gloating about finding a long-lost detail of his
      life. We in no way mean to
      > infer any importance to the clues (in the grand scheme of
      things) ...it's just fun to see little
      > slices of his life from a distance through the binoculars of time
      [sorry, horrible cliche].
      >
      > Those of us who have been on this board from the beginning (Jan.
      2000) have discussed
      > many complex aspects of Don's life in-depth (such as his
      sexuality) ...but folks who have
      > joined us in the last year or two will only see the lighter
      dialogue and assume everything is
      > trivial on the board. I urge all newcomers to go back and read
      some of our older posts for
      > more detailed talks that have already transpired.
      >
      > The bottom line is that to try and get to the "meat" of Don's
      life, his feelings, dreams,
      > inclinations and quirks, we have to sort out all the finer details
      like where he lived, who he
      > knew, and who he wrote to. That's all we have to go on for the
      moment. And if discovering
      > that he had a bran muffin with Edgar Cayce on Thursday, April 3,
      1924 leads to finding an
      > entry in Edgar Cayce's diary that states Don made a sexual pass at
      him...well then there we
      > have our proof!
      >
      > I think most of us are mature, open-minded adults and I for one
      feel that if Don was
      > gay..."so what!" It wouldn't tarnish his image at all...it would
      just add to the interest. Most
      > of us have expressed that opinion here. It's not disinterest that
      keeps us from discussing it
      > (and as I said, we have talked about it in the past ad naseum)
      it's just that until we know
      > for sure, one way or the other, it would just be conjecture. If he
      was gay, it would have had
      > a huge impact on how he lived his life, who he trusted, how he
      separated his public
      > personna of a big, strapping ladies-man poet who was respected by
      men as well, from his
      > private, gentle, secluded life when not on the lecture circuit.
      But until we get the "smoking
      > gun" letter or diary entry which reveals his sexual
      preference....we plug away on the
      > research and try to build a profile of Don that is honest, sincere
      and revealing. It just takes
      > time. Most of us have either 9-to-5 jobs, kids, grandkids, etc...
      which takes up the bulk of
      > our time, and research has to wait for rare free time.
      >
      > I will say, this is the best dialogue we've had in a long time.
      >
      > Keith
      >
    • canoeist35
      ... and lurk ... pass ... Exactly. Well said, Mike. Gaining knowledge of more of the facts of his life is not to judge Don Blanding in some negative way. It
      Message 2 of 14 , Sep 14, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In aloha-donblanding@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Gothard"
        <75vette@...> wrote:
        > We all respect his work or we probably wouldn't ponder, dialogue,
        and lurk
        > here searching for answers and points of interest if we were apt to
        pass
        > judgment.

        Exactly. Well said, Mike. Gaining knowledge of more of the facts of
        his life is not to judge Don Blanding in some negative way. It is to
        understand better. I don't think there is anything to fear from
        knowing the truth--at least not in the case of DB! And I'm going to
        do one of those no-no's, and maintain that Don Blanding would agree
        with that sentiment. I appreciated reading your post.

        Michael
      • THOMAS MARKLE
        Boy did I miss a lot of discussion.....I have 20 minutes on this computer, so......I liked Keith s response and others as well. Don s sexual persuasion is not
        Message 3 of 14 , Sep 14, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Boy did I miss a lot of discussion.....I have 20 minutes on this computer, so......I liked Keith's response and others as well. Don's sexual persuasion is not the important piece we are researching. It is there and known but so what. I've interviewed several people in their 80's who said, "Oh, Don Blanding that gay boy from Waikiki, he was so well liked by everyone that no one cares what he is". That's a pretty accurate quote. He was a personality, wordsmith, artist and mooch. He was loved most anywhere he went. As researchers we uncover little bits of information that sometimes lead to other finds that lead to newer finds, so on and so forth. That's research. I met an antique dealer on Kauai that had some DB pottery and we got to talking and now she's interested in our site. She didn't know we were researching him and was really excited about it. What Cadia and the rest of us have done in 7 years is amazing as far as I'm concerned. Aloha to all...tj

          keith2draw <keith2draw@...> wrote: Aloha Mike & Michael,

          You've made good points, and they are all well taken.

          There are about 4-5 Blanding researchers who frequent this board, and we are all busy
          piecing together his life from obscure newspaper accounts, magazine articles, long lost
          interviews and ebay ephemera. Blanding was after all born 114 years ago and has been
          gone for half a century. We do not have the luxury of having previously written and
          researched volumes of details on his life, such as you would already have for say someone
          like Thomas Edison, Edgar Allen Poe or Gertrude Stein (because, frankly, he wasn't as
          important as these folks). The people who knew Don well are now dead themselves. There
          are some old-timers that knew him in his later years...but obviously no-one alive who
          shared his early, developmental years.

          To us, the thrill of the hunt is as enjoyable as the actual body of work that Don left behind.
          So when one of us discovers a new clue (however small), and posts it on this board, it's the
          detective in us gloating about finding a long-lost detail of his life. We in no way mean to
          infer any importance to the clues (in the grand scheme of things) ...it's just fun to see little
          slices of his life from a distance through the binoculars of time [sorry, horrible cliche].

          Those of us who have been on this board from the beginning (Jan. 2000) have discussed
          many complex aspects of Don's life in-depth (such as his sexuality) ...but folks who have
          joined us in the last year or two will only see the lighter dialogue and assume everything is
          trivial on the board. I urge all newcomers to go back and read some of our older posts for
          more detailed talks that have already transpired.

          The bottom line is that to try and get to the "meat" of Don's life, his feelings, dreams,
          inclinations and quirks, we have to sort out all the finer details like where he lived, who he
          knew, and who he wrote to. That's all we have to go on for the moment. And if discovering
          that he had a bran muffin with Edgar Cayce on Thursday, April 3, 1924 leads to finding an
          entry in Edgar Cayce's diary that states Don made a sexual pass at him...well then there we
          have our proof!

          I think most of us are mature, open-minded adults and I for one feel that if Don was
          gay..."so what!" It wouldn't tarnish his image at all...it would just add to the interest. Most
          of us have expressed that opinion here. It's not disinterest that keeps us from discussing it
          (and as I said, we have talked about it in the past ad naseum) it's just that until we know
          for sure, one way or the other, it would just be conjecture. If he was gay, it would have had
          a huge impact on how he lived his life, who he trusted, how he separated his public
          personna of a big, strapping ladies-man poet who was respected by men as well, from his
          private, gentle, secluded life when not on the lecture circuit. But until we get the "smoking
          gun" letter or diary entry which reveals his sexual preference....we plug away on the
          research and try to build a profile of Don that is honest, sincere and revealing. It just takes
          time. Most of us have either 9-to-5 jobs, kids, grandkids, etc... which takes up the bulk of
          our time, and research has to wait for rare free time.

          I will say, this is the best dialogue we've had in a long time.

          Keith






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • kathysip3
          ... and we are all busy ... articles, long lost ... ago and has been ... previously written and ... have for say someone ... frankly, he wasn t as ...
          Message 4 of 14 , Oct 1, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In aloha-donblanding@yahoogroups.com, "keith2draw"
            <keith2draw@...> wrote:
            >
            > Aloha Mike & Michael,
            >
            > You've made good points, and they are all well taken.
            >
            > There are about 4-5 Blanding researchers who frequent this board,
            and we are all busy
            > piecing together his life from obscure newspaper accounts, magazine
            articles, long lost
            > interviews and ebay ephemera. Blanding was after all born 114 years
            ago and has been
            > gone for half a century. We do not have the luxury of having
            previously written and
            > researched volumes of details on his life, such as you would already
            have for say someone
            > like Thomas Edison, Edgar Allen Poe or Gertrude Stein (because,
            frankly, he wasn't as
            > important as these folks). The people who knew Don well are now dead
            themselves. There
            > are some old-timers that knew him in his later years...but obviously
            no-one alive who
            > shared his early, developmental years.
            >
            > To us, the thrill of the hunt is as enjoyable as the actual body of
            work that Don left behind.
            > So when one of us discovers a new clue (however small), and posts it
            on this board, it's the
            > detective in us gloating about finding a long-lost detail of his
            life. We in no way mean to
            > infer any importance to the clues (in the grand scheme of things)
            ...it's just fun to see little
            > slices of his life from a distance through the binoculars of time
            [sorry, horrible cliche].
            >
            > Those of us who have been on this board from the beginning (Jan.
            2000) have discussed
            > many complex aspects of Don's life in-depth (such as his sexuality)
            ...but folks who have
            > joined us in the last year or two will only see the lighter dialogue
            and assume everything is
            > trivial on the board. I urge all newcomers to go back and read some
            of our older posts for
            > more detailed talks that have already transpired.
            >
            > The bottom line is that to try and get to the "meat" of Don's life,
            his feelings, dreams,
            > inclinations and quirks, we have to sort out all the finer details
            like where he lived, who he
            > knew, and who he wrote to. That's all we have to go on for the
            moment. And if discovering
            > that he had a bran muffin with Edgar Cayce on Thursday, April 3,
            1924 leads to finding an
            > entry in Edgar Cayce's diary that states Don made a sexual pass at
            him...well then there we
            > have our proof!
            >
            > I think most of us are mature, open-minded adults and I for one feel
            that if Don was
            > gay..."so what!" It wouldn't tarnish his image at all...it would
            just add to the interest. Most
            > of us have expressed that opinion here. It's not disinterest that
            keeps us from discussing it
            > (and as I said, we have talked about it in the past ad naseum) it's
            just that until we know
            > for sure, one way or the other, it would just be conjecture. If he
            was gay, it would have had
            > a huge impact on how he lived his life, who he trusted, how he
            separated his public
            > personna of a big, strapping ladies-man poet who was respected by
            men as well, from his
            > private, gentle, secluded life when not on the lecture circuit. But
            until we get the "smoking
            > gun" letter or diary entry which reveals his sexual preference....we
            plug away on the
            > research and try to build a profile of Don that is honest, sincere
            and revealing. It just takes
            > time. Most of us have either 9-to-5 jobs, kids, grandkids, etc...
            which takes up the bulk of
            > our time, and research has to wait for rare free time.
            >
            > I will say, this is the best dialogue we've had in a long time.
            >
            > Keith
            >
            > I have to agree with everyone else, great dialogue, by far the most
            >interesting of discussions I have read in along time. Thanks to all.
            > I still love his work, be he a, a, or whatever.....

            > Kathy
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.