By Andy Borowitz July 12, 2021 PALM BEACH (The Borowitz Report)—Neighbors of Donald J. Trump said that they have seen him check the mailbox in front of his house “multiple times a day” while waiting for what he called his “reinstatement notice” to come. Mel and Tracy Klugian, who have lived next door to Mar-a-Lago for the past twenty-seven years, said that Trump starts checking the mailbox first thing in the morning, sometimes dressed in his bathrobe and slippers. “I told him that the mail doesn’t come until three most days, but he just said, ‘I don’t mind waiting,’ ” Mr. Klugian said. According to Mrs. Klugian, Trump told her that his reinstatement notice could be coming “any day now,” and he doesn’t want to miss it. “When the mail truck comes, he gets this excited look on his face,” she said. “Then he usually winds up with a bunch of Pottery Barn catalogues and whatnot, and he just trudges sadly back to the house.” Mr. Klugian said that he sympathized with Trump because he remembered “checking the mail a lot when I first retired.” “If you don’t have anything to do, the mail becomes kind of the high point of your day,” he said. “He has to get into gardening or volunteering. Something. He can’t go on like this.” Andy Borowitz is a Times best-selling author and a comedian who has written for The New Yorker since 1998. He writes The Borowitz Report, a satirical column on the news.

Triumphant: Arya Karki, 15, and Alex Karki, 12, after their recent vaccinations Usually, they’re called Gen Z, but they’ve also been dubbed the Selfie Generation, or iGen. We’re talking about the nearly 17 million young people, weaned on iPads and cell phones, who were born between 1995 and 2010. Since this group has been shaped by growing up during the Pandemic, perhaps Generation P would be a more fitting moniker. A major turn in Gen Z’s pandemic journey came in May, when they became the latest group eligible for the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine. Some health providers and cites raced to vaccinate 12-to-15-year-olds on the morning of Tuesday, May 11, one day after FDA green lit the Pfizer vaccine for that age group. As of May 23, more than 2 million 12-15 year-olds had received at least their first dose. Although the CDC now recommends that everyone 12 and older get vaccinated, things are not that simple in this politically polarized time. To the consternation of health officials, many Americans view the teen/tween vaccinations warily. According to a May survey by the KFF COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor, a project tracking public attitudes about vaccinations, only 30% of parents of children from 12-15 say they will get their child vaccinated as soon as the vaccine is available. A quarter say they will wait a while to see how the vaccine is working; 18% plan to get their child vaccinated if their school requires it, and nearly 25% say they will definitely not get their child vaccinated. Since parental consent for vaccines is required in almost every state, millions of mothers and fathers are now grappling with this decision. Karen and Rajeev Karki in Farmington Hills, Michigan are one such couple. They live in a state that has been riven by political fights over Covid issues such as mask mandates and shelter-in-place orders. Despite seeing anti-vaxxers frequently on the local news, the two Karki children, Arya, 15, and her brother Alex, 12, were immediately gung-ho about getting vaccinated. “I wondered, when are we going to be able to get it?” When are we going to be able to get it? says Arya. “I was so excited when they finally announced it.” When people cite challenges posed by the pandemic, they generally mean adult concerns like the travails of working remotely But the younger set has its own Covid-related frustrations too. Alex just finished sixth grade, his first year in middle school, but he has never physically been inside of his new school building because his classes were remote. Alex’s assessment of life during the pandemic? It’s not the most fun thing,” he says. “In most ways, I’m separated from my friends. I don’t get to see a lot of people in person because I do virtual school.” Likewise, Arya just finished ninth grade, her first year of high school, but has never been in a classroom there. She initially had a very hard time adjusting to the new Covid reality. ‘I was freaking out a lot,” she recalls. ‘I was very scared and I had a couple panic attacks. We weren’t really sure of anything about the disease. When we got our grocery orders, we were disinfecting all the surfaces of cereal boxes and stuff like that. I didn’t know how it spread, and I was worried about it all the time.” Arya and Alex were optimistic that their parents would favor them getting vaccinated. After all, Karen and Rajeev were early vaccine adopters themselves. Rajeev, a product manager for an auto-financing company, says that he and his wife had no hesitation about taking the vaccine. “We were just waiting for Michigan to make it available for our age group,” he says. ‘So when it was announced, we stayed up late and tried to get appointments. We were there the next day.” His wife, Karen, a photographer, elaborates: “Obviously, we looked into the vaccine as it was developing. We were keeping an eye on it. But by the time it was available, we were feeling confident and ready to go.” The couple were vaccinated in March and April, But vaccinating your children is another kettle of fish. Karen and Rajeev took it slower. Says Karen, “I definitely wanted to check into things. For yourself, you feel, ‘okay, I’ll be fine’. But then when you’re looking at getting it for your kids, you’re like,’ I’m not talking about just myself anymore.’ It puts it at another level.” The all-too-real dangers of Covid-19 loomed large in their decision-making. Karen’s grandmother passed away in September from Covid. “She had been so careful,” says Karen. “But she had a caretaker who came to the house a couple of times a week. He got a very mild case and my grandma didn’t make it.” The couple also had another friend who died a few months later of Covid in January. “He was just 50 years old,” says Karen. “He and his wife both got Covid. She had a mild case and he passed away within a week.” Rajeev, who is originally from Nepal, also knew of numerous people there who had died of the virus. Those indisputable dangers tipped the scale in favor of letting Arya and Alex get vaccinated. Says Rajeev, “I believe in the process and science. I probably wouldn't have been the first one to sign up for the vaccine, but I'm happy about the people that were the first ones to volunteer around the world. I'm sure there were tens of millions already vaccinated. So I felt safe and then I knew that my kids would be safe too.” Adds Karen, “When we looked into everything, we really felt that given the risk level of getting COVID, and not knowing whether or not you’re going to be someone who will have a mild case or someone who had an extreme case, it was worth it. By the time the vaccines opened up to 12- to 15-year-olds, we had seen the 16 and up population roll out, and it seemed to be going pretty well. People were not having early adverse effects. And so we felt pretty good.” So in May, the family made the trek over to a Walgreens pharmacy, where Arya and Alex were vaccinated. Recalls Arya, “We waited maybe five or ten minutes. And then we went into a small room. They gave me the vaccine and we waited there for 15 minutes afterward, because they had to do that to make sure we didn’t have a bad reaction. We didn’t, and we headed home.” Mission accomplished! Like their parents, Arya and Alex only had mild side effects from the vaccines. “It didn’t hurt very much,” says Arya. It was just like a really, really minor aching feeling for a day or so. After the second shot, I had a little bit of chills for an hour. But that was really it. I didn’t have anything beyond that.” Alex had a slight fever. “I took a nap,” he says. “My left arm was a bit sore for the next day as well. I thought it was normal, because a lot of people have side effects.” But things don’t go that smoothly for some Gen Z vaccine wannabes. Parental feelings about vaccinating their offspring generally align with their sentiments about getting a vaccine themselves. In June, the New Yorker ran a desperate interview with an anonymous 16-year-old boy from Arizona whose unvaccinated, unmasked parents refuse to give him permission to get a vaccine. “I’m starting to get left out of life because of not being vaccinated,” he told the magazine. The teen explained that his parents have “been going down the kind off Trump and far-right rabbit hole as long as I can remember.” His parents have now told him, “You’re never getting the vaccine.” The Karkis watched a similar drama play out closer to home. One of Arya’s closest friends was barred by her politically conservative father from getting a vaccine. Says Karen, “She really wanted to get the vaccine, but her dad was really holding off. She really wanted to take that step and felt that was what needed to happen for her to be able to go back into school settings. Her mom was supporting the idea of their daughter getting it, but the dad thought there might be underlying--I don’t want to say conspiracy theories—but kind of conspiracy theories, on why vaccines are being promoted. They had to come to a family agreement and get everybody on board. She has since been vaccinated.” In April, 2020, armed protestors memorably swarmed Michigan’s state capitol in Lansing, objecting to Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s shut-down orders. Neither Karen nor Rajeev, who describe themselves as Democrats, have any patience for the many vocal Covid deniers or anti-vaxxers in their state. Says Karen, “It’s just shocking. People have seen people getting sick all around them. How can they go on denying that this is something that’s really happening, or something we need to as a community take some kind of action toward? Everybody knows this is not the way we want to ideally live our lives. But how can you just pretend it’s not happening?” After watching the partisan theatrics in his state, Rajeev is amazed by what has gone on. ‘I don't know why it became such a big political thing,” he says. “Vaccines have been around forever. Polio has been pretty much eradicated and there are vaccines for all kinds of other things. So I feel that if Covid had appeared during a different political era. and if there wasn't so much news about being against even masking up, maybe people would have reacted differently.” He is exasperated by the anti-vaccine talk he has heard from some of his own acquaintances: “I'm from Nepal, right? If these people were more religious and maybe not educated, and saying, ‘No, I'm not going to get vaccinated’--but friends and coworkers who are well-educated--I thought would at least believe in the science.” Now that their family is fully vaccinated, the Karkis find their lives are opening up in pleasing, albeit careful, ways. Explains Rajeev, “My daughter was pretty panicked about just going outside and being in a group, even if we were careful wearing masks and we were outside We felt pretty safe, but my daughter didn't. So we didn't do a lot of activities. But now, being vaccinated, she's not as worried and that has allowed us to do even like hiking and going to the beach. We're still being careful, but at least being outdoors, we're a lot more comfortable. We’re still trying to keep some distance. If there were a pool party with a hundred people there, we probably would decide, ‘Okay, we're going to still enjoy it from the side.’ We probably wouldn't do that. But we're pretty close to Lake Michigan, where there are big beaches. If people have their spots and they're 10-20 feet away, I think that we wouldn't think twice about participating in something like that.” With most schools opening in-person in the fall, life promises to edge closer to normal for Gen Z kids like Arya and Alex. Growing up during such a profound crisis will inevitably shape the personalities of many of these kids, who have been forced to grow up faster than usual. That has certainly happened to Arya and Alex, whose parents marvel at how much their kids have matured during this unusual passage. With a pandemic-born precociousness, Arya sums up the vaccine situation nicely: “I think it’s really important for people to get vaccinated. I think it’s a thing to do for the community, and I think everyone should do it. It’s technically their choice, but I think it’s a choice that is about other people. And I think that not getting it is selfish. If it were a minor disease like a cold or something it would be a little different. But this is life threatening. Essentially when you don’t get the vaccine by choice, it’s kind of like saying your pride is more important than someone else’s life. I also think that it’s wasteful, because there are so many people in other countries who don’t have the same access to the vaccine. My dad’s side of the family is from Nepal, and they have not, a lot of them have not been able to get it. And here in the United States, we, take a lot of things for granted. Here we can just make an appointment and go get the vaccine the same day. And here we are, a lot of people are turning up their noses at the fact that there are other people who are just desperate to get the vaccine. So, I think it’s a privilege that we have. And it’s, when you don’t get it, you’re squandering that opportunity.” Meanwhile, Pfizer and Moderna are currently conducting vaccine trials on children from 6 months to 11 years old. Move over, middle-schoolers. The next political brawl may take place in the nursery.

Opinion by Jeffrey D. Sachs | CNN.com July 8, 2021 Editor's Note: Jeffrey Sachs is a professor and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and president of the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network. His most recent book is "The Ages of Globalization" (Columbia University Press, 2020). The opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author; view more opinion on CNN (CNN) - Four interconnected pieces of climate change-related news from the past two weeks reveal America's predicament. And they also show the way forward, which ultimately must include oil companies' paying restitution for damage that they have done to the climate and humanity for decades. The first of the four pieces of climate news is the deadly heat wave hitting the western US and Canada, killing hundreds to date. According to the United Nations, there has been a "staggering increase" in the frequency of such extreme climate events. The earth is now warmer than at any time in the past 12,000 years. The second is President Joe Biden's infrastructure plan. The Biden plan aims, in part, to join with other nations to build a new 21st-century infrastructure based on renewable energy, electric vehicles and other zero-carbon technologies in order to stop human-induced climate change. To achieve the global aim of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit), the world's energy system should be decarbonized by 2050, along the lines described in a recent report by the International Energy Agency on achieving net-zero by 2050. As usual, Republican leaders lined up against the parts of the plan aimed at reducing carbon emissions. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declared, "The total amount of funding it would direct to roads, bridges, ports, waterways and airports combined adds up to less than what it would spend just on electric cars," and that "The far left sees a strong family resemblance between these proposals and their socialist 'Green New Deal.'" The GOP was joined by Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, whose campaigns are amply funded by the oil and gas industry and coal mining. The third is the wonderful new Greenpeace UK exposè on ExxonMobil lobbying. Posing as a headhunter, a Greenpeace activist secretly videotaped Keith McCoy, an ExxonMobil lobbyist, explaining the tools of his trade. "Did we aggressively fight against some of the science? Yes," McCoy said. "Did we join some shadow groups to work against some of the early efforts? Yes, that's true. But there's nothing illegal about that. We were looking out for our investments. We were looking out for our shareholders." The lobbyist explained that ExxonMobil's "support" for a carbon tax is just for show. "Nobody is going to propose a tax on all Americans. The cynical side of me says we kind of know that. But it gives us a talking point. We can say, 'What is ExxonMobil for? We're for a carbon tax.'" Most importantly, the lobbyist compared lobbying to fishing for Congressmen. You "kind of reel them in." "Because they're a captive audience. They know they need you and I need them." McCoy identified 11 US senators he says are "crucial" to Exxon and describes Manchin as "the kingmaker." He said that he talked "to his office every week " (Manchin's office did not respond to CNN's request for comment.) McCoy apologized (though claimed some of his statements were taken out of context), while ExxonMobil's CEO declared that the lobbyist's comments "in no way represent the company's position" on climate policy and its commitment to carbon pricing. Yet Harvard researchers have argued that ExxonMobil has a record of misleading the public that goes back decades. The company has denied that too, claiming the study was activist-funded. Carlos Torres hydrates, even as ashes have not yet cooled at his mobile home of 22 years, as he was looking for paperwork during the aftermath of a fire in Kelseyville, Calif., that burned three mobile homes, two separate garages and vehicles, a single family dwelling and outbuildings in a wind whipped brush fire that prompted tense moments and evacuations, amid temperatures well over 100 degrees, Saturday, June 26, 2021. ExxonMobil's lobbying per se is not illegal. That's part of the problem. We have a political system that promotes narrow corporate interests above the common good. By misleading the public over many decades, ExxonMobil has compounded the political failure. Even ExxonMobil's shareholders are in revolt against the company management's disgusting resistance to reality. A hedge fund investor won a high-profile proxy fight this past spring to add three new members to the ExxonMobil board of directors who will advocate for the company to adopt a decarbonization policy. The hedge fund argued to the other shareholders that for ExxonMobil to continue down the path of carbon energy is a dead-end, a sure way to strand assets, and a majority agreed. The fourth is the European Union's consideration of plans to end the sales of oil-using internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles by 2035 and to replace them with electric and other zero-emission vehicles (such as hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles). In Europe, the oil-and-gas industry is much less powerful politically than in the United States. Recently, a Dutch court in The Hague ordered Royal Dutch Shell to slash the emissions from its products. The European Union as a whole is moving forward with a European Green Deal to decarbonize the EU energy system no later than 2050. In line with the European plans, Volkswagen recently declared its intention to phase out ICEs in Europe by 2035. As in so many areas of public life, America is suffering from a broken political system that sells public policies to the highest bidders and the best-organized lobbies. The oil and gas lobby gave nearly $140 million in campaign contributions in the 2020 election cycle, $75 million through individual and PAC contributions and the rest in soft money. Of the $75 million, $63 million, or 84%, went to Republican candidates. This is "fishing" for Congressmen, indeed. Yet as a result the companies are not merely making ill-gotten gains. Their products are killing fellow Americans and creating havoc worldwide. It's time for them to pay for this repeated, long-standing, knowing and shocking malfeasance. ExxonMobil and the other big oil companies owe not only a profound mea culpa to the world for pushing dangerous products, but also restitution for the damage they have caused. As with the drug companies that pushed addictive painkillers on Americans and tobacco companies that pushed killer cigarettes, it's time for the oil industry to pay heavy penalties on ill-gotten gains, the flip side of which are the death and destruction caused by extreme climate events. ExxonMobil has a market capitalization of around $260 billion. These and other oil and gas companies should be charged a corporate income tax surcharge to reflect the social cost of carbon of their oil and gas products, now estimated to be around $51 per metric ton of CO2 emissions. Tax penalties should include damages from past emissions as well as ongoing production. Up till now, as a result of America's pay-to-play politics, the companies have received tax benefits instead of paying tax surcharges. By charging an income-tax surcharge, the companies would not only pay restitution to society, but would face the incentive to change course before they create a complete disaster for the world. The funds raised by such a surcharge could then help to fund the modernization of infrastructure that America so desperately needs, including the shift to green technologies that protect the planet. America still has a chance to save itself. Biden is on the right course. In addition to the scaled-down "bipartisan" infrastructure agreement that strips out clean energy, the Democrats are planning a reconciliation bill that includes Biden's clean energy policy. The American people overwhelmingly support policies to limit climate change. America's test, therefore, has come down to the question of honesty, honor and survival. Can we overcome corporate greed and a broken political system to save our nation and our world? https://edition.cnn.com/2021/07/08/opinions/biden-climate-corporate-greed-infrastructure-sachs/index.html

By Andy Borowitz July 8, 2021 PALM BEACH (The Borowitz Report)—Claiming that he has been “treated very unfairly,” Donald Trump is suing eighty-one million American voters for banning him from the White House. “This was all part of a Big Tech conspiracy,” he said. “Many of these eighty-one million people were users of Facebook, Twitter, and TicketyTock.” Trump called the decision by eighty-one million people to ban him from the White House “a bad thing. A very bad thing.” “This would mean that it’s up to millions of Americans to decide who gets to use the White House and who doesn’t,” he said. “This should never be allowed to happen in this country.” The lawsuit was delayed for several weeks, sources said, while Trump sought to determine which, if any, of his attorneys still had a law license. Andy Borowitz is a Times best-selling author and a comedian who has written for The New Yorker since 1998. He writes The Borowitz Report, a satirical column on the news.

By Jessie Seigel / Washington, D.C. Political solicitations—we’ve all been overrun by them, whether phone calls that come every ten minutes just at dinner time, emails that invade our computers, or a flood of snail mail clogging our mailboxes. If you respond to one request, suddenly you are inundated by what seems like hundreds more, some coming from sources you’ve never heard of. The solicitations arrive from candidates and parties, but also from citizen-organizations trying to lobby the government on a variety of issues. Nowadays, the political season is never-ending. Every time my landline rings—the one that has caller ID—I find myself running from the living room to the back room of my apartment, where that phone sits, to see if someone I should speak with is calling. If not, I don’t answer. But I no sooner return to the other end of my abode, settle in to read or write or watch TV, when the damn thing rings again and I must rush back to check anew. These days, that race from one end of my apartment to the other accounts for half my daily exercise. When the same number comes up on caller ID repeatedly, I do finally cave in and answer in order to find out who the hell it is and tell them to stop. If the call turns out to be from a political source I favor, I tell them I am in sympathy with their cause but I never contribute over the phone or online, only by mail and please take me off their list. I treat these callers kindly because I’ve been on that side of phone banking—not to raise money, but to get out the vote for candidates or to reach out to other people on issues I care about. It should come as no surprise to regular readers of Washington Whispers that I am most familiar with the Democrats’ mailing and calling techniques as well as that of other liberal organizations, and therefore am best equipped to comment on them rather than on those of the Republicans or their right-wing allies. I get no phone calls from Donald Trump. Many of the Democrats’ written requests for money importune us with the specter of looming midnight Federal Election Commission (FEC) deadlines. But nothing of legal consequence occurs if a self-set monetary goal is not met by a given cutoff. Campaigns care about the FEC deadlines because, as a practical matter, the more money that campaigns raise early, the better they can make budgetary decisions for hiring and other essential electioneering matters. FEC reports of high contributions also make the candidate appear more viable and thus encourage further donations—the “everybody loves a winner” principle. Some entreaties masquerade as surveys asking for our opinion on what the Democratic Party’s priorities should be, though everything on their list really needs to be of equal priority. Some organizations ask us to sign petitions on this issue or that, accompanied by an appeal for funds. Other requests write of the many terrible ills that we will be unable to fix if we lose the Senate, the House, or the White House or don’t gain Democratic seats. Or they write of the many threats to democracy that currently engulf us and must be fought. All true. The litany of problems these supplicants raise—whether voting rights, civil rights, reproductive choice, gun regulation, climate change, Covid-19 relief, infrastructure, or others—are real. The obstacles to solving them if we cannot overcome McConnell-led filibusters with a heartier Senate majority and prevent stonewalling Republican senators from gaining the majority—are real. And the money is sorely needed, especially since Republican politicians get contributions from large companies and billionaires, and have Political Action Committees, (better known as PACS), to get around donation limits that we plebeians must abide by. While the Democrats also receive contributions from some deep pocket sources, it is never as much as their Republican counterparts. Many progressives have eschewed corporate contributions altogether. Instead, they court large numbers of small donors. Thus, their requests are for smaller amounts, sometimes as little as five dollars. But the appeals are made more frequently. This raising of money is necessary. The frantically frequent contacts are understandable. But for some of us receiving the requests, it has become just too much. And for the senders, I suspect it must be reaching a point of diminishing returns. At a certain level, the annoyance factor can turn contributors off. The constant hyperbole (even though legitimate concerns underlie it) plays on the nerves of the recipients. No rational person appreciates being pushed into a chronic state of high alarm. In addition, although emails and letters may set out in some detail the urgent reasons why we should support a candidate or cause, very few tell us with specificity how the contribution will be used to further that cause. I do not mean that they should provide a line-item financial statement, but rather, say something about how such contributions will be used to fight the good fight. Think of the following contrast: You receive letters from two different legal organizations. One recites a catalogue of horrors—people denied their rights, lynched, or whatnot—and you are asked to give money to fight the injustice. The other letter recites horrors as well but tells you that they have brought a particular lawsuit to challenge the injustice and need money to support that suit. Or, even better—as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has often done in its letters—tells you of particular such lawsuits it has won. Which is more likely to spark your enthusiasm to contribute monetary support? The SPLC originally came to my notice when it sent me a letter informing that a judgment it won had put the Alabama Ku Klux Klan out of business. That letter did not even ask me for money, but it inspired me to contribute. Even if the SPLC had not won, hearing what concrete action they were taking was more stirring than a mere catalogue of issues at stake and a general plea for help. Perhaps professional fundraisers assume we don’t care to be buried in such details. Or that in this age of short attention spans, they could not keep our interest long enough to deliver them. Conceivably, they think a litany of horrors grabs attention more than proposals for a cure. Maybe I am an outlier in my reaction to such things. But I prefer quality over quantity. Give me fewer donation requests with more substance in them. I suspect others who are bombarded by these solicitations may feel the same. I’d love to hear from other Insiders about their experiences as “small dollar donors,” as we’re known in the campaign game. Of course, if any of you are billionaire donors, feel free to weigh in, too! Political columnist Jessie Seigel had a long career as a government attorney in which she honed her analytic skills. She has also twice received an Artist’s Fellowship from the Washington, D.C. Commission on the Arts and Humanities for her fiction, and has been a finalist for a number of literary awards. In addition, Seigel is an associate editor at the Potomac Review, a reviewer for The Washington Independent Review of Books, and a dabbler in political cartoons at Daily Kos. Of this balance in her work between the analytic and the imaginative, Seigel jokes, “I guess my right and left brains are well-balanced.” More on and from Seigel can be found at The Adventurous Writer, https://www.jessieseigel.com.

July 7, 2021 Jeffrey D. Sachs, Juliana Bartels | Project Syndicate It is imperative that the G20 finance ministers' meeting in Venice this week act to provide the COVID-19 vaccines needed to achieve worldwide comprehensive adult immunization by early 2022. Given current production, this should not be a problem, so long as a global plan is quickly implemented. SIRACUSA – When G20 finance ministers meet in Venice on July 9-10, they should adopt a plan to immunize the world against COVID-19. Every vaccine-producing country will be in the room: the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, China, Russia, and India. Together, these countries produce enough doses to complete the immunization process for the entire globe by early 2022. Yet the world still lacks a plan to get it done. The existing global effort to bring vaccine coverage to poor countries, known as the COVID-19 Vaccine Global Access (COVAX) facility, has fallen disastrously short of what is needed. Vaccine-producing countries have used their output to vaccinate their own populations – with many millions of doses to spare. And vaccine-producing companies have made secret deals with governments to sell vaccines bilaterally rather than through COVAX at a lower cost. The world is plagued by the selfishness of the vaccine-producing countries, the greed of the companies, and the collapse of basic cooperative governance between the world’s major regions. We doubt that experts from the US government have ever met (even by Zoom) with their counterparts in China and Russia to plan a global vaccine campaign. The US has been more interested in shipping vaccines to Taiwan, presumably to embarrass the People’s Republic of China, than to work with China to protect the entire world. Scientists have been sounding the alarm that delay in global vaccine coverage could prove devastating for the entire world, as new variants arise that evade the existing vaccines. That ominous breakout is already underway. Israeli scientists have reported that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is only 64% effective against the Delta variant, compared to 95% effective against the original virus (though four other studies found significantly higher efficacy). The good news is that comprehensive global vaccine coverage is feasible. Global production levels are now high enough to reach comprehensive coverage for the adult population in every country within a few months. What we need now are plans to share vaccine doses among countries worldwide, rich and poor alike, supported by logistics and financing. None of this is out of reach if the G20’s members finally start planning seriously. Shockingly, there are no systematic, comprehensive, and up-to-date official figures on expected monthly vaccine production according to producing company and country. We have based our estimates of likely vaccine production in the coming months on the actual doses delivered and each company’s announcements, mainly in statements to investors for press releases. From this projection, we have devised a preliminary timeline to achieve a high level of global vaccine coverage. The failure of COVAX, the World Health Organization, the G20, and the vaccine-producing countries to do the same amounts to a dramatic breakdown of global cooperation. Our estimate is the following. Monthly production by all companies producing COVID-19 vaccines that have received emergency use listing by the WHO and national regulatory authorities, and that are being widely administered between July and December 2021, will average around one billion doses. The world’s population is 7.8 billion, and 5.8 billion are 15 or older. If we define comprehensive immunization as 80% coverage of the adult (15 and older) population in each country, the world should be aiming to immunize 4.6 billion individuals. As of June 30, about 850 million people have been fully immunized, and about 950 million more have received the first dose of the vaccine. To achieve 80% adult vaccination coverage globally, around six billion additional doses will be required. We have made a preliminary spreadsheet model showing that with about one billion vaccine doses delivered each month and approximately six billion doses required, we can achieve comprehensive vaccine coverage in about six months – by early 2022. The precise numbers depend on the specific combination of vaccines. But that will happen only if there is a global plan that includes a timetable to allocate the doses across all countries, a logistical plan to transport the vaccines, an implementation plan within every country, and a financing plan. The situation is especially urgent in Africa, where only about 16 million people, or just 2% of the adult population, were fully immunized as of June 30. This is incredibly low, especially compared with full vaccination rates of 17% of the worldwide adult population outside of Africa, and far higher rates in the vaccine-producing countries: 57% of the adult population in the US, 59% in the UK, 40% in the EU, 15% in Russia, and 6% in India as of June 30, and 19% in China as of June 10. There are enormous global risks. The Delta variant is now surging through Africa, auguring a monumental catastrophe unless immunization coverage is dramatically accelerated. The Africa Task Force of the Lancet COVID-19 Commission has issued an urgent appeal for 300 million vaccine doses for Africa. Moreover, new variants with a greater ability to evade the existing vaccines may soon emerge. And the global anti-vax movement and disinformation campaigns have spurred vaccine hesitancy, which means that even when doses are available, uptake falls well below comprehensive adult coverage. In short, we are still profoundly unsafe – everywhere. The four million confirmed COVID-19 deaths to date (excess death figures indicate that actual deaths are probably many times higher) are the tragic result of the world’s failure to respond to COVID-19 with clarity, cooperation, and compassion. The G7 pledge last month to donate 870 million doses, enough to immunize around 435 million people fully, remains far short of a global plan. It is imperative that the G20 come together and act to provide the needed vaccines. The world’s health depends on what happens in Venice this week. Jeffrey D. Sachs, University Professor at Columbia University, is Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. He has served as adviser to three UN Secretaries-General, and currently serves as an SDG Advocate under Secretary-General António Guterres. His books include The End of Poverty, Common Wealth, The Age of Sustainable Development, Building the New American Economy, A New Foreign Policy: Beyond American Exceptionalism, and, most recently, The Ages of Globalization.

FRED PLOTKIN is one of America’s foremost experts on opera and has distinguished himself in many fields as a writer, speaker, consultant and as a compelling teacher. He is an expert on everything Italian, the person other so-called Italy experts turn to for definitive information.  Fred discovered the concept of "The Renaissance Man" as a small child and has devoted himself to pursuing that ideal as the central role of his life. In a “Public Lives” profile in The New York Times on August 30, 2002, Plotkin was described as "one of those New York word-of-mouth legends, known by the cognoscenti for his renaissance mastery of two seemingly separate disciplines: music and the food of Italy." In the same publication, on May 11, 2006, it was written that "Fred is a New Yorker, but has the soul of an Italian."

By Anokhee Mepani As we finally look ahead to what a post-Covid-19 world might look like, it’s become glaringly clear that our cities, states, and country need an early warning system for contagious illnesses. Just as we have early warning systems for hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes and even asteroids, we need one that alerts us to spreading illnesses, so we can take action early to stop an outbreak before it turns into a pandemic. I began my career in finance as an investment banker, and most recently was the Director of Strategy and Operations at Addepar, a $2.3 billion wealth management technology company. But during nights and weekends, I poured my heart and soul into the nonprofit I run, Learn to Love. Learn to Love makes education possible for children with acute special needs by providing the healthcare services and support they need to go to and stay in school. Running Learn to Love and providing school-based health programs is where I find joy and meaning. When the pandemic hit, like many others, I reevaluated my life choices and decided to leave a career I wasn’t passionate about. Instead, I would dedicate 100 percent of my time and energy to help kids stay healthy and in school. As I decided to change jobs, the No. 1 obstacle keeping kids out of the classroom was Covid-19. This past year, I left my career in finance to join Kinsa Health https://kinsahealth.com, a public health company on a mission to curb the spread of infectious diseases through early detection and early response. For seven years, Kinsa has run a school-based health program called FLUency that reduces the spread of illness in classrooms. FLUency has been proven to decrease illness-based absenteeism during peak flu season by 27 percent. At Kinsa, I now run our FLUency program, and also lead our Public Sector efforts. In late February, 2020, Kinsa detected atypical levels of febrile illness in New York City. We alerted public health officials, but as a startup company, we didn’t have a big voice back then. Three weeks later, the world was calling the atypical illness we saw Covid-19. How did Kinsa detect an anomalous disease before the traditional public health system? Because we talk to households. Typical public health data starts with the healthcare system, which unfortunately only sees a portion of illness. Here’s some of those people the healthcare system misses: ● People who don’t have access to healthcare (can’t afford it, live too far, etc.) ● People who have mild symptoms that they treat at home ● People who don’t want to go to the doctor, or may have been encouraged not to go, in order to limit the spread of disease, as was done were during the early days of the pandemic At Kinsa, we talk to households using the simplest, most essential in-home medical device: the thermometer. By using commonplace human behavior (checking to see if there’s a fever when someone falls ill), we’re able to access and communicate with people at their earliest sign or symptom of illness. You take your temperature with a Kinsa thermometer, enter any symptoms into the app, and Kinsa immediate triages and provides guidance to you on what to do next. Now, put that smart thermometer in millions of households. We’re able to detect where and when illness is on the rise, how fast it’s spreading, and how severe it’s becoming, all while protecting individual privacy. Kinsa’s school health program, FLUency, makes our smart thermometer and a connected app accessible to families across the country. This past school year, we were in more than 4,000 schools, 85 percent of which are Title I schools with a large percentage of low-income children. Through FLUency, we reach underserved communities by giving our smart thermometer to families and staff members in schools for free, and giving the school tools to curb the spread of illness. Now, as the New York Times recently reported, New York City is making FLUency available to all 700 public elementary schools. We’re helping to stop the spread of illness in school communities, and we’re strengthening the city’s early warning system for contagious illnesses, because we never want to see a pandemic like Covid-19 hit our city again. Anokhee Mepani, who grew up in Boston, lived in New York City for over a decade. She now lives in California with her husband and lots of plants. Anokhee is committed to helping students achieve their full potential by providing the healthcare services they need to stay in school. She's the Director of Public Sector & K-12 at Kinsa, and also founded Learn to Love, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit that supports the education and healthcare of children with acute special needs. In her free time, she loves to dance, read, and meet new people.

By Naomi Serviss Our infrastructure is killing us. Just when we thought it was safe to hug a friend and maybe travel, Chicken Little comes home to roost. The sky is falling. Condos collapse, bridges fail and sinkholes swallow cars. The Gulf of Mexico’s on fire. Marine life is paying the price of our hubris and greed. America’s birthday doesn’t feel as festive this year. We’re suffering from pandemic fatigue-depression and hyperarousal. So little time, so much to fret. Our hellish tsunami year would give Buddha pause. Baby Boomers are graying and fraying. Knees are shot, hips need replacing and secretary spread dread is bumming me out. Who else forgot to take their pill this morning? When did it become a challenge to assume the lotus position? Did I really go to the gym at the 92nd Street Y 92 times three years ago? I did! The incentive: a free month. Who was that person? Now I‘m grateful for an uneventful morning walk in Central Park. Erica Jong had fear of flying. I have fear of falling. My balance has been quirky post-foot surgery. I measure each step like a sous chef. It takes me longer to walk two miles, but I’m walking! I’m still in the game! Joni Mitchell’s classic album Blue is 50 years old. I’ve listened to her for half a century. She burst on to the scene when I was a high school sophomore. Joel, a classmate, took photos of her in small Philadelphia clubs. She liked them so much that Joel became a personal photographer to her. Joni video-tweeted her thanks to fans in June. 

Blonde braids, killer cheekbones. Her face is beautifully age appropriate. Blue was panned when first released. Now people get it and she’s glad. As Monty Python recommends, always look on the bright side of life. Waking up twice a night isn’t a highlight. But at least I’m waking up. Covid killed too many. It ravaged lives indiscriminately. I’m grateful my family has been spared. It takes longer to rise from a lotus position, but I’m in no rush. Childhood provided too many cortisol-raising experiences. I coped and hoped, Without too much self-inflicted damage. In second grade I limped a mile home. I had fallen in the creek behind Marilyn’s house. My bone was broken. I was soaked when we returned to Marilyn’s house. Her mom wanted to lend me a dry change of clothes. Ashamed, I refused the offer. I was wearing my older sister’s too-big underwear. What if Marilyn’s mom noticed and felt sorry for me? I was drenched when I reached my Colonial Apartments home. My right foot was swollen and bruised. My mother didn’t think it was serious. It was. I ended up in the hospital. My mother had promised I wouldn’t have to stay. She also reassured me I wouldn’t get a shot. I was deadly afraid of needles. I stayed overnight and got a shot. But I made friends with the little boy and girl sharing the room. We laughed together at our cartoon-y gowns. I’m no Pollyanna, or even Hayley Mills, but her movie character made an indelible impression. She was the unsinkable Polly Brown. Irresistible. Pollyanna was a tomboy and loved to climb trees like me! Even when she (spoiler alert) lost her balance and fell her radiant recovery vibes caused a sea change in the village. It’s not easy letting go of negative emotions. Especially when you’re in physical and metaphorical pain. I’ve learned a few things from Allan Lokos, a Buddhist meditation teacher at the Community Meditation Center on the Upper West Side. It’s been my saving grace. We’ve been meeting virtually this past year. Allan’s guided meditation and spirited discussions have been restorative and joyous. He teaches patience, lovingkindness, generosity and compassion. My foot still hurts, I went up a shoe size and I had to ditch 20 pairs. But my footgear has narrowed to three excellent athletic sneakers. Fewer decisions of what to wear! Maybe the sky isn’t falling after all. Naomi Serviss is a New York-based award-winning journalist whose work has been published in The New York Times, Newsday, The Philadelphia Inquirer, Highroads (AAA magazine), in-flight publications, spa and travel magazines and websites, including BroadwayWorld.com

By Alan Resnick I’m not sure what‘s more challenging these days, being a student or a teacher in the public school system. But what I am certain of is that I’m elated to be in neither group. Being a student now seems infinitely more difficult than back when I was in public school during the ‘50s and ‘60s. Conducting a Google search for information about climate change for a term paper can generate hundreds of links, many of which contain misleading if not total misinformation. Social media has brought people together, but at the cost of creating anxiety, eroding self-esteem, and providing new opportunities for bullying. Students are bombarded daily with pictures, videos, and posts suggesting that everyone else’s life is better than their own. And they live with a realistic fear that a classmate one day may decide to bring a gun to school and open fire. On top of all this, students have been forced into remote learning during the pandemic. That’s not a small obstacle. For the last few years I have participated in a large adult education program based in metropolitan Detroit. The 2020 spring semester was cancelled due to the Covid-19 outbreak. So when it was announced that the fall semester would be delivered via Zoom-based instruction, I decided to enroll and give it a try. My attention span gave out 30 minutes into the first presentation. Listening to a disembodied voice drone on about the Crimean War while staring at a PowerPoint presentation on a laptop was not for me. School kids have been expected to learn remotely for full days multiple times a week during an entire school year. And this doesn’t take into account how remote classes have stunted some kids’ social and emotional growth. But as bad as being a student in the public school system is these days, being a teacher there is also very difficult and stressful. Like their students, remote teaching has left many instructors physically, mentally, and emotionally exhausted. School districts across the country are attempting to dramatically enlarge their summer school programs to compensate for pandemic learning deficits and the resulting poor grades. For example, the superintendent of Philadelphia schools announced in early April that the district would provide summer school opportunities “for any family who wants their child in some sort of program.” But many districts are finding that their faculty members are too burnt out to teach. A May 23 article in The Washington Post reported that some districts in the Washington D.C. area are offering incentives such as double pay and $1,000 bonuses to attract the necessary number of teachers. Even with these sweeteners, though, there have been some cutbacks on the number of students that districts can serve this summer because not enough teachers are enlisting. For me, though, the thing that makes teaching most stressful and nerve-wracking is educating students in a way that is meaningful and yet not offensive to anyone. Many educators find themselves trapped in the ultimate dilemma of “damned if you do, damned if you don’t,” particularly when teaching “softer” subjects like history, civics, or health. For example, let’s say you are teaching sex education and want to include a module on sexual orientation or gender identity. The Brown Political Review reports that, as of March, six states have what are known as “no homo promo” laws limiting the discussion of homosexuality in public schools. The article goes on to say that “Teachers in Texas and Alabama are required to tell students that: ‘homosexuality is not a lifestyle acceptable to the general public’ during sexual education classes.” Similar laws are on the books in Mississippi, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Oklahoma. And in April, a bill allowing parents to opt their children out of LGBTQ+ education was signed into law by Tennessee Republican Governor Bill Lee. Under this law, schools must notify parents 30 days before topics related to LGBTQ+ identity are discussed in the classroom, giving them time to request that their child be exempted from the lesson. I can’t imagine what it must feel like to be a teacher and know that you have to marginalize or ignore the sexual orientation or gender identity of some of your students or risk incurring the wrath of angry parents or administrators. How is a teacher to respond if a student brings up the subject of homosexuality? What if you are an LGBTQ+ educator forbidden to discuss your own sexual orientation or gender identity with your students? How painful it must be if you are a teacher who has an LGBTQ+ child. History and civics professors don’t have it any easier. They somehow have to thread the needle of educating students about the history of racism in a way that is simultaneously accurate and impactful, but inoffensive in highly politicized and hyper-polarized times. That makes it exceptionally difficult to incorporate concepts like critical race theory (CRT) or the New York Times’ 1619 Project into a lesson plan. CRT and the 1619 Project posit that systemic racism helped found the United States and remains in place today. They present a far less idealistic and flattering picture of our nation’s history than is typically taught in public schools. According to a May 29 article in the Washington Post, “Since the murder of George Floyd by a police officer last year, schools across the country have been overhauling their curriculums to address systemic racism and seek to make classrooms more equitable. Among other efforts, districts are instituting anti-bias training for teachers and requiring that history lessons include the experiences of marginalized groups.” The article continues: “Critics say teachers are trying to ‘rewrite history’ and should not consider race when interacting with students. Proponents counter that discussing race creates more inclusive schools and helps students overcome systemic barriers restricting their achievement.” But CRT and the 1619 Project are ultimately historical perspectives, albeit different ones than what appear in current textbooks. They are not necessarily entirely correct, but do provide students with another way of thinking about our country’s past and present. However, a number of states find these perspectives extremely threatening, so much so that they do not want their students exposed to them. Legislatures in Arkansas, Idaho, Tennessee, Texas, and Oklahoma have passed bans on these concepts, with some restricting the teaching of CRT in public colleges and grade school classrooms. Other states like New Hampshire and Utah are considering similar bills. While some proposed laws explicitly use the term “critical race theory,” others allude to “divisive concepts” or race-related guilt. In a news conference in March, Republican Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said, “Let me be clear, there’s no room in our classrooms for things like critical race theory. Teaching kids to hate their country and to hate each other is not worth one red cent of taxpayer money.” A May 18 article in Education Week points out that many of these laws are so vaguely written that it is unclear what they would cover or whether they would impermissibly limit free speech. The piece asks, “Could a teacher who wants to talk about a factual instance of state-sponsored racism—like the establishment of Jim Crow, the series of laws that prevented Black Americans from voting or holding office and separated them from white people in public spaces—be considered in violation of these laws?” And how would it even be possible to monitor and police what’s discussed in thousands of classrooms around these states? Yet the article asserts “Social studies educators fear that such laws could have a chilling effect on teachers who might self-censor their own lessons out of concern for parent or administrator complaints.” One English teacher quoted in the article goes even further: “History teachers cannot adequately teach about the Trail of Tears, the Civil War, and the civil rights movement. English teachers will have to avoid teaching almost any text by an African American author because many of them mention racism to various extents.” I began to wonder if there were any constraints or restrictions placed on my teachers back in the good old days. So I private messaged Ms. Randel (nee Miss Horowitz), one of my wonderful junior high school English teachers, to ask for her opinion: “Alan, I never felt I could not include anything in lesson plans. But remember I was only 20 when I started teaching and ridiculously naive. Things are so much different now.” Indeed they are. Albert Einstein once said the value of education “is not the cramming of many facts, but the training of the mind to think.” How minds are being trained has become a battleground where teachers and students look like certain losers. Alan Resnick is an industrial psychologist with over 40 years of professional experience. He and his wife are sheltering at home in Farmington Hills, Michigan. He is passing the time by cooking, exercising, catching up on friends’ recommendations of must-see TV and writing.

One film journalist’s stream-of-consciousness cinematic journey through the pandemic, Part 41 By Laurence Lerman Even after more than a year of enjoying and extolling the virtues of streaming—of having a century-plus of world cinema at one’s fingertips—the pleasures of physical media, namely Blu-ray Discs and DVDs, continue to beckon. But embracing those formats, the technologies of which came of age more than 20 years ago, feels a little like swimming upstream these days, as it were. The growing popularity of streaming during the pandemic has accelerated the slow demise of Blu-ray and DVD configurations, whose primary audience today is the collector’s community and diehard cinephiles. What those Blu-ray and DVD aficionados will tell you is that a gorgeous remastered edition of the film is vital, but that a disc’s supplemental materials offering background, context and complementary information on the film are also key. The major studios continue to release their films on discs, although they didn’t make nearly as much of a splash over the past year as they had prior to the quarantine and shutdown. Back then, mail-order retailers and even the occasional brick-and-mortar outlet would see regular action for the fading formats. These days, major studios and big releases aside (the Marvel Comics Universe films continue to do bang-up business on disc), it is the smaller, more specialized distributors who are bringing the most interesting and provocative titles to the marketplace. Old films, “banned” films, rarely-seen films, films previously trapped in some kind of legal limbo—there are a million stories in the lost celluloid city. And it often takes the wherewithal and ambition of a hungry, independent supplier to release these titles to an equally enthusiastic if far smaller audience on Blu-ray and DVD. And when the release is adorned with some appropriate bonus features, well, that’s the cherry on top. The past month I’ve enjoyed new Blu-ray editions of a trio of films from the Sixties, Seventies and Eighties, each outfitted with supplements that made their viewing even more enjoyable. None of them are scheduled for a streaming premiere (yet), and it was a pleasure to fire up the old Blu-ray player for the first time in many months to check them out. Following the triumph of his classically drawn 1962 western Ride the High Country, director Sam Peckinpah went large-scale with his next picture, 1965’s Major Dundee, starring Charlton Heston as the titular Union Cavalry officer, a vainglorious hard-ass who mounts an expedition to hunt down an Apache war chief. Putting together a ragged army of criminals, former slaves and Confederate POWs (which includes Richard Harris and esteemed Peckinpah regulars Ben Johnson, Warren Oates and Slim Pickens), Dundee takes the action to Mexico, where he aims to achieve a crowning moment of glory. Major Dundee initially clocked in at an imposing 136 minutes and earned generally negative reviews. Against the protests of Peckinpah and producer Jerry Bresler, 13 minutes were quickly excised, which tightened up the narrative but didn’t help much in the critics’ eyes or at the box office. Today, the film is best remembered as the first time Peckinpah had a film taken away from him by unhappy producers or a disgruntled studio. It launched Peckinpah’s image as a renegade filmmaker who would encounter similar problems with such later projects as The Wild Bunch (1969), Straw Dogs (1971), Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid (1973) and Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (1974). Leading restorer and distributor Arrow Entertainment took Dundee under its restorative wing last month, issuing a handsome Blu-ray edition that includes both the 122-minute theatrical cut and the 136-minute extended version (which was barely seen by the public), remastered from a 4K scan of the original source material. The Blu-ray also offers an overflowing assortment of bonus materials, includes a collection of deleted and extended scenes, archival and newer making-of featurettes, and three separate audio commentaries by film critics and Peckinpah scholars. These well-researched supplements offer a corral full of information on the famously troubled production, including stories of Peckinpah’s frequent drunkenness on set and his mid-shoot firing of a number of crew members for trivial reasons. Even leading man Heston reportedly found himself on the receiving end of Peckinpah’s renowned wrath, prompting him to threaten the director with a cavalry saber and, at one point, actually charging “Bloody Sam” on horseback in an effort to calm him down. David Bowie referred to Just a Gigolo, the 1978 seriocomic film in which he stars, as “my 32 Elvis Presley movies rolled into one.” Still, the film’s bizarre storyline, high-end production values and memorable cast elevate it to more of a curious misfire than a by-the-numbers genre flick, built around a charismatic, distinctive-looking rock’n’roll star. Set in Weimar-era Germany, Bowie plays Paul von Przygodski, a Prussian WWII vet recovering from a bomb attack, who returns home to a financially distressed family and a series of menial jobs. Things change when he discovers steady work as a gigolo, working out of a ritzy Berlin hotel under a renowned madam (Marlene Dietrich, in her final film role). Przygodski soon finds himself engaging in all manner of escapades with both a revolutionary (Sydne Rome) and a society widow (Kim Novak), while being aided along the way by a fellow veteran-turned-Nazi Party organizer (David Hemmings, who also directed). Following a poor commercial and critical reception upon its international release, Just a Gigolo was pulled from theaters as the reportedly disorganized and boozing director Hemmings tried to recut it. Bowie essentially disavowing the film and Germany boycotting it for its depiction of Nazi life didn’t help the matter. Supplier Shout! Factory’s just-released widescreen, uncut Blu-ray edition of Gigolo marks the film’s first U.S. appearance since its VHS release in chopped-up form back in 1989. Bonuses includes a 30-page booklet with production notes by producer/co-screenwriter Joshua Sinclair, a commentary track by assistant-to-the-director Rory MacLean, and a half-hour featurette including interviews with both of them. Taken together, the supplements offer some great insight into the genesis of the film, its production and sublime cast, and how everything went wrong. The most interesting bits involve screen icon Dietrich, who was wooed to make her first screen appearance in 15 years with an offer of $250,000 (as well as regular deliveries of roses and champagne) for two days of work. Sinclair also notes that it cost an additional half-million dollars to shoot Dietrich’s seven minutes of scenes in Paris since she refused to return to West Berlin. Further, the film’s on-screen meeting between Bowie and Dietrich never actually happened in real life, as Bowie’s scenes were shot in Berlin and the Paris footage of Dietrich was edited into the film, with the director himself standing in for Bowie for their big scene together. Nutty production tales also pepper the story of the 1988 Italian supernatural horror film Nosferatu in Venice, starring Klaus Kinski, a bizarre, unofficial sequel-in-name-only to Werner Herzog’s 1970 Nosferatu the Vampyre, which also starred the irascible, bordering-on-the-uncontrollable Kinski. Produced and directed by Italian film impresario Augusto Caminito (who took the director’s chair after a handful of previous helmers dropped out), the film follows a British professor (Christopher Plummer) who travels to The Floating City to investigate the whereabouts of the legendary vampire Nosferatu, whose last sighting was during Venice’s Carnival in the 18th century. Wouldn’t you know that the professor joins a séance that awakens Nosferatu from his 200-year slumber and unleashes him on an unsuspecting Venice? Last month, Severin Films issued a Blu-ray edition of the atmospheric but scattershot Euro-horror-thriller, marking the film’s first official U.S. release in any digital format. It features a fresh 2K scan and an outstanding new documentary on Kinski’s later career entitled Creation is Violent: Anecdotes from Kinski’s Final Years. Directed by Josh Johnson, it is comprised entirely of interviews with filmmakers, actors and others who worked with Kinski during the last six years of his life (interspersed with some footage of the ranting man himself). The feature-length doc is actually more entertaining than the film it is supplementing. Creation is Violent’s participants paint an alarming picture of Kinski in the Eighties, whose best work was clearly behind him (Herzog’s 1971 Aguirre, the Wrath of God and 1982’s Fitzcarraldo, among them) and whose legendarily demented persona appears to have kicked into overdrive during those final years. Tales of Kinski attempting to sabotage nearly every production he worked on, his verbal and sometimes physical abuse of fellow performers and crew members, and his attempts to sexually assault the actresses he worked with (often while filming sex scenes!) are not for the faint of heart. The question “What price art?” can certainly be raised when it comes to Kinski, whose unforgettable face and presence were seen and felt in more than 120 films over four decades. His talents and presence may have been palpable, yes, but it’s worth remembering that he was also accused of literally trying to rape his female costars. That’s not the kind of backstage info one ordinarily expects, but that it’s being furnished as part of a supplemental package on the Blu-ray release of a 30-year-old lesser-known film is very gratifyingly. The truth will out, digitally or otherwise. Laurence Lerman is a film journalist, former editor of Video Business--Variety's DVD trade publication--and husband to The Insider's own Gwen Cooper. Over the course of his career he has conducted one-on-one interviews with just about every major director working today, including Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino, Clint Eastwood, Kathryn Bigelow, Ridley Scott, Walter Hill, Spike Lee, and Werner Herzog, among numerous others. Once James Cameron specifically requested an interview with Laurence by name, which his wife still likes to brag about. Most recently, he is the co-founder and editor-in-chief of the online review site DiscDish.com.

By Victoria Rolfe Summer is in full bloom and we are in the heart of gardening season. For the most part, your garden should be fairly established by now. So we move into maintenance mode. In the previous Weed It and Reap column I discussed the proper watering and fertilizing techniques, which you will need to continue to practice throughout the summer months. You will also need to keep your garden weed free and, of course, continue to happily harvest and eat your produce. The next maintenance task to be discussed is keeping your plants free of pests and disease. This is one of the main reasons why, way back in the planning phase, I recommended placing your garden as close to your house as possible. It is important to patrol often so that you can catch problems early and nip them in the bud (so to speak) if you can. To start with, healthy plants are happy plants. It may seem almost counterintuitive, but pests do not usually like to eat healthy crops. It is actually much easier for them to attack plants that are compromised in some way. Therefore, your first line of defense is to maintain good soil, fertilizer, and proper hydration practices. That said, it is good to be ever vigilant for the first sign of trouble in your garden. Hopefully, you are strolling in your yard each day to enjoy the delightful oasis you have created there, and pick some fresh veggies for your dinner, and maybe even a bouquet of flowers to enjoy on your table while you are eating. When you are there, keep your eye out for anything amiss. Do you see any holes or discoloration on your leaves? Any signs of chewing? Unfamiliar insects? Any wilting? Any blemishes or distortion of fruits? At the first sign of something wrong it is time to take action before a small problem escalates into something harder to control. Now is the time for a little detective work. The more you can learn about what is happening to your plant (mostly through the magic of Google), the better you are equipped to deal with it. A good resource for your vegetable gardening questions can be found at https://gardening.cals.cornell.edu/garden-guidance/ . It is always best, especially if you wish to grow organically (which hopefully you do), to start with the simplest controls. For instance, try hand-picking your pests and dropping them into a can of soapy water (passionate gardeners learn not to be squeamish pretty early on) or squirting aphids off your plants with a hard spray of the hose. Another neat trick along these lines is to use duct tape to gently pull insect eggs off leaves without harming the leaf. This works especially well with squash bug eggs. Just press a piece of tape onto them and lift them off. If they have hatched into little bugs, well … squash them. Sometimes your problem may not be due to a pest at all or even a disease, but rather a cultural problem, such as blossom end rot of tomatoes, which is caused by uneven watering conditions. Or it could be due to something such as poor pollination, which results in stunted misshapen fruits on crops such as cucumbers and squash. If you see weird things happening to your plants, it’s time to get your Sherlock on once again and do a little “digging” on your computer. An informed gardener is a savvy gardener. I beg you here to not grab a spray bottle of something at your nearby garden center as soon as you see a bug. First of all, you don’t even know what that little critter is. He may be doing no harm at all. In fact, he may be helping you. Even beginner gardeners know that lady bugs eat aphids and so they leave the cute little red beetles alone. But few realize that the prehistoric-looking thing they encounter on their plant is actually a lady bug larva, and their first instinct is to destroy the ugly bugger. The bottom line is that there are many steps you can take to keep your garden free of pests and disease that do not require you to spray anything toxic. And it is very prudent to use these natural measures rather than heading to the garden center for harsh chemicals and dousing your plants with them. Better for your pocketbook, your health, and the environment. Remember: Your garden is a beautiful ecosystem of its own and when you spray toxins you are also killing many beneficial insects that are helping your plants to flourish. Be kind and gentle and your garden will reward you in a multitude of ways for the loving care you have bestowed upon it. Victoria Rolfe has had a love of gardening all her life, from the time she was a tiny child coveting the daffodils growing in her neighbor’s yard (and wondering why she couldn’t have them in her own), to her teenage years when she took her pot experimentation in a different direction by growing the seeds she extracted from the bag into a beautiful marijuana plant on her bedroom windowsill. She went on in her adult years to feed her family by growing a huge and bountiful vegetable garden, as well as beautifying her three-acre property with an array of ornamental trees, bushes and flowers in the magnificent Hudson Valley region of New York. Victoria learned a great deal in the process of all this plant experimentation. She then added to that knowledge by taking courses with the Cornell Cooperative Extension to become a Master Gardener Volunteer. In her volunteer capacity, she helps to educate the public on gardening through classes and information booths, most notably at the Dutchess County N.Y. Fair each August. Throughout the summer months, Victoria is most likely to be found among the weeds, either in her own garden or those of others who actually pay her to play in their dirt and do the thing she loves best, delight in the magical world of gardening. Victoria is not only a gardening aficionado; she is also passionate about helping people live a better life on less money. Visit her website and blog at brightfuture2budget4.weebly.com, or email her at brightfuture2budget4@gmail.com.