------------------------------
The Old-Time Radio Digest!
Volume 01 : Issue 196
A Part of the [removed]!
ISSN: 1533-9289
Today's Topics:
seeking Gale Gordon interviews [Ben Ohmart <bloodbleeds@[removed]; ]
Silent Film Stars on OTR ["Robert Fells" <rfells@[removed]; ]
Re: The Goldbergs [Elizabeth McLeod <lizmcl@[removed]]
Right(s) Face! ["Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@]
Patently Different ["Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@]
Long-Ago Newspaper Clippings: ["Lois Culver" <lois@[removed]; ]
Re: Sorry Wrong Number AGAIN [OTRChris@[removed] ]
Carl Amari's Comments ["Jeff Geddes" <jeffg@[removed];]
Re: Matt and Kitty ["Tony Bell" <t_bell61@[removed]; ]
Puck the Comic Weekly ["A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@[removed].]
Copyrights again ["A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@[removed].]
I got paid for it ["Andrew Emmerson" <midshires@[removed]]
Your All-Time Hit Parade [Tom van der Voort <evan@[removed];]
Brenda Lee on Breakfast Club [Duane Keilstrup <duanek9@[removed]; ]
For the Love of OTR [Dan Panke <dpanke@[removed]; ]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 17:29:07 -0400
From: Ben Ohmart <bloodbleeds@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: seeking Gale Gordon interviews
Let me know what you have. I have a lot of otr to
trade. Thanks.
Check out Fibber McGee's Scrapbook,
a new otr book! [removed]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 18:18:13 -0400
From: "Robert Fells" <rfells@[removed];
To: "old time radio" <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Silent Film Stars on OTR
In my research, I've haphazardly come across OTR shows where a famous silent
screen star of the 1920s was either featured or hosted. I believe that Mary
Pickford, "America's Sweetheart." hosted a show in 1936. Harold Lloyd was
the host in 1945 or 46 for the Old Golds Comedy program; Conrad Nagel turns
up as host in a few shows. I recall that Norma Talmadge, who was so popular
in the silent era but made only one talkie, was on a series, circa 1937.
Charlie Chaplin made a few appearances in 1940 to re-enact the speech he
gave at the end of his film The Great Dictator.
Even Lux Radio Theater occasionally presented a silent film - most notably
The Jazz Singer in 1936 and 1947 - the original was mostly a silent film
with only a few talkie sequences - and extraordinary, Seventh Heaven, in
1951 (from memory) that starred Charles Farrell and Janet Gaynor, the
original stars of the 1927 film.
Does anyone know if this type of data has been collected anywhere?
Bob Fells
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 18:18:11 -0400
From: Elizabeth McLeod <lizmcl@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Re: The Goldbergs
On 6/18/01 4:16 PM [removed]@[removed] wrote:
Very much interested in knowing more about the radio show The
Goldbergs, and does anyone know where I can obtain a copy of this
show.
"The Goldbergs" was the creation of Gertrude Edelstien Berg, the daughter
of a middle-class Jewish couple who ran a boarding house/hotel in upstate
New York. Her grandfather had emigrated to the US from Poland in the
1870s, and as Gertrude was growing up, she listened intently to his
stories of ghetto life -- and also to his thick Yiddish dialect, which
she learned to perfectly mimic.
As a teenager, Gertrude had entertained guests with dialect skits drawn
from her grandfather's stories, and developed a strong interest in
writing. She experimented with short stories, but never managed to hit on
quite the right formula for what she was trying to do. In 1918, at the
age of nineteen, she married a chemist by the name of Lewis Berg and went
to live with him on a sugar plantation in Louisiana, where he was
employed by a large sugar processing company. The couple returned to New
York in the early 1920s, and Gertrude took an course in creative writing
at Columbia University while raising the couple's two children.
Berg began experimenting with radio in the late twenties, writing
continuity and short skits for various small New York stations, but it
wasn't until the breakthru in dramatic radio created by the success of
"Amos 'n' Andy" that she hit upon the formula that would make her famous
-- submitting to NBC-New York a proposed comedy-drama serial revolving
around a struggling Jewish family in the Bronx. Although Berg herself had
no personal experience with either poverty or ghetto life, the memory of
her grandfather's stories had given her plenty of source material -- and
in November 1929 "The Rise of the Goldbergs" was picked up by NBC. The
program aired sporadically at first, but in 1931 it was picked up by the
Pepsodent Company -- sponsors of "Amos 'n' Andy" -- and placed in a
regular six-nights-a-week timeslot.
During this period, the program dealt primarily with the conflict between
the "old world" immigrant parents, Jake and Molly Goldberg -- with
Gertrude Berg playing Molly herself -- and the "new world" ways of their
children, Sammy and Rosalie, and much of the show's humor stemmed from
Molly's Yiddish dialect malapropisms and Jake's constant scolding over
her meddlesome behavior. It can be argued, in fact, that the stock
characterization of the "Jewish Mother" in pop culture owes much to
Gertrude Berg's portrayal of Molly. "The Goldbergs" was far from the
first attempt to portray Jewish-American ghetto life in humorous fiction
-- but the humor in Berg's work was far less exaggerated than the film
comedies of Max Davidson or the "Potash and Perlmutter" short stories of
Montague Glass. Like its radio predecessor "Amos 'n' Andy," "The
Goldbergs" emphasized plot and character development over jokes or gags,
and again like "Amos 'n' Andy" it frequently crossed the line into
straight melodrama.
Berg maintained full creative control of the program, wrote all the
scripts herself, and supervised all elements of the production process.
She also carefully shaped a public image for herself that completely
submerged her own identity -- the college-educated author, producer,
businesswoman, and middle-class chemist's wife -- into that of the
fictitious yoo-hooing, heavily ethnic Molly.
"The Goldbergs" in its original form ended in 1934. In 1935, Berg created
a half-hour weekly comedy-drama based on her memories of the Edelstein
family hotel, entitled "The House of Glass," which ran for a season on
NBC for Palmolive. "The Goldbergs" reappeared briefly in 1936-37, and
then returned for a long run in 1938 for Procter and Gamble -- but this
series was very different from the original program of the early 1930s.
It was no longer a story of Jewish immigrants in the Bronx -- the family
now lived on a farm in a small Connecticut town, and ethnic themes were
not significantly emphasized. And it was no longer a comedy-melodrama:
instead, it was a straight soap opera, dealing with the usual soapish
romance-and-deception plots. Ironically, it was this version, so
different from Berg's original, that had the longest continuous run of
any of her programs, continuing as a daytime show until 1945. That year,
James Waters, who had perfectly played the role of Jake, died suddenly --
and Berg refused to continue the program without him.
In 1949, a new version of "The Goldbergs" surfaced on television --- and
returned to the roots of the original. The children -- who had grown to
adulthood on the soap-opera version -- were suddenly school-age again,
and once again the family lived in the Bronx. This version of the show
was far more comic than any of the radio versions -- and it became so
popular on television that it led to a revival on radio, in version which
closely duplicated the half-hour sitcom format of the TV series. Actor
Philip Loeb replaced the late James Waters as Jake in this revived
series, but soon became the focus of unwanted controversy when he was
blacklisted in "Red Channels." Loeb was not a Communist -- but he had
been active in the liberal labor movement, and for the vigilantes, this
was evidence enough. Berg at first refused to fire him, but finally
relented -- and unable to find any other work, Loeb eventually committed
suicide. "The Goldbergs" never really recovered from the Loeb tragedy,
and the final TV version of the show was a filmed sitcom series called
"Molly," in which the Goldberg family lived in a bland baby-boom suburb.
It finally expired in 1955.
Berg spent the next several years working in live theatre, and returned
to television for one last series in 1961, an unusual sitcom called "Mrs.
G. Goes to College," in which she played a Molly Goldberg-like character
returning to school after raising her family. This series ended after one
year, and Berg returned to the theatre. She died in 1966.
Only one episode of the original 1929-34 "Goldbergs" is known to survive
as a recording, but more than 400 episodes of the soap-opera version
survive, and can be obtained on tape from a number of dealers on this
list.
Elizabeth
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 18:20:52 -0400
From: "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Right(s) Face!
Pete Greco, commenting on the Carl Amari/MediaBay controversy, observes,
I have been reading the e-mails concerning Radio Spirits and all the
wrong that CA is doing. A great deal of wonderful comments, a great deal
of the members doing their homework. As I see it, all the e-mails, all
the letters don't amount to a hill of beans. CA will not bend, he will
continue just as he has been not showing what shows he has etc.
The reason for all the discussion isn't primarily aimed at getting Mr.
Amari to change his ways; it's essentially to sensitize both consumers
and small dealers to the nuances of the situation. For instance, there
may be some question as to what constitutes public disclosure of one's
rights. Forewarnd is forearmed.
Its interesting reading, but will not change CA's thinking.
As noted, that's not its purpose. It's also to sensitize well-meaning
folk just when they reach the limit of the law. For instance, if I buy a
protected tape from a legitimate dealer, I've done something legal. If I
give that tape to another person as a gift, what I've dome is legal: the
recipient now owns the copy of the protected work. If I strike a copy to
keep before I give away the original, and then give the original away,
I've done something illegal. Doing that, or posting a copy of a
protected work for folks to copy (as Napster used to), this is also
illegal. By sensitizing folk to these aspects of the problem of rights,
it might save some people a lot of trouble.
Stephen A. Kallis, Jr.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 18:21:27 -0400
From: "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Patently Different
Jim Mayor notes, vis-a-vis copyrights,
I don't know about anyone else out there, but all my life I have worked
for an agreed-upon salary. All the work I ever did (I was an engineer) I
was paid for, yet for over 30 years others have taken what I have done
and either used it or expanded upon it and I was never "compensated," nor
was anything ever offered beyond what I was originally paid. So I
should have copyrighted my work? No, I got paid for it and if someone
can benefit from it, OK.
Well, that situation is different. From what I understand, what you did
was what's known as "work for hire," and is different than copyrightable
material. When I was working for various companies (I didn't have an
engineering title, though I did some of that stuff), as part of my
employment agreement with the company, I agreed that anything I developed
for the company or that I developed as part of my job would become the
intellectual property of the company. Most firms have that sort of
agreement.
An entertainment item (TV show, OTR program, musical recording, book,
magazine article) is something that needs protection because it's so easy
to copy and disseminate without having to buy more than raw materials.
Suppose an author's work gets Xeroxed and given away. This deprives the
writer of deserved income. It's intellectual theft.
What an engineer normally does is to contribute to or to develop a design
of a product. Suppose an optical engineer develops a novel catadioptric
lens assembly. To get it, you have to buy the product; however, once you
have it, you can't Xerox or tape it. Of course, the design of such an
assembly would probably be protected by a patent, but that's a whole
other matter.
Now about those johnnie-come-lately copyrighters. Who is benefiting
from the copyright? The original artists? I doubt it, but maybe
sometimes they are. Sometimes it is the heirs of the artists. That sure
makes strange sense to me.
Well, as I understand it, you can't be a "Johnnie-come-lately
copyrighter." I can't copyright anyone else's work, unless that person
authorizes me to ([removed], transfers rights to me). Now there _are_
subtleties here: it's possible to copyright a program's container, or an
special edit of a program ([removed], inserting musical bridges in a show that
didn't have such bridges originally), but that's the extent one can
copyright "later."
Whoever holds copyrights is entitled to their protection. How they got
them is outside the discussion, since that can be argued for any
property, from buildings to oil wells.
Stephen A. Kallis, Jr.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:11:24 -0400
From: "Lois Culver" <lois@[removed];
To: "OTR Digest" <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Long-Ago Newspaper Clippings:
>From Citizen-News, Hollywood, Wed Nov 7, 1951
Dr. Christian (Jean Hersholt) is called in when children interfere in the
romance of a couple past 60, KNX at 8:30. In the cast are: Olan Soule, Ken
Kingston; Alvina Temple, Barbara Berkeley; Norman Field, Dr. Tom Kingston;
Gwen Delano, Mrs. Eleanor Berkeley, and Howard Culver, announcer and gas
station attendant.
Lois Culver
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:11:21 -0400
From: OTRChris@[removed]
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Re: Sorry Wrong Number AGAIN
In response to Jim Widner and Martin Grams Jr who still believe that are two
seperate recordings in existence of the 05-25-43 broadcast. ( west coast
version and east coast version ).
First off I want to make sure that everyone understands I HAVE heard both
versions. I have played them side by side and THEY ARE THE EXACT SHOW. Each
lists Banquos chair as next weeks program and everything else is the same
ACCEPT
The version without the flaw has been obviously edited so as not to include
the miscue. That is the absolutely ONLY DIFFERENCE in this show. You even
hear the exact same surface noise from the disc at the same times.
When you have heard both the fluffed version and the non-fluffed version you
will know exactly what I have been stating. You really only need to listen at
the point where the fluff is and you can hear how the edit was done. Those
who have played the shows side by side as I have done have also come to the
same conclusion.
I hereby offer this challenge :
Let anyone who maintains that they own two seperate versions of this
program ( an East and a West )run them side by side simultaneously and then
post on this digest what they have found . Every pause , every tone , every
disc skip is exactly the same.
Suspense was heard at 9:30pm EWT /6:30 PWT (ie ONE SHOW)
as listed in national radio magazine " RADIO MIRROR"
and countless newspaper listings up the west coast.
Seattle, Spokane, Portland , SF , LA all carried the show at 6:30 pm PWT. you
say that a station 100 miles up the road may have carried the later feed .
On the west coast in 1943 there often was not another station up the road 100
miles . Besides I am not one to believe that CBS went through the trouble of
a second live performance for just the smaller of the west coast towns.
-Chris
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 21:42:02 -0400
From: "Jeff Geddes" <jeffg@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Carl Amari's Comments
All, especially Mr. Amari,
RSI has paid millions of dollars to acquire
and maintain rights to the series it controls
And that I [removed] I just hope R$ runs millions of dollars into debt.
Radio Spirits has been doing a lot of work to own the shows it owns, from
what I understand, and that's fine and [removed]
But once I heard Mr. French's story about Carl Amari buying shows from him at
an OTR Convention, all the comments Mr. Amari posted in the digest seemed
ridiculous to me.
Thanks!
jeff
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 00:01:37 -0400
From: "Tony Bell" <t_bell61@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Re: Matt and Kitty
Joe Salerno asks:
What exactly was the relationship between Ms. Kitty and Marshall Dillon?
Were they ever an item or did they have some kind of an "agreement"?
I always had the impression that Kitty wanted something to happen much more
than Matt [removed] know Kitty had a horrible reputation among the womenfolk
in Dodge, and that came up in a number of the episodes I have [removed]
John Dunning's book, under his entry on "Gunsmoke" he describes Kitty as a
[removed] she [removed] was never explicitly implied in the shows I
have, but I have by no means heard all the episodes in [removed]
seemed to always be drinking and dancing with the men at the Texas Trail
Saloon, but I don't know what her job description [removed] always enjoyed the
fact that there was a certain amount of ambiguity in Matt and Kitty's
[removed] think it would have spoiled things a bit to have them get
together on a steady basis, much the way it did in latter day television
shows like "Moonlighting" and "Cheers"...I'm interested in what those who
are closer to "Gunsmoke" have to say about this.
Tony Bell
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 00:30:19 -0400
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Puck the Comic Weekly
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:49:58 -0400
From: garysteinweg@[removed]
"Rigga-digga doon doon, saska-matash! Give us music for
heroic Flash" which announced Flash Gordon (at least that's
how I remember it).
I remember "The Comic Weekly Man" on the local station in Albany, New
York. This apparently was a syndicated show sponsored by the Hearst
syndicate, whose newspapers carried "Puck the Comic Weekly" as their
Sunday comic section.
I even remember some of the musical themes for the comic strips. I
remember one time, the comic strips they were doing on the radio didn't
fit what I saw in the newspaper. Then the local announcer came on and
said that the Comic Weekly Man had gotten ahead of himself, and were had
been listening to next week's comics. The show then resumed with the
right comics.
I don't know if there's a Website anywhere devoted to this, but it
wouldn't surprise me.
A. Joseph Ross, [removed] [removed]
15 Court Square lawyer@[removed]
Boston, MA 02108-2503 [removed]~lawyer/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 00:30:20 -0400
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Copyrights again
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 22:14:06 -0400
From: "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@[removed];
If the status of a program is unclear, then
it's understandable that dealer might sell them: they might honestly
believe that the shows in question are in public domain.
Unclear to whom? A little research will often disclose who owns the
rights to something. Amari apparently does his research. Others can do
the same.
This is an argument that it's OK for me to steal something if I "honestly
believed" that nobody owned it. That may work for an 8-year-old, but
adults should know better.
In truth, this is a function of the growth of our hobby. A few people
trading shows didn't have to worry about rights, not because what they
were doing was legal, but because it was too small to appear on anyone's
radar. But when the activity grows to the point where lots of people know
about it and there's serious money to be made, it's going to show up on
the radar of the people who own the rights. It may be sad that the hobby
has grown to where it can't be as informal as before, but it's true.
The Web has enhanced this because anything on the Web has a world-wide
distribution. When you reach that many people, you can't expect rights
owners to leave you alone.
A. Joseph Ross, [removed] [removed]
15 Court Square lawyer@[removed]
Boston, MA 02108-2503 [removed]~lawyer/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 11:22:01 -0400
From: "Andrew Emmerson" <midshires@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: I got paid for it
Jim Mayor misses the point when he says "All the work I ever did (I was an
engineer) I was paid for, yet for over 30 years others have taken what I
have done and either used it or expanded upon it and I was never
"compensated," nor was anything ever offered beyond what I was originally
paid."
He was paid a salary every month. The people who write scripts, books, songs
etc. have no salary or guaranteed income; nobody pays them a penny until
someone decides to buy the rights to one of their copyrighted works. This is
a fundamentally different way of earning a living.
Andy Emmerson.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:22:48 -0400
From: Tom van der Voort <evan@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Your All-Time Hit Parade
Michael Berger asks about the program being promoted with the phrase
"the best tunes of all move to Carnegie Hall."
I believe the show in question is "Your All-Time Hit Parade.' At
least two shows originating from Carnegie Hall are in circulation. They
both feature Mark Warnow's orchestra. Other performers include Bea Wain,
Jerry Wayne and Tiny Hill's band.
Tom van der Voort
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:41:01 -0400
From: Duane Keilstrup <duanek9@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Brenda Lee on Breakfast Club
Does anyone remember when Brenda Lee sang on the "Breakfast Club?" Brenda
Lee will be interviewed on Yesterday USA on Sunday evening, June 24, at 7:00
[removed] Central.
Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 16:37:51 -0400
From: Dan Panke <dpanke@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: For the Love of OTR
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 13:37:04 -0400
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@[removed];
The person who cares
is the person who digs through their archives, pulls out an old broadcast,
digitizes it and posts it so the recording lives on.
And violates the rights of the people who own the intellectual property
involved. Copyright infringement is theft.
<snip>
I failed to mention that the current broadcast is NOT in circulation. This
was sort of a follow up to a previous posting. Tough to lay claim to
something you don't or can't possess without someone giving or selling it to
you. You mention 'theft'. How can there be theft when nothing is taken?
If I find a broadcast in my collection the no one in the world possesses, I
kind of think I own. And, if I want to, I think I have the right to burn it.
This would be sort of foolish so now I decide to give it away and low and
behold someone lays claim to it once they've gotten a copy. This copyright
issue is very complicated.
__________________________________________________________
Get your FREE personalized e-mail at [removed]
--------------------------------
End of [removed] Digest V01 Issue #196
*******************************************
Copyright [removed] Communications, York, PA; All Rights Reserved,
including republication in any form.
If you enjoy this list, please consider financially supporting it:
[removed]
For Help: [removed]@[removed]
To Unsubscribe: [removed]@[removed]
For Help with the Archive Server, send the command ARCHIVE HELP
in the SUBJECT of a message to [removed]@[removed]
To contact the listmaster, mail to listmaster@[removed]
To Send Mail to the list, simply send to [removed]@[removed]