Page 30 - Flathead Beacon // 11.5.14

30 | NOVEMBER 5, 2014
LIKE I WAS SAYIN’ Kellyn Brown
Steinbeck’s Short Stay
AS WE TALKED ABOUT VARIOUS EVENTS TO include in the timeline of Montana’s first 150 years, we predictably began discussing one of many resi- dents’ favorite quotes. You know the one, by John Stein- beck, in “Travels with Charley.”
“I am in love with Montana. For other states I have ad- miration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love, and it’s difficult to analyze love when you’re in it.”
It’s a great quote. It makes us feel proud. But so much of Steinbeck’s book has been disputed that its 50th anniver- sary printing in 2012 included this disclaimer in the intro- duction, written by Jay Parini:
“It should be kept in mind, when reading this travel- ogue, that Steinbeck took liberties with the facts, invent- ing freely when it served his purposes, using everything in the arsenal of the novelist to make this book a readable, vivid narrative.”
I’m not suggesting Steinbeck loved this state any less, but he was hardly an authority on the area. And his love must have been at first sight, because he wasn’t here very long.
Bill Steigerwald, a former journalist for The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, first brought many of the discrepancies in Steinbeck’s famed book to the fore in 2010. Originally, Stei- gerwald had hoped to simply retrace the route in Travels with Charley for a book on how America had changed over the previous 50 years. Instead, he found a book largely per- ceived as nonfiction, largely fiction.
Steinbeck’s own son has suggested much of his dad’s book was made up, but Steigerwald went further, creating a timeline of the author’s journey after researching letters, biographies and the original transcript. “This is just grunt journalism,” Steigerwald told the New York Times in 2011. “Anybody with a library card and a skeptical gene in his body could do what I did.”
Steigerwald’s conclusion of Steinbeck’s time in Mon- tana: “The great author’s love affair with the Treasure State was really more like a two-night stand” and he was only within our borders for “about 60 hours.”
Steinbeck’s iconic quote has been repeated so often – attached to photos, repeated on our social media feeds and reprinted on T-shirts – that one would think he spent a year exploring every corner of our state and interacting with its pioneering residents. That’s not the case. Appar- ently, he didn’t veer far from what today is Interstate 90, except for a quick visit to Yellowstone National Park and another to the Custer Battlefield site.
Our territory, and now state, has made quite an impres- sion on millions of visitors over the years. And perhaps one can fall hard for Montana by simply driving across its In- terstate. As a Spokane, Wash. native, I’ve traveled much of Steinbeck’s route dozens of times – when I worked in Boz- eman and Bismarck, N.D., and attended college in Powell, Wyo. It’s a beautiful drive.
But Steinbeck should have stayed a little longer. He should have aimed north toward Flathead Lake and spent time in Glacier National Park. He should have hiked and fished and explored our sprawling national forests. He didn’t.
Steinbeck wrote: “It seems to me that Montana is a great splash of grandeur. The scale is huge but not over- powering. The land is rich with grass and color, and the mountains are the kind I would create if mountains were ever put on my agenda.”
All this is true to many of us and few could articulate that feeling better than Steinbeck. Imagine what he would have written if he would have spent a week here.
OPINION FLATHEADBEACON.COM
TWO FOR THOUGHT
Local Topics, Opposing Views
Voting: A Power or Pretension?
By Tim Baldwin
Frequent elections are intended to enable citizens to control public officials and advance policy preferences in government. On these as- sumptions, the Constitution’s advocates in 1787 argued that liberty would exist longer in our union because human nature teaches that people presumptively act in their best interest and do not willingly harm themselves.
But can elections today accomplish their in- tended purposes for the whole of society? If 50 percent of qualified voters regularly vote; only two political parties have a chance of getting elected; and 51 percent of those voters determine which candidates govern us, the conclusion is, a small minority control election outcomes. Cou- ple this with the reality that individuals have virtually no influence on politicians, but foreign governments, corporate conglomerates and lob- byists have enormous power, as a Princeton Uni- versity professor recently demonstrated. Politi- cians know this and act accordingly.
There is thus little wonder why so many citi- zens are disenfranchised with elections. Natu- rally, this downward spiral leads to political corruption and citizen indifference. As James Madison said, “An ELECTIVE DESPOTISM was not the government we fought for; but one which should ... be founded on free principles.” In truth, direct elections, by themselves, do not secure lib- erty for each and all. To be even partially effec- tive, elections must have substantive impact, not just formal. Think about it.
By Joe Carbonari
From the day before our midterm election, I wonder: Will it help to get our economy un- stuck? Will it lead to cooperation? Will we have elected office holders that recognize that they have a responsibility to all of us to work togeth- er, to move forward? Or, will partisan bickering continue to win out?
Locally, I expect that we will be fairly solid. The Flathead has some good candidates who are likely to take responsible leadership roles. The more fringe candidates seem largely non- threatening and offer proof that everyone does get to vote, and they remind us of the danger of those votes that are flippantly or by manipula- tion cast.
Which brings me to Mailergate, seemingly an attempt to manipulate a piece of our election and then to measure the effect that the manipu- lation had, so as to more widely sell this election “service” in the future. Entrepreneurially ad- venturous; ethically challenged. Our Supreme Court make up and subsequently the nature of the decisions made by it, manipulated.
I don’t like it. It reminds me of the Dark Money boys, and I look for their involvement in this charade. They tend to think themselves in- tellectually cute, but they are playing with our votes. It is reprehensible, it destroys trust in our institutions, and it is destructive to our democ- racy. It is neither conservative nor progressive. It is unethical and wrong. It must stop.
GUESTCOLUMN | NilesHushka
Montanans Will Continue to Innovate
In Montana, we know innovation. Our state is home to historic feats of engineering like the Go- ing-to-the-Sun Road and the Fort Peck Dam. These days Montana engineers are hard at work solving new challenges, like harnessing new energy sources and leading the way in high tech industries.
Our history of innovation built Montana. We don’t shy away from the challenges we face. In- stead, we work together to innovate and figure out the best way to confront them – the Montana way. Imagine what visiting Glacier National Park would be like today if highway engineers had said, “there’s no way we can build a road up that mountain.”
Today’s challenges are no different. And we can- not ignore one of the biggest challenges we all face: how climate change may soon affect Montana’s ag- riculture and the countless businesses and indus- tries that rely on our lucrative outdoor heritage.
So how do we address it? The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing new limits on coal pollution. In Montana we like to say that one size does not fit all, and thank goodness in this case, as the EPA is giving Montana flexibility to build its own road up the mountain.
Gov. Steve Bullock met the challenge by iden- tifying several different ways to meet those new standards and invest in new jobs and technology – all while protecting existing coal jobs. Like so many Montanans before us, the governor showed us that we don’t have to back away from our most pressing challenges.
Montanans gave quick feedback to the gover- nor’s vision, and he impressed many of us by pro- viding a uniquely Montanan path forward.
Under the scenarios Bullock outlined, Montana can make homes and businesses more energy effi- cient. We can protect our clean air and water. And we can create jobs and improve economic oppor- tunity. We can achieve all of these things without shutting down a single coal facility. We can save consumers money.
That’s innovation.
When Bullock announced his plans, he said he’s “less interested in rhetorical fights” and instead fo- cused instead on knowing what the proposed EPA rule could mean for Montana. That too is the Mon- tana way. On this particular issue, let’s set aside our partisan differences and focus on what’s right for Montana. Let’s continue to innovate. Let’s put our creativity to work for the future.
I encourage all Montanans to take a look at the governor’s scenarios for meeting the EPA’s pro- posed standards. The standards can be found at governor’s website.
Niles Hushka is CEO of KLJ, one of the largest, regional multi-disciplinary engineering and planning firms. He also sits on the Board of the Montana Chamber of Commerce.