I've Been Making It All Up. And I'm Sorry.

I think my conscience is getting to me.  Finally.  I started this blog in 2011, and almost every word I've written is my invention.

If you read Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses, you remember the part where the scribe, who is writing the Qur'an, from the mouth of Mohammed, realizes he has made a mistake.  But he also realizes no one is checking him, and no one will know he made a mistake.  So he begins to make more of them, and to write whatever he wants.  That's what I do.  I'm mostly talking about things that happen, in places, like Commission meetings, where I am.  But since not many other people are there, I have come to realize I can say whatever I want, and almost no one will call me on it.  So I just make stuff up.

My big critic and external conscience had sometimes been Milt Hunter.  Months ago, Milt sent me, for some mysterious reason, an e-mail.  I couldn't tell what his point was, since he was rambling incoherently, but he did mention my then recent "whoppers."  I don't know if Milt reads this blog, and he doesn't come to Commission meetings, but he clearly knew I had been lying, big time.  He didn't specify what were the "whoppers," but he wouldn't have said it, if it hadn't been true.  Milt is an interesting figure for me.  He's like AA.  Milt is the anchor I can use, and the promise that's available to me, if I can admit I have a problem, and rely on a "higher power," which is Milt.  Milt made me that offer about this blog some years ago.  I was feeling discouraged, and I was talking to him about it, and he offered that if I would make a clear public statement that I had failed, and that he was the new savior (I hope it's OK if I don't use the upper case S), then he would take over the blog.  I guess I hadn't hit bottom by then, or I couldn't admit my life was out of control, and that I needed Milt as my higher power, so he just started his own blog instead.  Milt has been vastly more responsible and honest in his blog than I have here.  For example, when I was running for Commission re-election in 2016, Milt did the public service of writing a whole post all about how terrible I am.  He spelled it all out.  Well, as it happened at the time, and with the understanding that I'm neither honest nor willing to surrender, I wrote a comment to Milt's blog, delineating all the things Milt said that I considered inaccurate.  (Of course, it was me talking, so who can rely on my concept of accuracy?)  Milt, conscience/savior that he is, refused to allow my comment/correction to be printed.  Good old Milt.

Anyway, back to my confession, I admit I have made awful portrayals of some of our neighbors.  I'm thinking most recently about people like Tracy Truppman, Betsy Wise, Jenny Johnson-Sardella, Will Tudor, and, in a different way, Dan Samaria.  It was just this past Tuesday at the Commission meeting, that Tracy pointed out she's lived in the Village for about 20 years.  We all know Tracy.  She's a good enough kid, right?  But I can portray her any way I want, and I do.  I can "quote" various lies I claim she tells, and manipulative behaviors I allege she commits, because there are few people around who could challenge me.  And since the few who are around at meetings are accomplices of mine, they very rarely do correct anything I say.  I get away with murder.  The same is true about Betsy Wise.  None of us knew Betsy at all before she decided she should be on the Commission.  That's because she's a mild-mannered, quiet, tentative, and circumspect person.  But I describe her as if she was some sort of bad dog, barking and biting all the time.  Betsy couldn't possibly be like that, but I can say she is, because who's there to confront me?  Jenny Johnson-Sardella is an attorney.  She took a lot of initiative to get where she is, and she must know a lot about the law.  But I make her out to be uninspired, practically paralyzed, totally dependent, and clueless.  I say whatever I want.  Will Tudor just reminded us he's been a "federal employee" for 25 years.  He didn't say if he was president, a janitor, or something in between.  But 25 years...  As something he characterizes as a "federal employee..."  He's got to be stable, and someone who brings distinct value.  But I don't describe him as being valuable.  I describe him as vacant and non-contributory.  Hey, why not?  Who knows different?  All the people who don't come to Commission meetings? 

Dan Samaria is almost the opposite kind of situation.  We all know Dan.  He makes it impossible not to know him.  I generally think of Dan as a comparatively unsophisticated person, and someone who tends to be influenced by others.  I'll give you an example.  In 2017, we had a special election for a Commission seat vacated by David Coviello.  At first, the candidates were Dan, Harvey Bilt, and Mac Kennedy.  Mac eventually dropped out.  But in the meantime, I was trying to pull together a Meet the Candidates event, of the question-and-answer and topical discussion type we had always had...before.  But only Mac was willing to participate.  Harvey was either taking direction from the beast I portray Tracy Truppman to be, or he was, shall we say, highly skeptical, because I was the organizer, so he refused to participate.  Dan also refused, and it wasn't easy to get him to articulate a reason.  Much later, after Harvey won the election, Dan, who is my exterminator, told me his reason for refusing to participate: Harvey advised him against it.  Imagining this to be true, I pointed out to Dan the-- I'm sorry, Dan-- insanity of taking advice from a rival instead of from an unbiased person, who was sort of a friend, and who was a client.  Dan agreed he made a mistake.  Later, in 2018, he repeated the mistake.  That's Dan.  But the point is, it's not really believable for me to describe Dan, as I have on more than one occasion, as the independent brains of Commission operation.  But who's going to tell me I described it wrong?  Not you, if you're not there.

So, I want to make a request of you.  It's partly for my benefit, since I need an intervention, and partly for the Village's benefit, because I really shouldn't misportray us as I do, and contribute to giving us a bad reputation.  I want to ask you to come to Commission meetings.  I think you should pay careful attention, and maybe even take notes.  Because when I then do that awful and dishonest thing I keep doing, I want your comments all over this blog.  I need to be taken to task.  I need to be chastised severely.  Please, do something.  Come to these meetings.  Let me have it.  You know it isn't as I describe it.  It couldn't possibly be.  Right?


PS: If you know a Village resident who votes, but doesn't come to meetings, and isn't on my circulation for announcements about this blog, PLEASE forward this to them.  They need to know.  About me.  So they can stop me.  It will help me, but more importantly, it will help the Village.