The Singing Dentist of Bensonhurst

By Raanan Geberer


"When you begin/Begin the beguine/It brings back the night/Of tropical splendor....”

Dr. Pearlman sang as he looked into Rob’s mouth and started poking around, the curbed probe in one hand, the tiny mirror in the other. Ever since Rob had moved to Brooklyn last year, in 1987, his father had tried to get him to see Dr. Pearlman as a dentist because Dr. Pearlman was a cousin and had grown up with his father in the East Bronx, and finally, here he was. Dr. Pearlman’s office was on the second floor of a rundown two-story building on a nondescript commercial street in Bensonhurst whose only redeeming feature was the Italian bakery next door. You walked down a long, narrow hallway to get to Dr. Pearlman’s office.

“A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H/ I got a gal in Kalamazoo/Don’t want to boast but I know she’s the toast/of Kalamazoo...”

Rob had never heard of a singing dentist before. Not only does he sing, he thought, but he seems to sing only the songs of his own era, which would be the late 1930s and early ’40s. It’s incredible that this guy is still practicing, he thought. He must be in his late 60s, past retirement age. He idly glanced at the wall – here was a diploma from “New York University Dental School, June 1948.” Probably went to dental school on the G.I. Bill, he thought. Suddenly, he became alarmed when Dr. Pearlman picked up a drill.

“What are you doing with that drill? Aren’t you going to give me an anesthetic or an injection?”

“Well, the X-rays show that the cavity is very small and very near the surface, so we don’t need it. Open your mouth—you’re so good, you’re the best, you’re the champ. Here it comes. I’m not lazy!

`I got spurs that jingle jangle jingle/As we go merrily along/And they say, ain’cha glad you’re single/And that song it ain’t too far from wrong’ ...You’re doing great! Don’t worry about anything. I’m the master! ...

"`In ‘76 the sky was red/Thunder rumbling overhead/King George couldn’t sleep in his bed/And on that morn/Uncle Sam was born’ ... You’re so good! Okay, rinse out your mouth!”

Rob bent over, grabbed a paper cup and rinsed his mouth. He watched the blood going down the drain. He had hardly felt anything. “There! That wasn’t so hard, was it? “ Dr. Pearlman asked. “I’m gonna do the filling now! You know, your father did some amazing, heroic things! Like the time he ran into the battlefield and carried the wounded lieutenant on his back to safety! They were gonna give him a medal for that, but, you know how it is!”

Rob had never heard that story before. Then again, his father rarely talked about his past. He was going to ask another question when....

“OK, we’re gonna put in the filling material next. Here it comes! Stay still! I’m not lazy!

"`Moon over Miami/Shine on as we begin/A dream or two that may come true/As the tide comes in.......’

"Okay, just a little bit more. Just stay still. You’re the best! ... Bor’chu es adonai hamvoroch/Boruch atoh adonoi hamvoroch leolom voed/Boruch atoh adonoi/Eloheynoo melech ha’olam' ... OK, we’re done here, kid!”

“I heard you singing that Hebrew brocho,” Rob said, referring to the blessing over the Torah that Dr. Pearlman had just intoned. “Wouldn’t those Hasidim I saw in the waiting room object if you sang that when they were here?”

“Fuhgedaboutit!” Dr. Pearlman responded, cheery as ever. “Don’t worry about them. They got nothin’ to say! OK, see you next time?”

“What should I pay?”

“Don’t pay anything! ‘’Cause you’re a relative, I’ll fix the insurance form so the price will be very high, so what they give me will cover what you should pay!”

“You don’t have a secretary?”

“Naah! I used to have a secretary, but if I did now, I’d have to charge you guys more! OK, kid! Give your regards to my father .....NEXT!!!”

Bill Cosby's Right: Let's Tone Down Profanity

Originally published in Brooklyn Daily Eagle

On a recent episode of the Jon Stewart Show, Bill Cosby surprised host Jon Stewart, known for using four-letter words (which are bleeped out), by asking him to curb his use of profanity. He mentioned that when he was young, when someone said a four-letter word, it was usually a prelude to a fight. Stewart, who was taken aback, asked whether Cosby and Richard Pryor hadn’t used four-letter words on stage when they were starting out. Cosby said no, because there were always cops around.

I plead guilty to using the “f-word” (usually when I’m angry). But many people use it to describe almost anything and everything, as an adjective, adverb, noun and verb. While it is surely one of the oldest words in the English language, its use in show business (with a few exceptions, such as the odd 1938 recording of “Old Man Mose” by the Eddie Duchin Orchestra) was pioneered by comedian Lenny Bruce in the 1960s. Bruce was a comic genius, and his intentions were certainly commendable: he wanted to do away with hypocrisy and portray daily life honestly.

But in doing so, Bruce opened a can of worms. What he was doing went way over most people’s heads. Profanity became a lazy way of getting cheap laughs. If you don’t believe me, go into any comedy club in the country. Bruce was about social commentary, but that social commentary has degenerated into the insulting shock humor of Howard Stern.

Fifty, sixty years ago, we were a nation of rules: open the door for a lady, don’t wear your hat indoors, get up from a subway seat to let an older person sit down, call an older person “sir.”  Those rules have disappeared. Again, in an effort to do away with hypocrisy, the hippies of the 1960s sought to do abolish the old rules. They thought they would replace the authoritarian society of the 1950s with one based on communal values, but that never happened. Instead, what eventually replaced it was one of extreme individualism, of sneering at others who are less successful. The hippies believed in free sexuality as an expression of honesty, but what we have today is free sexuality as a way to sell cars or soft drinks. I certainly don’t want to go back to the society of the 1950s, when James Joyce was banned. But someone like Miley Cyrus is no James Joyce.

Some people might say, “Why don’t you criticize the real problems of society, rather than someone dancing naked on stage?” But to me, these problems are part of the same bag.

On one side of the coin, we have corruption in government, cheating on Wall Street, huge corporations like Walmart paying subsistence wages, politicians refusing to cooperate with their colleagues across the aisle, manufacturers shipping what had been American jobs overseas, people not caring about the homeless and the poor.

On the other, we have movie stars gyrating like only porn stars did a few decades ago, violent gangster rap, a record number of divorces, a record number of children being born out of wedlock, kids disrespecting teachers, and, yes, the constant use of four-letter words in public.

Yes, these are two sides of the same coin. And that coin is the degeneration of American society into one ruled completely by self-gratification and selfishness.

A Hospital Is More Than a Money Drain

Originally Published in Brooklyn Daily Eagle

This newspaper has been faithfully chronicling the ins and outs of the Long Island College Hospital (LICH) and, to a lesser extent, the Interfaith Hospital controversies. Turning our attention to Manhattan, we’re sure most readers are also familiar with the St. Vincent’s Hospital conflict of several years ago.

Implicit in all these controversies, however, is the idea that a hospital is nothing but an endless money drain. There’s some truth to this—many patients are on Medicare or Medicaid. When funds are cut, the hospitals suffer. But hospitals indirectly contribute large amounts of money to the community at large, and when a hospital closes, the entire community suffers as well.

Let’s take hospital beds. Beds require linen, pillows, and so on. The company that supplies linen to the hospital probably employs many people and pays a good deal of money in taxes. Without the hospital as a client, that company may have to lay off employees. It will also pay fewer taxes, thus depriving the government of much-needed tax revenue.

Let’s also take food. Every hospital has a cafeteria and also delivers food directly to patients in their rooms. Food concessionaires also hire employers, pay taxes, and purchase large amounts of food from suppliers. No cafeteria, no cafeteria employees. In a normal, healthy economy, these employees would find new jobs in a few weeks. But we’re not living in a healthy economy.

Same thing for the various coffee shops, restaurants and bars around a hospital. Many of these places mainly cater to hospital employees and visitors. If there’s suddenly no hospital, then half of these places may very well close. Their former employees will then spend less money at the supermarket and other local stores, sending negative waves through the local economy.

Transportation? Private car services near hospitals also rely on hospital visitors for much of their trade. If there’s no hospital, there will be fewer trips. Ultimately, fewer cars will be needed.

In macroeconomics, all of this is known, appropriately, as the “ripple effect.” This effect is worse when a hospital is the major employer in a neighborhood, as Long Island College Hospital probably is in Cobble Hill. As bad as the closing of St. Vincent’s Hospital was, the total economy of Greenwich Village wasn’t impacted that much because the West Village is jumping with hundreds of bars, clubs and souvenir shops. Closing LICH and Interfaith would hurt the areas surrounding these institutions much more.

The presence of a hospital can even cut down on crime. No one wants to mug a passer-by or sell drugs across the street from a hospital because people are constantly coming and going. But once a hospital closes and all you have are some big, empty buildings, the criminal element could see this as a green light to move in.

To sum up, hospitals aren’t just annoying, although necessary, institutions that cost millions of dollars. They generate lots of money into the local economy through purchases, services for visitors, businesses that cater to employees and much more. They also help keep the neighborhood safer. Hospitals don’t just generate physical health – they generate economic health, as well.

For More Riders, Make Amtrak Travel Into an Adventure

Originally in Brooklyn Daily Eagle 

In the cost-cutting frenzy that is sweeping Washington, Amtrak is a prime target. Contrary to what many people think, Amtrak is not an arm of the government – like the Postal Service, it is a separate corporation created by legislation, with some federal and state input and funding. It’s safe to say that if passenger rail had stayed profitable in the U.S. in the 1950s and ’60s, Amtrak would not have been created.

The most recent threat to Amtrak service comes in the Midwest, where Indiana has balked about continuing to fund the Hoosier Express linking Indianapolis and Chicago. And because Amtrak often shares its route with private freight railroads, performance on many lines is “iffy.” For example, I once waited for an hour and a half in Amherst, Mass., for a train to New York. When I called the Amtrak help number, I was told that our train had to wait until a huge freight train cleared the tracks.

Despite  the problems, Amtrak’s ridership is growing rapidly. According to a Brookings Institute report that was released this year, Amtrak went from carrying 20.1 million riders in 1997 to 31.2 million today. However, the Boston-to-Washington segment provides 44 percent of the traffic for the entire system (it also provides enough of a surplus to pay for most of Amtrak’s other short routes). Some of Amtrak’s long-distance routes, according to the study, only operate at about 20 percent of capacity. Indeed, the great majority of Amtrak’s ridership increase comes from people who travel less than 400 miles.

Some politicians have talked about cutting Amtrak down to its highly-traveled East Coast and, to a lesser extent, West Coast corridors. However, before we try that, maybe we should take a look at the way Amtrak is promoted.

Government proponents of Amtrak say that it costs less per person to subsidize passenger rail than it does to subsidize bus lines, that passenger rail creates less pollution, that it promotes “green” energy, and that if Europe and Japan can do it, so why can’t we?

While these arguments all have merit, they’re all somewhat abstract and won’t necessarily move the average American. Many people have never been to Europe or Japan, don’t care about green energy, and don’t spend time thinking about pollution unless it hits their immediate neighborhood.

If you want more people to take Amtrak, focus on the train experience itself. Show people that it’s much more comfortable to travel by Amtrak than by bus, that you can move around in a way you can’t on a long-distance bus, that you can look out the window at scenic sights such as the Rockies like you can’t on a plane, and that you can’t get food on a bus or (nowadays) a plane—but you can on Amtrak. Tell them that being in the train stations, many of which are historic buildings, is a pleasing experience, unlike the seedy atmosphere you find in many bus stations and the confusion you find at airports.

Make rail travel itself into an adventure. If you do so, you’ll definitely increase ridership.

Post Mortem: Anthony Weiner

Originally published in Brooklyn Daily Eagle

In the aftermath of the recent Democratic mayoral primary, some (although not a lot) of attention was paid to the concession speech of former Brooklyn-Queens Congressman Anthony Weiner. He maintained that he had the most innovative ideas of the campaign, but that he was an “imperfect messenger.” Perhaps to prove this point, he was photographed “giving the finger” to a reporter.

The strange thing is that Weiner may have been right about his election platform. A look at his usually-ignored “Keys to the City” reveals some strikingly innovative, far-reaching ideas. Here are some of them:

·        A single-payer health plan for the uninsured in New York City. Consider this—several states, such as Vermont and Massachusetts, have their own health care plans. New York City has more people than the entire state of Vermont.

·        Push mold elimination requests to the front of maintenance requests for housing projects. Mold is as toxic today as lead paint was yesterday.

·        Conduct an air rights audit for New York City properties, such as schools and police stations. Taking advantage of unused air rights could add millions to the city treasury.

·        Create a new Mitchell-Lama-type program to build housing for the middle class similar to the well-known program of the 1960s. Since Mayor Bloomberg took office, it seems that residential construction is done either for the well-to-do or for low-income people (the latter often proving a bonanza for politically connected non-profits).

·        Encourage the Housing Authority to buy energy-efficient lights, boilers and windows that will pay for themselves in energy costs and save untold amounts in repairs and day-to-day maintenance.

·        End arrests for small amounts of marijuana that take officers’ attention away from fighting serious crime. The main reason these laws are on the books is so that officers can show their superiors how many “collars” they made.

·        Give incentives for experienced teachers who choose to teach in low-income schools. Nowadays, most teachers who work in these schools are beginners who are waiting to get tenure so they can transfer out.

·        Eliminate city income taxes for New Yorkers who make $40,000 or less. This, Weiner said, will cost the city only “one half of one percent of the total budget, while generating hundreds of dollars in savings for middle-class and struggling New Yorkers.”

·        Put cab stands for yellow cabs in every borough. This would make it easier for yellow cabs to find fares in the outer boroughs and would attract more of them to Brooklyn, the Bronx, etc.

·         Institute “lead time” for pedestrians at traffic lights, giving them a few seconds of walking time before cars start to move. This would be a godsend to seniors who can’t walk fast.

·         Give incentives to cab fleet owners who choose hybrid or other energy-efficient cabs, rather than insisting that all cabbies drive the same vehicle (the “Taxi of Tomorrow”).

·         Give a bonus to families on food stamps who buy fresh fruits and vegetables, rather than penalizing those who buy unhealthy foods.

While some of these ideas may already be in Mr. de Blasio’s, Mr. Thompson’s or Mr. Lhota’s playbook, others are probably unique to Mr. Weiner. Just because Weiner’s personal behavior is suspect doesn’t mean his ideas aren’t worthwhile. If some of them are put into action, they, rather than the “Carlos Danger” scandal, could become Anthony Weiner’s most lasting legacy.

 

Memo: A Diner Isn't the Same as a `Greasy Spoon'

Originally published in Brooklyn Daily Eagle

Recently, to my surprise, I have seen many online references to diners as “greasy spoons” on the web. I have seen this misuse of the term on local blogs (one called the El Greco diner in Sheepshead Bay a greasy spoon, which is akin to calling a Mercedes Benz a jalopy) and even in the New York Post. I first saw diners referred to as greasy spoons about two years ago, which leads me to believe that this use of the term is fairly recent.
For the record, throughout most of my life, a “greasy spoon” referred to a small, unhygienic luncheonette that has about 10 items on the menu, has wobbly counter stools and a cracked counter and fries everything on the same griddle throughout the day. The very name “greasy spoon” connotes unhygienic conditions – it means the spoon is still greasy when they give it to you, meaning that they didn’t do such a good job of washing it.

Today, because of changing populations, the rise of fast-food joints and higher commercial rents, the number of these places is declining. But in my childhood, they were plentiful, and usually had a sign saying “luncheonette” outside. There usually was one person behind the counter who often didn’t make much of an effort to be nice to the customers. Nobody ate in these places if they could help it.

By contrast, most diners are extremely clean, occupy a large amount of space, are very well-lit and have waiters or waitresses who are very helpful. Just the large number of offerings on the typical New York City menu takes these establishments out of the realm of “greasy spoons.”

Of course, diners and greasy spoons do have several things in common. Both offer basic, non-pretentious types of food, usually of American origin (those foods of European origin that they do serve, such as eggplant parmesan, became assimilated into the American diet years ago). By contrast, I’ll be that many of the food writers who lump diners and greasy spoons together grew up eating sushi, tapas and Asian fusion cuisine. Diners are not what they’re familiar with.

People like myself, on the other hand, who grew up eating at diners, neighborhood Chinese restaurants, pizza places and Jewish delis, are very attuned to the differences between good and bad diners, good and bad pizzerias and so forth. We don’t lump them all together.

It may come as a surprise to some people that there is a movement to preserve classic diners. I remember when one famous Manhattan diner, the Cheyenne near Madison Square Garden, closed and preservationists started looking for places it could be moved to. There was a possibility that it could have been moved to Red Hook, but eventually the Cheyenne was separated into two parts, put onto trucks and taken to Birmingham, Alabama. Another old Manhattan diner, the Moondance, ended up in Wyoming. Diners were never a New York-only phenomenon.

I don’t think diners are the beginning and the end as far as cuisine is concerned. I’d rather have eggplant parmesan at an Italian restaurant than at a diner. I’d rather have grilled or poached salmon at an Asian restaurant than at a diner. But for good basic food – especially late at night, after other restaurants have closed -- you can’t beat the typical American diner.

So it’s time to honor the diner for its place in society. Please don’t call it a greasy spoon.

Why Not More Money for the Social Sciences?

From Brooklyn Daily Eagle

A while ago, in these pages, we ran an article about a plan to make the Brooklyn Tech Triangle (DUMBO-Navy Yard-Downtown) the biggest tech hub in the city, overtaking California’s Silicon Valley.The plan included re-doing office space with fiber-optic wiring, establishing new business incubators, collaborations between universities and tech firms, and creating amenities such as new pathways, restaurants, bike lanes, bus service and more.
Not expressly stated in the press conference, but closely related, is the upcoming conversion of the old MTA building at 370 Jay St. into a high-tech applied sciences school sponsored by NYU-Poly.
All in all, according to one of the organizers of the press conference, the Tech Triangle area is expected to support 19,000 tech-related jobs and 43,000 indirect jobs within two years.
I think this is a good thing – but it’s not the only thing. When the government and business “powers that be” can rest for a few minutes from pouring money and support into technology, why not have a similar effort to boost the social sciences?
Yes, that’s right. The social sciences, which have been around forever. I can just see someone asking, “What are the concrete rewards of someone studying sociology, history or political science?”
Well, look at all the problems of the world and the nation. People talk about the persistence of poverty in urban neighborhoods and rural hinterlands. If any solution is at hand, it will most likely come from sociologists and social workers.
Other people point to the ineffectiveness of state government, the persistence of the filibuster in Congress, how important bills can get bogged down in committees and so on. If there is any real reform in politics, it is likely to begin at political science departments at the universities.
Or maybe you’re worried about the sluggish economy, slow job growth, low interest rates and why Wall Street growth isn’t reflected in the general economy. If you’re preoccupied with these issues, you’ll have to turn to economists for answers.
Cultural anthropology? Well, the U.S. sends ambassadors all over the world. Many, perhaps most, American embassies are in non-Western nations. If U.S. diplomats want to make friends with local leaders, they have to study the beliefs, habits and customs of the local people.
But what about history? you ask. Surely, that’s frivolous – it already happened! Yes it did, but what happened once can happen again. If the government had studied the history of Iraq before we invaded that country, we wouldn’t have been so shocked when the moment after Saddam Hussein was overthrown, various factions started fighting each other in the streets.
I submit that the social sciences are as necessary to the development of society as is technology. However, their importance often gets lost in the pervasive cry of “We need more people proficient in math!” or “We need universal broadband access!”
By all means, let’s have more broadband access, more high-tech incubators, more schools of applied technology. Technology can save lives – look at the ways medical technology, such as laparoscopic surgery, has helped people. It can also save people from endless drudgery – look at the way computerized drafting has replaced what we used to call “mechanical drawing.”
But let’s have some support for the social sciences, too. No, they won’t bring in lots of jobs in the near future. But in the long run they will improve the quality of life on this planet.