text:
filmmaking for change
IFH 394: Using Filmmaking for Change in the World with Jon Fitzgerald
December 13, 2021 June 19, 2020 by Indie Film Hustle
Today on the show we have filmmaker and author Jon Fitzgerald. Jon has twenty-five years of experience in the independent film, internet, and film festival communities, a rare leader with a unique combination of skills. As a filmmaker, he has produced a number of award-winning documentaries; and as a consultant, he has guided many independent film projects through the maze of festivals and hybrid distribution models.
As a co-founder of the Slamdance Film Festival (1995), he led the event the next two seasons before being named the Festival Director for the prestigious AFI Film Festival in 1997. After running AFI Fest for three years (1997-1999), he created a consulting business, guiding the launch of numerous film festivals (Bahamas, Lone Star, Orlando), directing several others (Santa Barbara, Topanga, and Abu Dhabi), and consulting to dozens more.
Jon authored his first book, entitled Filmmaking for Change: Make Films That Transform the World, which was ground-breaking in the space.
Again, based on the premise that powerful stories can create change, Jon founded Cause Cinema, connecting social impact films to related causes. The Company acts as a filter to the best of social impact cinema, integrating numerous film programs, social action campaigns, and unique exhibition models, giving audiences the tools to take action.
Enjoy my conversation with Jon Fitzgerald.
Now guys, today on the show, we have John Fitzgerald. Now John is a very interesting filmmaker, because not only is he an award winning filmmaker, he's also the co founder of the slamdance Film Festival, and the author of the book filmmaking for change. Now this episode was recorded prior to COVID. And prior to the protest movement and Black Lives Matter, and everything that's going on in the world. But, man, when I went back to listen to it to get it ready for this episode, I could not believe how timely This episode is. So we talk about how to make social change with your filmmaking. And I think it's more important than ever before, that you make a change in the world with your art. And this episode in this conversation will help you get on that path. So without any further ado, please enjoy my conversation with John Fitzgerald. I'd like to welcome the show John Fitzgerald man, thank you so much for being on the show my friend.
Jon Fitzgerald 3:19
Absolutely happy to be here.
Thank you, man. And like we saying off air. You your book makes a cameo in my film on the corner of ego and desire. When we're in the bookstore we pan across is the first book that scene in it. It's not a quick pan there's it's a moment you read the title. So I wanted to give you a shout out for for the book. I love that. I love that. So before we get started The reason it's here movie. Yeah, exactly. Now, real quick before we get started, how did you get into the business?
Okay, I have a film degree from UCSB and broke into the train program at William Morris. And back then it was actually triad but it was it was acquired and did the development thing a while socking away my per diem, working on a script that I'd started in film school, and eventually raise the funds to shoot it. And like everyone else, really wanted to premiered at Sundance, but it wasn't to be. Fortunately for me, I had met a couple other filmmakers at the I FM in New York that year. And they didn't get in either. And so we all banded together and started slam dance. So I kind of by accident, became a festival director. We all did it together the first year as co founders and then I became the director for year two and three in Brighton. Peter Baxter was one of the producers of a film in the first year he came on as a creative director and then I moved on to take over As a fi fest director, and then Peter took over slam dance. So that's the short version of how I got into this indie film space.
That's it. And Dan has been on the show, Dan Mirvish has been on the show multiple times, and he's great. He also makes a cameo himself. Oh, man, he hustles man, like, there's no tomorrow. And he actually makes a cameo in the movie, and his book makes a cameo. I tried to bring as many people as I could.
He's great. And he, you know, I have to give him a lot of kudos. He's the one that you know, wrote the first press release that was in variety. And he was he was a big help. And he's, he's a great guy.
Now, um, you wrote a book called filmmaking for change. Now, I wanted to ask you what the book is about, and why did you write it?
Sure. Well, having done film festivals for a number of years, again, you know, as a festival director, especially curating movies, I found myself on a panel with Michael Lisi. And we're walking back to the hotel. And I said, Hey, I become more interested in what I call social impact movies and wondering, you know, why they don't have a book on this subject? What would it take to make that happen? And he said, Well, send me an outline and the first chapter and you know, if it makes sense, we'll do it. So that's kind of where it started. And it's true, I had become much more interested in, in documentary, and even narrative that that, you know, were movies with some social relevance. And so I did that book. And, and really was thinking along the lines with with some of the other books that this could be something that was taught in film schools, to really help filmmakers, learn how to take ideas, and make documentary, but not just talking heads documentary, but how do you how you take a core of an idea and sort of break it down into a narrative structure. And I used some other Michael ABC books, the hero's journey, for example, Joseph Campbell's hero's journey, and the 12 stages, I'm sure you're familiar with that. And so that was kind of the anchor for for the book and how to have, you know, development and production, and then distribution and how you could take all these pieces and think of these movies as, as, as more narrative stories, and and then I made a handful of documentaries along the way that I could kind of reference in the book as examples.
Now, documentaries are an easy, an easy play for social impact. They're kind of you know, if done correctly, they're kind of built to do that. Where I find it a little bit more complicated is in the narrative space. Do you have any tips or suggestions? And also examples of narrative films that have really hit us has created social impact besides coming to America? Of course?
Well, I it's funny, you say that, because I, you know, when I was writing the book, obviously, I had to do a lot of research to give it some context. And what you really learn when you kind of take a deeper dive is that a lot of movies over the years have been social impact movies, you're just not labeled that way. And you think you even think about, you know, Schindler's List. You know, you think of greenbook Yeah, right. If you think I mean, if you look at the Oscars the last few years, it's its spotlight, you think of a lot of big narratives that actually have something to say. And and so I think it's, it's not something that audiences are necessarily looking out for consciously. But I think because there's so much wackiness going on in the world. I think that one of the reasons why we're seeing kind of a spike in documentary and even social impact narrative is that people are more interested in learning now about the world around them in different cultures and, and getting to the crux of some of these big issues.
Now, how do you dance though, the line between preachy and entertaining because if you start preaching, people tune off even in documentaries to a certain extent. I'm a huge fan of documentary and you know, the whole plant based food movement was started with a documentary basically with four knives. Yeah, I'm sorry. Forks Over Knives is in my book as a case study. Yeah, fork over knives, food matters, all those kind of what the health and cow spear see and all these other ones. So they're very powerful and even back in the day with Roger and me with with Michael Moore and his social impacts with his documentaries. Yeah. But how do you dance the line between preaching and entertaining?
I honestly See think it's, it's it's a combination of different factors that don't necessarily all apply into each project, I think each kind of has their own their own anchor, obviously, with more you've got, you've got a charismatic figure who you kind of want to watch, because he's so crazy. But there's other, there's other documentaries, where the filmmaking style is really interesting, you know, you think about life itself, right? documentary made a few years ago, and they used animation. And this this, this, you know, this guy had grown up with with, you know, a disorder, essentially and connected back to Disney movies. And so I think it's really a question of what your style and your structure is, and, and if you can somehow weave in a narrative? Oh, I mean, there, there is a reason why, you know, there's a beginning, a middle and an end to most of the more popular stories, whether it's, whether it's a book or a movie, so, so I think that's the key. And I think, you know, filmmakers are getting it. And that's why if you look back, and to some extent, you could, we could thank Netflix, they've, they've really, you know, busted open the doors for documentary in the last few years, I think, with such a deep library, and, of course, HBO. So they're out there. And, and there's a, there's a reason why people are paying attention now. And I think it's because these stories are told in such an interesting way.
The one thing I found interesting about your book, and what you're trying to say with it is that it does really fall into the concept that I've kind of been preaching about, profusely over the last six months, or longer, is this whole concept of being a film shoprunner being a an entrepreneurial filmmaker, and finding a niche, and then feeding that niche providing service to that niche, impact social impact movies are literally that you think, I mean, unless it's a very broad, like, you know, racism, or the Holocaust, or even that those are still niches of the larger society. They're kind of pre built for that, do you have any tips on how, because I know, when you're making a social impact, film money might not be a specific goal. But if you're raising money for a cause, for for a foundation, then generating revenue is as important as if it was going into your own pocket even more so than at that point. So still, revenue generation is still extremely important for, for filmmakers even doing social impact movie. So do you have any recommendations in regards to what you've seen over the years?
Jon Fitzgerald 12:46
Yeah, that's a great point. And I love the idea of your book, by the way, and I, I've consulted for a number of years helping filmmakers kind of figure out their marketing and distribution strategy. And one of the things that I've been saying a lot in the last few years is you really have to think of your movie as a brand. And you have to think about it as a product and not just find a distributor, stick it on that show. And, you know, see how many people might find it, I, you do have to do all the things that I'm sure you cover in your book, in terms of, of social impact, what's what's interesting, is, you need to have a call to action. And, and when I talk to filmmakers about this, it kind of all starts with the goal. And then you back into the process from there. And each film kind of has its own goal, right? Because a film about homelessness is not necessarily going to have the same goal as a film about the environment. You look at a movie like racing extinction, you know, they created an amazing campaign. And I don't know if you had a chance to check it out. But the the new book that the second edition, has a whole new section, which is called activation to your point, which is, you know, how can you take this idea that was built with a mission in mind and put it in motion? And I think what racing extinction did, which was brilliant, is that they they took this concept of, of climate change. And and, you know, they put different challenges in there with call to actions. And did you know that animal agriculture is responsible for 14.5% of global mission? I mean, and then they talk about the fisheries as you know that 90% of the fisheries are over fish. So they talk about these issues, and then they follow up with with questions and solutions and what you can do as a person to make your contribution and I think part of the problem is that people get overwhelmed with the idea that oh my god, there's so many problems. How can little old me make a difference? You know, and I think it does have to start with us and we have to just know that every little bit counts.
Yeah, there's um I'm thinking a movie camp like boys don't cry, which obviously touched upon, at the time, really, you know that, you know, LGBTQ rights, which was something that was not even discussed when that movie came out really was kind of like one of those films. And it could have been at the end, like, hey, if you know somebody, put on it, go to this website, sign up, and get help, or whatever that might be or, you know, get assistance or whatever there is, there's always an ability, and I think the filmmaker just really needs to be very clear about what their endgame is. I've even seen big movies who that touched like, I mean, obviously, Schindler's List, you know, with, this was a social or social project that he that Spielberg created, which was, you know, to record every Holocaust survivor in America, you know, and he use Schindler's List as an as a catalyst for that as an educational tool. I think that you're right, that filmmakers really need to be very clear about what their endgame is. And also, I was going to ask you, how can filmmakers, depending on the the social impact of trying to make and the niche that you're trying to do? How could they? Or should they team up with organizations in that niche to get the word out in ways that you can't and also as a, basically free marketing, because if you're making a film about the environment, let's say we are specific, something even more niche than that. And there's an organization about that they have 1000s and 10s, of 1000s, and hundreds of 1000s of people on an email list, and they can market your film for free essentially, do you agree with that?
Absolutely. Just hit it right on the head. I mean, with with virtually all of these, what I call, cause cinema movies, you know, the these are, these are projects that have not for profits, depending on the category, whether it's the oceans, or homelessness or education, veterans, you name it, all of them have organizations to support this effort. And, and it is, in a way, almost a sponsorship or a partnership agreement that that is developed between filmmaking team and, and, you know, company, really, it's going to them and saying, Look, I've got this content, and it supports your mission, how can we help each other? How can you get our message out to your audience base, maybe it's giving you some content for your website, depending on what their forum is, but it really does come down to understanding after you get past, you know, underneath the layer of the goal, it's what's your, what's your distribution plan? Are you are you interested in playing on Netflix or HBO? And what if they don't want you? You know, are you? Are you going to play in schools? Are you going to play in high schools you to play in colleges? What is your What is your action campaign that supports the screening? Are you going to have bumper stickers? Are you going to have T shirts? What is your call to action? And I think once you back into what your distribution model is, I did a movie a few years ago called the Milky Way. And it's about breastfeeding in America nice and restoring the nursing phenomena, right? It'll blow your mind just how bad America is at this. This, really, and kids,
I trust me, I know, we did sue me. I was psychotic. And my kids were in my wife's belly. I was just like, I did so much research. I watched so many documentaries. It was like, Baby, you're breastfeeding. And she's like, I know, and Don't tell me what to do.
But what's what's crazy, though, is is that a lot of people just assume that, you know, formula, the nutrition factor or whatever, but they don't they don't realize it's the skin to skin in a anyway I know about. I know more about that now that my wife did when she was breastfeeding. But But the point is, is that these filmmakers weren't making it to make money. They Yes, they were on Netflix. Yes, they got the exposure. But it was more about how do we do a screening campaign that will give mothers an opportunity to see this movie and who are the right partners to do that. So with that particular film, speaking of tug, unfortunately, we did a campaign with tugg. And frankly, these filmmakers did not set the bar super high in terms of how many people had to see the movie to trigger the screening their thing and look at their 1520 moms in that theater. We're good that we help we're in so they didn't do it for money. And it's it's it's a wonderful thing to see when you see the emails flooding into ladies. They're both they're both essentially nurses in to see the impact they're having and that is a perfect example of a social impact film that we created with a beginning, middle and end. It has a story. There's the good guys and the bad guys There's some animation. And it's an interesting, it's an interesting story. But it does make a difference. And they knew that it wasn't about how much money they were going to make. It was about connecting to these groups, and having their Facebook and their Instagram and all these social media platforms and websites, in that nursing category that could do outreach for them. Because as audiences want to know about this subject,
We'll be right back after a word from our sponsor. And now back to the show. So let's since you've touched upon it, I want to talk a little bit about distribution. And that is, it's a dirty word, in many ways, and has become a dirty word. And at the end of the day, it's always wild, wild west, it's in people think it's, oh, no, everything's so much, you know, easier, or it's more controlled, there are rules, there's absolutely no rules, it's worse than ever. And I've literally, I actually had conversations today, actually with filmmakers, who are going through this whole tug situation if if anyone listening has not listened to Episode 373, where I, you know, break the story in regards to what happened with tug and, and what tug was and everything. But that there was documentaries, who had educational series and educational content that was licensed by tug. And now they're, they're going to lose eight to 10 grand and like, that's, you know, plus all the all the exposure for the cause, and everything. It's brutal out there. So it's brutal out there for filmmakers as a general statement. But it's even I think it's even a little bit more heartbreaking when you're when you're doing this for almost a nonprofit. And there are nonprofit filmmakers out there that just want the cause to get out there. And they still get screwed. And in the in the films get screwed. I mean, you're you're in that you're in this space, you're definitely in the space of distribution as well. So I'd love to hear your thoughts and ideas about what can be done, what should you look out for? And we touched a bit a little bit about the entrepreneurial filmmaking model, which I do believe is the future or hybrid version of that. But what's your what's your take on it?
Well, I I think I tend to try and look at things like a little bit more of the silver lining side, I, I do think that it is it is really disturbing when you hear about a stripper and tug. And these these, these companies that were doing so well for filmmakers that, you know, shut down. I will also say, though, that that by having so many new streaming channels, and frankly, channels that that aren't necessarily curating, there isn't as difficult of a barrier as there as there was some time ago. I mean, clearly, if you don't have a relationship with iTunes, you don't have a relationship with Netflix or HBO, it's gonna be hard for you to get good traction there. So I do think it's a challenge. I think, to your earlier point, I do think filmmakers have to be entrepreneurial now. Now more than they used to be. It wasn't just, I'm a visionary, and I'm going to create an idea, then give it to a sales agent who's going to rip me off and try and sell it. You have to, you have to build up, get creative on your own. But I do think there are a lot of opportunities out there, you still have to do your homework, you have to know who the right players are. And you still I believe, you know, some of these content creators are creating channels for themselves. Right. Roku has over 2000 channels now. Right. And there's gonna be some consolidation, of course, but but there's a lot of opportunity out there. You just got to do your homework.
Yeah, I mean, I even have my own streaming service, you know, so that's dedicated to filmmakers. So I mean, a lot of people have streaming services. And, you know, I think the future is curation. I mean, you can't like I agree, I guess I can't compete with Netflix. Not many people can Amazon can't compete with Netflix, let alone me. So they're the broad spectrum channels, I think will start to just die off because they won't be able to be sustained, their funding will finally crap out and they'll end they'll close. And I've seen that already happening. But I feel that the niche, the niche, or curated channels are going to be able to survive because people will want you know, if you're into documentaries, curiosity stream is a pretty good deal. I just, I just signed up for 12 bucks for the year. I'm like, okay, it's Yeah, it was a quick like, end of the year ever Black Friday sale. I was like, Yeah, sure. I might wait, why Why? Why not? You know, so that that makes sense. And I think you're right, there's just so much more homework. That filming
There's a lot out there. There's a lot out there and I do I do agree there's going to be some consolidation for sure that there won't be 2000 And channels in five years, but but the point is, do your homework and see which of these channels have your niche, you know, and and I do think that there is something to be said for curation, especially if you're focusing on a specific category, I think, you know, throwing as many ideas against the wall and just hoping a channel that has 17 genres is going to promote your title. That's, that's a bit more of a challenge. But I do think, especially for dogs, and some very specific, like sci fi, very hot, right. So I think if you if you if you're in a certain category, and you do your homework, and you can find a home, you have a chance to succeed there. And I still think having a website and, and having fans and creating community, as you know, I mean, those are, those are the audiences that would come and see your next movie. So I still think you don't want to just give it up and wait for the checks to roll in. You gotta you gotta gotta keep hustling
When you're preaching to the choir on that one, but, but I see it too, that the distributors, you know, when I was at AFM this year, they're they're scared, they don't know what to do. I mean, all their golden calves are gone. So they they're, I asked, I literally asked a distribution company was in a meeting with me, I go, you guys really have no idea how you're gonna make money this year are you they're like, we're just gonna throw up things as many things up against the wall as we can and see what sticks and things are and the wall is moving. And the things you're throwing up against the wall are moving. So it's a constant game of musical chairs, and nobody really knows what's going on. So that's kind of why I always again, talking about entrepreneurial is the exploitation of the movie is one revenue stream. While you should be creating multiple other revenue streams from other products and or services, like food, like I mean, a fork over knives, I mean, those guys, I have them in my book as a as a case study as well, because yeah, they were really food matters. Fat, Sick and Nearly Dead. Even even Kung Fury, Kung Fury, that little short film, remember that? That guy he you know, the niche of 80s action movies? I wouldn't say that's a social impact film, but depending how you look at it, that's okay. That's okay. Um, I worked on a really bad Steven Seagal movie. You mean? So? Um, pretty much almost all of them except for the first maybe three or four?
Yeah, well, I've done the ground I have to say like,
Oh, wait, is that the one? Is that the oil one?
Yeah, and actually on Deadly Ground is the one that I worked on.
Okay. Horrible. It's horrible. It's someone with Michael Caine right
Under siege I think was the first one right that he was actually decent at. So under siege way.
So are arguably, this is my time of life. So I worked in a video store during this time. So this is I there's like I've said before on the show, there's a window of time that I will challenge anybody to a trivia situation. So from 87 to 93. I pretty much watched everything that was put out. So during that time there was above the law hard to kill mark for death out for justice. And then underseas showed up out in the middle of the pack. Yeah, so under siege, I would argue is probably his best and was his biggest hit and it was a warner brothers release. above the law. Not bad. I have a small good place for me in hard to kill. But I did remember he did on Deadly Ground. If that's if I'm not mistaken. That's the oil one in Alaska. Yeah, with Michael Caine. And he directed
McKinley, Billy Bob Thornton. It was a it was an awesome cast. But he directed he directed it. Yeah. And he was
so drunk on his own power. I could only imagine what that was like.
But it was a cast of what not to do in studio production that that movie would check all the boxes. But that was
but that was a movie if I remember correctly, that was a social impact movie. He was trying to say something about American Eskimo, was it Eskimos or American Indian and oil and the Alaska. It was Alaska. So it was like the natives of Alaska and all this. So it really was a bit preachy, if I remember correct, it was like a bit preachy. It was bad. It was just bad. nothing good about bad cinema. It it started to it started to do
a lot about it, was it It puts the money in my pocket. Did I say I could get closer to making my independent film that was the kind of helped me get to slam dance. That's the that's the way to look at it.
That's an absolutely wonderful way to look at it, my friend. Now, um, do you have any tips for finding funding for the social impact films because when you're doing a social impact film, funding opportunities are more relevant than the action movie star. Eric Roberts and Michael Madsen. So you have places you could go to get that work. Do you have any tips for that for
the listener? Well, you know, I do, I do cover that a little bit in the book. And I have a list of, of organizations, and it really just depends kind of on how much you're looking for. There's probably half a dozen or so and I know seeding the spark has has a lot of information about that. fledgling, you can, you can go to the doc, the IDA, website Chertsey a really long list of organizations that support docs, a lot of grants. What, what's also interesting is that is the crowdfunding campaign is kind of shifted to equity crowdfunding, yep. And so now you can get a you can get a piece of the movie instead of just, you know, a T shirt. So, so I do think there are a lot of opportunities. And as we both know, you can you can make these movies for next to nothing. So it's just a question of how creative how creative you can be. But the other thing I'll just add is there are companies like creative visions, right, that, that really support as a fiscal partner, and with a lot of tools and outreach, and a lot of examples, and they have talks and they bring filmmakers in and they they really support this social impact space, with a lot of information and resources, that that are hard to find in one in one shop. So that's another organization to know about. And I think moving forward, there has been definitely an uptick in social impact cinema over the last 20 years,
I mean, just from the moment where I was talking that little magical moment when I worked at a video store that you know, from there, I don't remember seeing many, you know, it was the ad so is a little different. But there wasn't a lot of social impact films, but they have becoming more and more and more and more. That God I can't believe unconvenient Inconvenient Truth. Yeah, that launched an entire conversation.
I talked about that a lot in my book. Oh, that's what that's what triggered me.
That was such a great, it was such a great. It's such a powerful use of the medium. I mean, what they were able to do, and I actually taught trailer editing in colleges and classes, and I bring out the Inconvenient Truth trailer. That trailer was so well edited. It was so powerful, and it's al gore in doing a slideshow slideshow, like incredible what they did. They made the movie he made al gore kinda cool. It was kind of weird watching that. And then you watch a movie like supersize me which completely started a conversation a global conversation about obesity and about food and about so much so that the multi billion dollar company stopped supersize. Exactly it was it It was amazing. So these films do do hit and in the in the just hypersensitive times that we live in where any little thing offends the corporation's are so sensitive to this. So if Can you imagine if supersize me showed up today? Oh, my. Oh, my Could you imagine? Because that was like, that was that pre that wasn't pre internet, but it was like early. It was early. He was really whenever that come out? Like That was the 90s it wasn't Yeah, it's more than it was more than 10 years ago. No, it's definitely the 90s if I'm not mistaken, but late 90s when when that came out so late 90s or early 2000s but it was like pre Facebook free pre insane social media. I know you're looking it up go ahead go look it up to try and find it while you're talking. But yeah, but so the I think that there is an uptick and I think it's a very powerful way for a filmmaker to make a difference in the world and also change minds and and help people with with this because we have we work in arguably the most powerful media in the world as far as cinema television content like the video content. You know, you can watch a movie and your life changes like yeah, make a difference you know, yeah, and and and it Yeah, so 2004 By the way, okay, good. I was I wasn't too far off.
Not too far. But the the thing is, these movies are movies that you you start a dialogue with somebody that may not know anything about it, right? You see something it's like hearing a new song, you want to tell your friend about that new song, you see one of these movies in it and it strikes you somehow makes you want to talk about it and share the information and one of the things that I think is is the next wave. I started this bit with cause cinema and then I got sidetracked with these other ideas but is, I believe There needs to be a more concentrated approach at connecting the cause to the movie. And so that if you see the movie, when you finish the movie, you're actually on a landing page that tells you more about the causes, if you want to get involved or make a donation or read more about it, that's something that hasn't really happened yet. And I think, you know, participant media was, was the was the likely candidate to assume that role, and they did a lot with with their digital, and then they shut it down. So somebody needs to do that in a big way. Because what you don't want to do is see one of these movies that can really make a difference, and then kind of go out to dinner and forget about it, right? You want to be able to make a difference. And that's why calls to action are so important.
Yeah, I just saw the film game changers, which was I just read that was the biggest documentary in iTunes history within two weeks, which about vegan athletes. And I've had so many people publicly now come out like Dolph Lundgren and iron, Robert Downey, Jr. and all these people that watch the documentary that just like, yeah, I'm changing. I'm not trying to preach here, guys eat your meat, it's up to you. But I'm just I'm just using it as an example of a film that's had immense impact. I mean, I haven't seen an impact in that space as much probably since either what the health or fork over knives wasn't fork over knives, the first that I
think Forks Over Knives, well, I think food matters might have come around first, but I think Forks Over Knives is the one that really busted it open. And they were smart talking about your entrepreneurs. You know, they they had, they had a companion piece. They had a magazine, they had a website. I mean, they've created a whole franchise around this, but but i think i think that, you know, Louis, who also did the cove, right, yes. And extinction. So he knows what he's doing. He's got an Oscar and he knows how to make a difference. And I think with with that movie came out of Sundance last year, right, I didn't see it, they're game changers. So yeah, it's gonna have an impact for sure. And more importantly, back to your other comment about distribution. It doesn't really help if you have a message and nobody sees it. Right. So you got it. You got to find your audience and and not everybody's going to have the luck of, of an acquisition at a Sundance and and an iTunes,
iTunes deal. And also having James Cameron or Schwarzenegger and Jackie Chan as your executive producers. That doesn't, doesn't didn't hurt in the least. It's a man I wanted. I wanted to thank you again, for being on the show. I'm gonna ask you a few questions. I asked all of my guests. What advice would you give a filmmaker trying to break into the business today?
I think I think mentorship is key. Find people that are doing what you want to be doing, and reach out to them because most of them are willing to help. And and if you know what genre you want to be in, try and find somebody that's making projects in that genre. I think one of the other one of the other challenges is some people think they want to make movies, but it turns out, they don't want to make movies, they just want to be connected to the movie business. So I think, you know, part of the challenge is to figure out which part of the business you want to be in right? And and then figure out who can mentor you and give you advice on on on the best path to reach that goal.
So I see you mean to tell me there's people in the business who just want to be famous and don't really care about the work stop at Johnston. Yeah. And next you're going to tell me distributors are you know, a lot of distributors are predatory. Like what do you what do you say? What is it's up is down, down is up cats and dogs living together? mass hysteria?
I think the key is get into a train program and and be willing to do internships because a lot of those internships lead to full time gigs.
Yeah, and if not a start punch. And if not, you start building that rhinoceros skin that you need that you need to build up in this business without question. Right. Now, what is the lesson that took you the longest to learn whether in the film business or in life?
I think the lesson that I learned over time in the film business was I kind of believe that if you did something and you did it really, really well, that you, you'd be able to make a lot of money. I love that. That's awesome. And then I realized, okay, if I want to be a really good curator at a really good festival director, or I want to teach film classes, or write or write books, unfortunately, most of those don't generally pay. making documentaries is not going to make you rich. Now, I'm not saying I got in this to get rich. I'm just saying I think I kept saying I'm not going to think about The financial picture of what I have to do to get my kids through school. Sure, I'm gonna work really hard and, and so I think the lesson was, you know what you got to go the other way you got to you got to love what you do. And fortunately for me, I've loved every minute of this journey. I've got to make movies, I've got to meet and discover tons of filmmakers. I love what I do. But But you, the lesson I learned was you can't think about where the money is going to come from. And think that just if I do this really well, I work really hard. And I'm good at that the money will come because the truth is some of these, some of these categories in the film space don't pay as well as you know, producing a movie for 20 Century Fox. And even those films sometimes are Disney.
Exactly. There's no more 20 Century Fox or Come on, come on, it's gone now. And three of your favorite films of all time.
I have to say Citizen Kane. I saw it in film school. And no, that's kind of an easy answer. Life is beautiful. I had the pleasure of showing with Panini and everyone there at the Chinese when I was running a FF I love that movie. And Gosh, my third one. I think one of the most impactful movies for me kind of coming out of film, school. Sex lies and videotape.
Yeah, Soderbergh's first film and actually what put Sundance in the mouth?
Yeah, very influential. Well, he generalists are three, those are three, three big ones.
Yes, even is, in general, very influential. What he does, and what he's doing now with iPhones is pretty insane. So I'm glad there's someone like him out there doing what he's doing. And for that, and for that same back and forth. And also, I'm glad that you're out there doing what you're doing, and fighting the good fight and helping filmmakers. Find not only, you know, meaning sometimes in using this medium to actually help other people, which is very important, but also helping them find their path in this business and in life. And if you once you get a taste of this, of doing something social and something that helps other people, it's fairly addictive. And very rewarding. Yeah, yeah, it might you might not live in the Hollywood Hills, but you're happy, you're happier, I feel but you know, you live in the Hollywood Hills and have social impact. I mean, look, Arnold did it.
One of the taglines I use for cars cinema was she good? Do good, feel good? Hey, that kind of sums it up, right? You get to see good social impact movies. You want to do good, right? With the call to action, and you'll feel good for doing so.
That's a that's an amazing,
Thanks for having me. Man. I it's it's an honor to be here. I've been I've been listening to your show and huge fan.
I appreciate that. But thanks so much. And real quick, where can people find you and you and your work?
causepictures.com is is is kind of my my anchor organization. And then for the book, filmmaking for change, obviously.
Thank you so much, brother, I appreciate you coming on the show and keep fighting the good fight my friend.
Thank you, you too.
I want to thank john so much for being on the show and being an inspiration to the tribe on how to use your filmmaking to change the world to change society. And again, guys, you know, you don't have to put all the pressure of the world and the world's problems on your art and on your films and on your writing. But you can make a slight change, use a theme you something that can can change somebody's mind to, to really help the world as a whole. It is, I think really, really important that you use this very powerful medium that we call filmmaking, to make a change in the world in any small way we can. Now if you want to get links to anything we spoke about in this episode, including links to his book, filmmaking for change, head over to the show notes at indiefilmhustle.com/394. And if you haven't already checked out the new indie film hustle Academy where we have awesome assortment of film education, courses, and workshops and seminars. Really high end stuff for the tribe. Just head over to eye f h academy.com. Thank you for listening guys. I hope you're all staying safe out there. It is crazy and getting crazier. Please stay home. Please protect yourselves and protect your neighbors wear a mask if at all possible. When you go out and and try to do whatever you can to make this world a little bit better than it was before you got here. Thank you again so much. As always, keep that hustle going. Keep that dream alive. Stay safe, and I'll talk to you soon.
Jon Fitzgerald – Official Website
Jon Fitzgerald – IMDB
Jon Fitzgerald – Facebook
Jon Fitzgerald – LinkedIn
Categories Blog, Directing, Podcast Tags filmmaking for change, Jon Fitzgerald


A new and creative way to raise money for your community, cause or school!
Tell us about your cause and get the ball rolling!
All of our headbands are up for grabs! Order headbands in bundles of 5 per print. Oh, and ask us about custom headbands for your cause/fundraiser!
Get 30%-50% off all headbands! Fundraiser bundles have a minimum order of 50 headbands. The suggested retail price of our custom fundraiser headband is $10.


text:
Chicago's Race Riot of 1919: The Beginning
January 2, 2017 January 2, 2017 / tamaratabel	/ 2 Comments
The 29th Street Bridge After Eugene Williams' Death
(Chicago History Museum)
Sunday, July 27th was sweltering. Temperatures soared to 96 degrees. To escape the heat, hundreds flocked to Chicago's beaches to cool off in the water of Lake Michigan. But the playful morning would turn violent by afternoon. Skirmishes between blacks and whites would break out at the 29th Street beach.
The First Fighting of the Day
As with much of the violence in the city that summer, the fighting revolved around territory. Several black men and women had strolled to 29th street beach to go swimming—a beach defined by unwritten law as being a "white" beach. The group of blacks was rebuked with curses, threatening gestures and rocks.
Chicago's "White" Diversy Beach
Minutes later the blacks returned with reinforcements and hurled rocks. This time the white bathers fled. But soon the whites reappeared, their numbers burgeoned with sympathizers, and they released a new barrage of stones.
The Spark that Began the Race Riot
Among the beachgoers that day was a group of four black teen-age boys from Chicago's South Side, near 53rd and State. The teens headed toward a secret spot north of 26th Street that they called the "hot and cold," where hot chemical run-off from the brewery vats mixed with effluents from a nearby icehouse and the cold lake water. There they had a 14 x 9' raft hidden. They met Eugene Williams, another black teenager from a different neighborhood further north, and he joined their water activities.
The teenagers floated out on their home-made raft. None of the five were good swimmers. Holding onto the raft, they began kicking, driving the raft further out into the lake. For amusement, they set a goal of reaching a marker nailed on a post several hundred yards from shore. Their path took them toward 29th Street.
Unaware of their location or of the earlier skirmishes, the teenagers continued to "swim, kick, dive and play around." Innocently, they edged into the waters of the "white" 29th Street beach.
The Murder of Eugene Williams
About 2:00 p.m., a white man named George Stauber threw rocks at the teenagers from a breakwater. The boys made a game of it, shouting warnings to each other and ducking as the rocks and bricks hurled toward them. Then Stauber hit his mark. Eugene Williams was struck in the forehead and slipped under the bloodied water.
One of the teenagers on the raft, John Harris, dog-paddled and swam underwater to shore and raced back to get a black lifeguard from down the beach, who sent a boat around. Beachgoers, both white and black, dove into the water to try to save Eugene. But it was too late. Eugene had drowned. Divers recovered Eugene's body 30 minutes later.
The Beach Explodes
The panic on shore then turned to anger. Blacks pointed out Stauber to the white police officer on duty as the man responsible for the rock throwing, but Officer Daniel Callahan refused to arrest Stauber and prevented a black officer from making the arrest. The policemen argued.
Meanwhile, Harris and others ran back to 25th Street beach and "told the colored people what was happening, and they started running" to 29th Street.
The argument on the 26th Street beach raged on. Still refusing to arrest Stauber, Callihan then arrested a black man on the complaint of a white. Driven by news of the drowning and unfounded rumors on both sides, angry blacks and whites swarmed the beach. The crowd grew to 1,000. When paddy wagons pulled up to take the arrested black man into custody, bricks and rocks were thrown by both parties. A shot was fired at police. James Crawford, black, wounded one of the white officers with his revolver. Jesse Igoes, a black officer, then shot Crawford in the abdomen, fatally injuring him.
More shots were fired. O'Brien shot at the retreating crowd, hitting two more black men. The black crowd grew and attacked white men, beating four whites, stabbing five and shooting another. Within 15 minutes, the original mob was dispersed, leaving 40 rioters and several policemen injured.
The race war had officially begun.
Fighting Spilled Into the Streets
Rioters from the 26th Street beach now spread through the streets of the south side. Individuals of both races fanned out through their neighborhoods to rally reinforcements.
Young White Men Running to Beating of a Black Man (Chicago History Museum)
Blacks shared news of Eugene's death; whites reported blacks' violence on the beach. But, other unfounded rumors also spread: the white officer had, by gunpoint, prevented swimmers from helping save the boy; blacks drowned a white man; blacks were stockpiling weapons and breaking into armories. Though false, the rumors further fueled the simmering conflict between the races.
Calls for retaliation found their way west of Wentworth Avenue just beyond the western boundary of the Black Belt. The athletic clubs jumped at the excuse to start a rampage. They armed themselves with baseball bats, knives, revolvers, iron bars, hammers and bricks, in search of any black person unlucky enough to be in their territory. Then they made their way into the Black Belt.
The Black Belt
By evening, Chicago's south side was a battlefield. Skirmishes erupted in and around the Black Belt, the predominantly black area of the city. The south side—from Cottage Grove Avenue and State Street from 29th south to 35th Street—was in pandemonium.
White Men with Bricks on the Chase
Shots rang out. Rocks flew. Members of both races were shot and stabbed. Blacks pulled a white fireman from a passing engine and beat him. A black man leaning out his window to watch was hit by a stray bullet.
The Deputy Chief of Police, John Alcock dispatched all available police officers to the south side. Hundreds of mounted police stormed up and down the avenues. But just as police dispersed a warring group of blacks and whites, the confrontation would begin again two or three blocks away. Overwhelmed, police concentrated on transporting the wounded to hospitals. Doctors and nurses worked overtime to care for the injured.
Few arrests were made. This allowed attackers and witnesses to slip back into the battles.
Sunday's Tally
Shouts and gunfire reverberated through the streets of the South Side from nine o'clock Sunday night until three Monday morning.
When the fighting on Chicago's south side finally waned, the injury count was 27 blacks beaten, 7 stabbed and 4 shot.
On Monday, July 28th, Chicago's riot made national headlines. The Chicago Daily Tribune reported 2 killed and 50 hurt in the Race Riots. Yet the Tribune's larger front-page headline read: "Full Confession by Slayer of Janet." The sensational story featured news of Thomas Fitzgerald's confession to the choking death of Janet Wilkinson after luring the neighbor child into his apartment with candy. He had hidden the girl's body under coal in their apartment building's basement.
Big Bill Thompson, Chicago's mayor, just back from a trip to Cheyenne, Wyoming, rode in a parade dressed as a cowboy. At City Hall, Thompson dismissed a reporter's question about the rioting saying that it seemed to be over. Thompson was much more interested in talking about Fitzgerald's confession and fears of an impending transit strike.
Police Deputy Alcock assessed that the fighting had passed.
Blacks returned to their jobs at the stockyards, in factories, in restaurants, as porters and at other jobs. Deliveries were made. The streetcars ran. Chicago seemed back to normal.
But the white gangs were far from done.
Gary Krist; City of Scoundrels: The 12 Days of Disaster that Gave Birth to Modern Chicago; Crown Publishers; 2012
Cameron McWhirter; Red Summer: The Summer of 1919 and the Awakening of Black America; St. Martin's Griffin; 2011
William M. Tuttle, Jr.: Race Riot: Chicago in the Red Summer of 1919; University of Illinois Press; 1996
The Roots of a Riot: Chicago 1919
December 31, 2016 January 15, 2017 / tamaratabel	/ 1 Comment
Black Home After a Bombing
During the summer of 1919, Chicago experienced one of the worst Race Riots in the nation's history. At the end of the eight-day conflict, 15 whites and 23 blacks were dead and at least 537 seriously wounded.
Although the length and brutality of the riots were unanticipated, the seeds of the riot had been planted in the years and months leading up to that day in July of 1919. Many factors combined to unleash hatred and violence against Chicago's blacks. And a new-found rage against inequality drove the blacks to fight back.
Crowded Housing in Deplorable Conditions
The Great Migration saw the numbers of blacks rise. Between 1910-1920, Chicago's black population soared from 44,103 to 109,458—an increase of 148.2 percent, the largest increase rate of any ethnic group in the city. From 1917 to 1919 alone, an estimated 50,000 black migrated to Chicago. (Source: Red Summer) And these new black immigrants were crammed into a small stretch of land called The Black Belt, crowded into dilapidated housing for high rents and without adequate services. The slum conditions were further stretched with more than double the population than before the war.
Tension in the Workplace
Business owners in the meatpacking, corn refining and steel industries used black workers to break strikes, undercut wages and further tensions between the ethnic groups. Southern rural blacks were recruited through ads, some saving to buy their own train fare, and others brought up free on special "company" trains.
Front Entrance to the Stockyards in Chicago
Most black workers were not unionized, which led to tensions with other ethnic groups who did support unionization as a way to increase wages and better working conditions. Blacks were understandably wary, as the factory owners held the power over their jobs and often supported community groups and activities in black neighborhoods.
The end of World War I saw increased competition for jobs combined with a declining demand for goods, and, therefore, jobs. White servicemen looked to return to the workforce, while blacks and other immigrant groups struggled to hold on to the jobs they had gained.
Black Veterans Demand Equal Treatment at Home
The 370th Infantry Regiment of Chicago
Returning black soldiers felt that their service to protect freedom and democracy abroad should also extend the basic rights of adequate housing and equality in their own country. When these rights were denied, many grew angry. (Pictured above are soldiers of the 370th–one of the few black regiments that was allowed to fight in World War I.)
"The return of the Negro soldier to civil life is one of the most delicate and difficult questions confronting the Nation, north and south."
— George Haynes, Fisk University professor and director of Negro Economics for the U.S. Department of Labor.
House Bombings
A precursor to the physical bodily violence was a rash of house bombings. In a little over a year, 25 homes belonging to blacks or to realtors who sold to black were bombed. One of the bombings resulted in the death of a black girl.
Between February 5 and June 13 of 1919, eight bombs or dynamite containers exploded on doorsteps of buildings in the city's south division—buildings on streets adjacent to the "Black Belt," which was about 80 per cent black.
Reports after the rioting lay much of the blame of violence on groups of young white men in so-called social clubs called "Athletic Clubs." These groups of teenagers and young men, many of the roughest of whom were of Irish-American decent, played baseball and threw parties, but they also wreaked havoc by staunchly defending their territory with the "color" line at Wentworth Avenue. They terrorized blacks for years. They created problems for black packing house workers as the workers needed to cross the Irish "Back of the Yards" neighborhood in order to get to work, making blacks subject to assault and intimidation.
Chicago claimed a number of these "athletic clubs". Perhaps, the most notorious of these was the Morgan Athletic Club in the Stockyards neighborhood, known by its honorary title of "Ragen's Colts" after its founder and benefactor, politician Frank M. Ragen. One source cites a membership of nearly 3,000, with a vigilante slogan of, "Hit me, and you hit 3,000." While Ragen's Colts controlled a large neighborhood in the Irish section of the South Side near the stockyards, other groups held additional sections of the South Side. These gangs included Our Flag Club, the Sparkler's Club, the White Club, and the Hamburgers. (Source: McWhirter)
Ragen's Colts Sports Team
When the rioting began, the athletic clubs unleashed their full fervor against black residents and workers. They had been waiting for a race riot and fully exploited the opportunity.
The future mayor, Richard J. Daley, was a 17-year-old member of the Hamburg Athletic Club in 1919, an Irish-American organization later identified as one of the clubs responsible for instigating the riots. It was never concluded that Daley himself participated in the violence.
The Chicago police force was predominantly white, and further, predominantly Irish. There were only about 300 black officers in the entire city. Many white officers had a reputation for being less than fair to blacks. Walter White of the NAACP, in his 4-week investigation of the riot, cited "police inefficiency" and "unpunished crimes against negroes" as two of the "eight reasons" for the violence. (White)
Fight for Political Power
The black voting block in Chicago was a force. Mayor Big Jim Thompson had actively sought the black vote during his campaigns, contributing heavily to his wins. Many whites resented this voting power held by blacks, and athletic clubs were known to disrupt black polling places on election day.
A Summer of Race Riots
Prior to Chicago, the nation had seen an outbreak of racial violence. In the summer of 1919, race riots broke out across the country: Washington, D.C.; Knoxville, Tennessee; Longview, Texas; Phillips County, Arkansas. and Omaha, Nebraska. In fact, the months from April – November 1919 were so tumultuous and bloody, it was called "Red Summer". Riots and lynchings claimed hundreds of lives. The white supremacist Ku Klux Klan organization revived its violent activities in the South, including 64 lynchings in 1918 and 83 in 1919. (History.com)
Two of Chicago's Most Famous Predicted the Riot
A well-known prophet of the riot's outbreak was Carl Sandburg. Although many know of him through his poems, (my favorite line being "The fog comes on little cat feet"), Carl Sandburg was a reporter for the Chicago Daily News. He covered conditions in the Black Belt prior to the riot and also reported on the riot's aftermath.
Carl Sandburg in 1920
Sandburg went into the neighborhoods to investigate discrimination. He noted that blacks received lower wages and working positions, yet paid higher rents than whites to live in crowded and run-down buildings. He found an infant mortality rate 7 times higher than in other neighborhoods. And blacks told him of their desire to flee lynchings in the south and better their living standards, the quality of schools for their children and their ability to be involved in the democratic process of voting.
Sandburg highlighted these issues in a series of 16 articles for the paper, (which included a summary written after the riot). It appears no one paid too much attention.
Ida B. Wells-Barnett was even more direct. She wrote a letter to the Chicago Tribune, warning that Chicago was on the brink of riot, and would become another East St. Louis.
Ida B. Wells-Barnett Warned of a Coming Riot
Wells-Barnett knew of what she spoke. The previous summer, she had gone down to East St. Louis, Illinois, to gather facts after that city's race riot. The two-day riots had left 150 blacks dead and almost one million dollars of property destroyed. As she accompanied black women back to their homes in a Red Cross truck, she saw the devastation. Homes looted. Pianos, furniture and bedding destroyed. Windows broken. Some homes even burned. But more alarming were reports that the soldiers had not intervened when black people were attacked. She reported her findings to Illinois' Governor but could not get blacks to testify. Her only success was in raising money through an article in the Defender to free Dr. Bundy, a black dentist facing a life sentence for leading a group of blacks to arm and defend themselves.
Here is Wells-Barnett's letter to the Editor. It is a fervent plea for action, as she notes how the home bombings and other acts of violence mimicked those prior to the East St. Louis riots.
Barnett's Letter to the Chicago Tribune , July 7, 1919
"Will the legal, moral, and civic forces of this town stand idly by and take not notice here of these preliminary outbreaks? Will not action be taken to prevent these law breakers until further disaster has occurred?"
Unfortunately, no one heeded her warning.
Catherine A. Welch: Ida B. Wells-Barnett; Carolrhoda Books; 2000
Carl Sandburg; The Chicago Race Riots: July, 1919; Dover Publications; 2013 (Originally published by Harcourt, Brace and Howe in 1919)
William M. Tuttle, Jr. ; Race Riot: Chicago in the Red Summer of 1919: University of Illinois Press; 1996
Walter White; "The Causes of the Chicago Race Riot"; The Crisis, XVIII (October 1919), p. 25
"Prelude to a Riot: Irish Athletic Clubs and the Black Belt in 1919"; Americanhistoryusa.com
"The Chicago Race Riot of 1919"; History.com; 2009
"Ragen's Colts"; Saturday, February 7, 2009; The Chicago Crime Scenes Project; chicagocrimescenes.blogspot.com
"The Race Problem in Chicago"; by Ida B. Wells-Barnett on June 30; published in the Voice of the People section, by the Chicago Tribune, July 7, 1919
Chicago's Packinghouses: The Assembly Line Jungle
November 28, 2016 / tamaratabel	/ 4 Comments
Packinghouse workers in the early 1900s endured hot, loud and dangerous conditions. Irregular working days swung wildly depending upon live animal shipments and production needs. On Mondays and Tuesdays, when cattle shipments typically arrived, sometimes working days stretched from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. or midnight. Summers were a lull period where layoffs were many. Wages were low for the unskilled and injury rates ran high—the Armour plant averaged 23 accidents per day in 1917.
It was a buyers' market. Packinghouses opened each morning to 200 – 1,000 willing workers waiting for jobs. Foremen or yards policemen went out to the gate and choose the number of workers needed that day from the strongest in the crowd. Only about 10 men in a gang of 200 were "steady time" men, guaranteed a full 6 days of pay. Many others were hired as "casual" workers, meaning that a worker might only be asked to stay the day or only a couple of hours as needed, for as low as 15 cents an hour.
(Pictured Below: Swift Beef Department Dropping Hides and Splitting Chucks 1906: Library of Congress)
The Birth of the Assembly Line
Although Henry Ford is credited with creating the assembly line in the manufacture of his Model Ts, the hog slaughterhouses of Cincinnati were the first to utilize an assembly line process as early as the 1830s.
To help speed the time-intensive slaughtering and cutting processes, the packinghouses used extreme division of labor, where each man might perform a single cut or task. Because of the odd shapes, and differing size, weight and quality of the animals, many aspects did not lend themselves to mechanization. So instead of mechanizing the process of dismantling the animals, packinghouses mechanized how the carcasses were moved from station to station. Slaughtered animals were raised with hoists, and moved along overhead rails and along conveyors. Men no longer brought the hogs and cattle to each station—the work came to them.
The all-around butcher, who had been in use as late as the 1880s, was now replaced by a killing gang of 157 men. The jobs were divided into 78 different "trades." Each man performed his individualized task 1,000 times a day.
The time-savings were enormous. The slaughtering and hanging process that had taken 3-4 men up to 15 minutes per animal, now could be done by one "shackler" who could hoist 70 cattle carcasses each minute by clipping the shackle around the hind foot and letting steam power raise the animals up.
"Looking down this room, one saw . . . a line of dangling hogs a hundred yards in length; and for every yard there was a man, working as if a demon were after him." The Jungle
At the Mercy of the Foreman
Packinghouses ran on low margins. The cost of the animals (the raw materials) made up 89 cents on the dollar, leaving little room for profit. Because the work could not be mechanized, the only option was to increase output. In other words, to make the men and women work faster.
In 1908, the endless chain in hog slaughtering was seen as a major breakthrough. It prevented the slowest worker from regulating the speed of the entire gang.
Now, the foremen on the killing floors controlled the speed of the conveyor line with a lever—men who were incentivized to process the highest number of animals at the lowest cost or lose their own jobs. Even small changes in speed could increase outcomes and profits. The pace of the work drew the most complaints from workers.
(Pictured: Armour Hog Scraping Rail 1909: Library of Congress)
The packinghouses worked to break unions and encourage constant competition. The companies established rivalries between houses within the firm and among foremen within the same house. Companies exchanged data on line speed and other factors. The fastest men were given higher paying jobs as "pacers" and were placed at critical points in the production flow, setting the pace for rest of the line. Less skilled "go betweens" were trained to fill the job above them, so positions could be filled when a skilled worker was absent for a day, and the threat of being replaced on a permanent basis kept skilled workers diligent.
"If you need to turn out a little more, you speed up the conveyors a little and the men speed up to keep pace."A Packinghouse Superintendent
Because of the great number of immigrants and black migrants looking for work, packinghouses also had the power to break strikes. It was the strike of 1904 that brought a new group of blacks up to Chicago.
The Largest Employer of Black Workers in Chicago
Blacks' reputation as "scabs" began with the strike of 1894 and repeated itself in 1904. During this second strike, labor agents recruited an estimated 10,000 black workers. Special trains carried black workers from Southern states and dropped them into the stockyards and alongside the packinghouses. In a single day, 1,400 arrived. As well, packinghouses brought trainloads of immigrants from Ellis Island and moved skilled workers from small rural plants.
As a whole, the blacks distrusted unions and lay their loyalties with the packinghouses themselves, though some blacks did join forces with their white co-workers in solidarity with unions. Employers went to great lengths to nurture a direct relationship with black workers through donations to black churches, Y.M.C.A.'s and the formation of black baseball teams. Though this courting did not include high wages (blacks held some of the lowest and lowest paid positions), the money was still better than many blacks could earn in their home states, especially if they were employed in agriculture as sharecroppers.
As WWI raged, the combination of plummeting immigration, white soldiers traveling overseas to fight, and the need for increased production to feed and defend U.S. and Allied soldiers, gave Southern blacks an opportunity at new and well-paying industrial jobs. Thousands traveled north to Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, Cleveland and Evansville, Indiana.
Between 1915 and 1920, roughly a half-million blacks migrated to northern cities. The Great Migration saw Chicago's black population burgeon. In 1890, blacks made up less than 2% of the city's population. During WWI, the black population rose to over 100,000.
The Department of Labor figures show that the number of black packinghouse workers in Chicago jumped three to five times from 1917-1918. For example, one major Chicago packing house only had 311 black workers in January of 1916, but employed 3,621 by the end of 1918.
By 1920, the Meat Trust was the largest employer of blacks, holding more than one-half of all of manufacturing jobs in Chicago's Black Belt. The next largest employer was the steel mills, with less than one-quarter of black jobs.
In total, Chicago would gain more than 500,000 of the approximately 7 million southern blacks during the entirety of the Great Migration. By 1970, blacks would represent 33% of Chicago's population—one-third of the city's people.
Great Diversity
Chicago's Union Stockyards and the surrounding slaughtering and meat-packing plants offered unparalleled diversity. More than 40 nationalities were represented, with diversity in age, gender and work experience.
The early immigrants to the trade included the Irish and German. They maintained the highest paying "knife jobs". This was followed by Bohemians, (coming from the industrialized region of what is now Czechoslovakia), and later Lithuanians, Poles, Russians, African Americans and Mexicans.
Although they worked side by side within the packinghouses, ethnic groups rarely mixed outside of the walls of their employers, each group staying within its own ethnic neighborhoods within Chicago. This lead to great overcrowding in Chicago's Black Belt and was one of the factors contributing to Chicago's Race Riots of 1919.
Chicago and the Great Migration, 1915-1950; Hana Layson with Kenneth Warren; The Newberry Digital Collections for the Classroom; dcc.newberry.org/collections/Chicago-and-the-great-migration
Down on the Killing Floor: Black and White Workers in Chicago's Packinghouses, 1904-54; Rick Halpern; University of Illinois Press; 1997
Great Migration; Encyclopedia of Chicago; encyclopedia.chicaghistory.org
The Great Migration in Historical Perspective: New Dimensions of Race, Class & Gender; Edited by Joe William Trotter, Jr.; Indiana University Press; 1991
The Jungle; Upton Sinclair; Barnes & Noble Classics; 2003 (first published in 1906)
Prelude to a Riot—Irish Athletic Clubs and the Black Belt in 1919; American History USA; americanhistoryusa.com
Work and Community in the Jungle: Chicago's Packinghouse Workers 1894-1922; James R. Barrett; University of Illinois Press; 1990
"World War I and The Great Migration"; History, Art & Archives, U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Historian, Washington D.C., U.S.; Government Printing Office, 2008.
Chicago's Black Soldiers in WWI: The 8th Regiment/The 370th Infantry
September 30, 2016 January 1, 2017 / tamaratabel	/ 2 Comments
Black Infantry Soliders Marching Verdun
When the United States finally entered the war in 1917, blacks newspapers and leaders encouraged blacks to join the war. The Crisis stated that "while this war lasts, forget about our special grievances and close our ranks shoulder to shoulder with our white fellow citizens."
And young black men responded. The overwhelming feeling among the black soldiers was that if they fought for the principles of democracy overseas, that it wold translate to equality for them back home–equal rights, equal treatment and opportunities equal to whites.
The could not know how wrong they would be.
How Many Blacks Served in the Great War
Upwards of 400,000 blacks serves–a combination of volunteers, regular Army units and the National Guard. Of that number, 340,000 were drafted. But only 200,000 served in France. Many remained stationed at camps throughoutthe United Stated providing manual labor. And of those sent overseas, only 42,000 served as combat troops.
The Harlem Hellfighters – 369th Regiment
Undoubtedly, the most famous of the black fighting troops were the "Harlem Hellfighters" of New York. Yet another regiment fought just as fiercely: The 370th Infantry of Chicago.
The 8th Regiment of Illinois/The 370th Infantry
The Germans called them the "Black Devils", especially because of the black troops' ferocious fighting at St. Mihiel, the Argonne Forest and the Meuse. Embedded within the French troops, they earned the name "Partridges" from the French because of their proud military bearing.
The 370th Regiment
The 8th of Illinois was the only regiment in the entire United States Army that was commanded almost wholly by black officers—from Colonel Franklin A. Denison to Lt. Colonel James H. Johnson, to three Majors and a Captain. (Torchbearers page 214).
Though the soldiers' accomplishments were many, from the beginning they had challenges. The first blow came when Colonel Charles Young, their commander, the highest ranking black officer in the United States Regular Army and a graduate of West Point, was found not physically fit to serve and was retired from active duty, despite his fervent protests. His troops and the black newspapers were angered by this decision, feeling that Young had been unjustly denied active duty in the Great War and denied promotion to Brigadier-General (which he would have automatically received upon being called to active duty) simply because he was black.
The second blow came when the decision was reached to have black combat troops serve with the French army, as Pershing did not wish them to serve under him. Pershing even went so far as to send a letter to the commanders of the French troops warning them not to ruin the negro troops.
Black Soldiers
at Rifle Training Behind the French Lines
Despite having to retrain with French equipment, including rifles, the 8th fought gallantly.
For their service, The United Stated awarded 21 of the regiments' heroes with the Distinguished Service Cross. The French government's honors extended even further. They awarded 68 soldiers with the Croix de Guerre.
Upon return to Chicago, the 8th Regiment received a hero's welcome with a parade attended by thousands. But the pride and acknowledgement by the other communities in Chicago was short-lived.
By July of 1919, Chicago would see one of the most violent Race Riots in the nation's history. But, in Chicago, as in Washington D.c., there was a difference. The blacks, including soldiers of the 8th Regiment, fought back.
The Unknown Soldiers: African-American Troops in World War I; Arthur E. Barbeau & Florette Henri; Da Capo Press 1996 (Originally published by Temple University Press in 1974)
Torchbearers of Democracy: African American Soldiers in the World War I Era; Chad L. Williams; University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill; 2010
1919, The Year of Racial Violence: How African American Fought Back; David F. Krugler, Cambridge University Press; 2015
America's Suffrage Movement
July 24, 2016 July 24, 2016 / tamaratabel	/ Leave a comment
Fighting for a Woman's Right to Vote:
The History of the 19th Amendment
The woman suffrage movement in America began before the Civil War. Little did they know how long and bitter and brutal the fight would be. The 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote was not nationally ratified until August 26, 1920. It had taken 72 years.
The Suffrage movement in the U.S. began in 1848 as an offshoot of the anti- slavery movement. It solidified as its own separate movement after the 15th Amendment extended the vote to African-American men, but not to any women. In 1869, two suffrage organizations were founded: The National Woman Suffrage Association and the American Woman Suffrage Association. The two groups had varying views on how to achieve the right to vote, but finally joined forces in 1887 to form the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA).
In the 1870s, the first attempt at a proposed Amendment (then the 16th Amendment) failed to pass and appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court fell on deaf ears. The national suffrage leaders knew they had to do more. Their response was to initiate a grassroots campaign in each state to obtain state suffrage amendments. The thinking was that if enough congressmen began to support women's rights on a state level, a federal suffrage amendment, approved by Congress, would soon follow.
By 1890, the leaders of NAWSA realized that to be successful they would need to "bring in the South." This was a troublesome proposition. Many white southern men viewed the anti-slavery movement and women's movement with the same contempt. Men, and even some southern women, felt women should stay in their traditional roles as "southern ladies," allowing men to rule wisely on their behalf. This would be a battle they would continue into the next century.
The Voices of Women for Women
The most vocal and well-known activists of the early efforts were Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
Susan B. Anthony was born in 1820 into a Quaker family with long activist traditions. In her lifetime, Anthony worked as an abolitionist, educational reformer, labor activist, temperance worker and suffragist. Her work in the temperance movement taught her that women needed to vote in order to be heard by politicians and to influence public policy. She met Elizabeth Cady Stanton in 1851 and attended her first women's rights convention in Syracuse in 1852.
The two women joined forces. They believed the Republican party would reward them for their help in garnering support for the 13th Amendment to abolish slavery. But they were wrong.
Anthony campaigned through the 1860s and 1870s. In Rochester in 1872, she was arrested for a crime. She had dared to vote. In 1877, Congress laughed at the 10,000 signatures she had gathered on petitions. In 1900, at the age of 80, she retired as President of NAWSA and in 1904 presided over the International Council of Women in Berlin. She went before every congress from 1869 to 1906 to ask for passage of the suffrage amendment. Anthony died in 1906, 14 years before the 19th Amendment passed–the amendment also known as the Susan B. Anthony Amendment.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton served as president of the National Suffrage Association and as the first president of NAWSA. After serving 20 years for the cause, she resigned in 1892 at the age of 77. In her resignation speech, "The Solitude of Self," Stanton stated that as an individual human, a citizen and a partner to man, a woman deserves the "solitude and personal responsibility of her own individual life. …Nothing strengthens the judgement and quickens the conscience like individual responsibility. Nothing adds such dignity to character as the recognition of one's self-sovereignty; the right to an equal place, everywhere conceded… ."
Nothings adds such dignity to character as the recognition of one's self-sovereignty… Elizabeth Cady Stanton
In the south, Nellie Nugent Somerville and Belle Kearney joined the struggle to convince fellow southerners that a federal amendment allowing women to vote was not a threat to the south.
In the north, some suffragists questioned why illiterate and immigrant men could vote while intelligent, literate women could not.
In 1915, Carrie Chapman Catt became head of the National Woman Suffrage Association. She developed a two-prong political strategy called the "Winning Plan" that went after both state laws and ratification of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Alice Paul took a more confrontational approach. In 1913, she organized a protest of 5,000 women to march up Pennsylvania Avenue on the day of Woodrow Wilson's inauguration–the first time it had ever been done. (Pictured below, is Inez Miholland in the parade of March 3, 1913.)
Two years later some 40,000 men and women marched in a suffrage parade in New York–the largest parade ever held in the city. And in 1917, Alice Paul and her supporters picketed the White House, six days a week, day and night, through sun, rain or snow. They carried signs that read:"How Long Must Women Wait for Liberty" and "Mr. President, What Will You Do for Woman Suffrage." Some chained themselves to the White House fence.
Political Tennis Ball
By the early 20th century, efforts to convince individual states to grant voting rights to women had achieved some success. Women already had full voting rights in 15 states–most of them west of the Mississippi. Wyoming, a territory where men outnumbered women 6-to-1, passed a woman's voting bill as early as 1869 in the hopes that it might attract single women to balance out the gender difference, while driving the population to the threshold needed for statehood. Plus, the Republican governor needed to support women's rights in the same way his party had supported African-American voting rights.
Unfortunately, this was not a national trend. Many states, particularly those in the south, opposed the passing of the 19th amendment on many grounds. Some southern politicians were still in opposition to the passage of the 14th and 15th Amendments, which, respectively, provided voting rights and civil protections to African-American men. Ratifying the 19th Amendment, they argued, would suggest that they approved of these earlier amendments, (which they were required to pass before being allowed back into the Union), and thus supported interference in state's rights. Plus, women weren't intellectually qualified to vote anyway.
State-by-state passage also had opposition within the suffrage movement itself. Some believed that "no" votes at the state level diluted national support of the amendment.
President Woodrow Wilson held off his public support of the amendment until the result seemed inevitable.
A Long, Treacherous Path
Women endured terrible hardships in the name of equality. Susan B. Anthony was struck down in the street. Alice Paul's picketers were physically attacked. In 1917, almost 170 picketers were arrested on the charge of obstructing traffic and sentenced to up to 6 months in a cold, damp jail.
Over 30 of those prisoners went on hunger strikes and were force fed through tubes. In 1918, an appeals court struck down the convictions.
Many of the prisoners went on a "Prison Special" tour in February and March of 1919, where they went across the country in their prison garb speaking on their mistreatment in prison.
Pictured right is Abby Scott Baker. Pictured below is a photo of suffragists Catherine Flanagan (left) and Madeleine Watson (right) of the militant National Woman's Party being arrested as they picket outside the White House.
Victory at Last
It would be 72 years before the first rumblings of voting rights for women would finally result in the 19th Amendment's ratification, when the state of Tennessee became the 36th and final state to ratify.
The first time all women in America could voice their voting power was the Presidential election of 1920. Even so, two states did not allow women to vote in the fall election. One of the states was Mississippi. In fact, Mississippi did not officially ratify the 19th Amendment until March 22, 1984.
"The State Where Women Voted Long Before the 19th Amendment"; Christopher Klein; August 26, 2015; history.com
"Suffragist"; National Susan B. Anthony Museum & House; susanbanthonyhouse.org
Mississippi Women and the Woman Suffrage Amendment; Marjorie Julian Spruill and Jesse Spruill Wheeler; Mississippi History Now: An Online Publication of the Mississippi Historical Society; mshistory now.mdah.state.ms.us/articles/245/mississippi-women-and-the-woman-suffrage-amendment
"The Solitude of Self": Stanton Appeals for Women's Rights; History Matters; history matters.gmu.edu/d/5315
"August 20, 1920 – Women's Suffrage Victory – 19th Amendment Becomes Law"; Jone Johnson Lewis; About.com
"The Struggle for Women's Suffrage: New Arguments and New Constituencies: 1880-1920"; digital history.uh.edu
Everett Historical
Map reproduction from the Norman B. Leventhal Map Center at the Boston Public Library (posted on history.com)
The Great Influenza
June 1, 2016 September 28, 2016 / tamaratabel	/ Leave a comment
The Deadliest Pandemic in History
The Great Pandemic of 1918-1919 was the deadliest pandemic in the history of the world, killing more in one year than the Black Death of the Middle Ages in a century. It infected about one-third of the planet's population. Original estimates during the 1920s put the death toll at 21.5 million. More recent estimates put the global mortality figure considerably higher—between 30 and 50 million, or even as high as 100,000 million. An estimated 675,000 were Americans. More Americans died from the Flu than perished in WWI.
The Spanish flu was 25 times more deadly than the ordinary flu. There are stories of men coming home sick from work and being dead by morning. Some collapsed where they stood. Many of the infected succumbed within 24 to 48 hours after becoming symptomatic.
But even more frightening was who got sick. Although most flus kill the very young and old, this strain killed healthy men and women in the age group of 20- to 40-years-old in alarming rates. Roughly half of those who died were in their twenties and thirties—the prime of the lives.
Death Was Swift and Horrific
Most infected people had a high fever of 100 – 104 F that lasted a few days. The onset was sudden—people felt dizzy, weak and in pain while at work or in the street. Once the disease became established, the mucous membranes became reddened with sneezing and sometimes hemorrhaged, causing bloody noses. Patients coughed. But the real danger came if the influenza infection progressed to bacterial pneumonia. This phase was often fatal. Victims' lungs would develop thick, bloody fluid, and the lack of oxygen would turn their faces blue. They would bleed from their noses and ears, and a pinkish froth would spew from the mouth. After hours of anguish, victims would suffocate—drowning in their own lungs.
The lungs' violent reaction was the body's way of trying to throw out the virus. The immune system toxins designed to destroy invaders went into overdrive and literally scorched the lung tissue. Thus, those healthy 20 – to 40-year-olds—like soldiers in the camps—had the strongest auto-immune response and therefore the highest death rates aside from infants and the old and weak.
The Deadly Flu Spread Rapidly
Because it was wartime, soldiers crossed from camp to camp, and across oceans, spreading the disease across the world. In the summer of 1918, over 1.5 million Americans crossed the Atlantic in the war effort—some from Kansas. The Flu resurfaced in Europe in all of the armies—including the English, French and German. As it spread, the microbe mutated, becoming more deadly by the day.
Cities were hard hit. In New York, 851 people died in a single day. Over 11,000 died in Philadelphia in October of 1918. Death carts roamed the streets. The dead sometimes lay abandoned in gutters. Cities had to resort to mass graves. Crepe on the doors of house after house marked death inside.
People were terrified. Would this disease ever stop? Would it prove the end of mankind?
The Disease Came in Three Waves
This original version of the influenza occurred in the late spring and summer of 1918 as was relatively mild. As the virus mutated, it became more severe and more deadly. The deadliest was the second wave that erupted in the fall of 1918. The final wave hit during the spring of 1919. The last two waves had a much higher frequency of complicated, severe and fatal cases. The severity and speed of the disease was unprecedented. Never before had three extensive pandemic waves of influenza occurred in rapid succession in the same year.
Why it Was Called the "Spanish Flu"
It is important to remember that at the outbreak of the Flu WWI was still raging. The governments of countries actively involved in the Great War—France, Germany, Britain and the United States—did not want the press to print anything negative that might hurt morale. But Spain remained neutral during the war, and reported freely on the disease, especially after King Alphonso XIII himself fell seriously ill. The disease became known as "Spanish Influenza" most likely because only Spanish newspapers were truthfully reporting the spread of the disease.
Why Couldn't They Stop It?
Towns and cities did what they could. Most governments imposed curfews, suggested masks be worn and banned any public gathering—including funerals. Churches, schools, theaters, pool halls and saloons were all closed. Some towns tried to close their borders altogether.
Yet, the virus continued to spread.
The reasons were many. Because of WWI, governments moved troops within their own bases and sent thousands of troops into battle in Europe despite warnings. Misinformation and lack of Information was rampant, such as the mistaken belief that wearing a mask could stop the virus from entering the lungs. People in close proximity, both in military camps and cities, made it easier for the disease to spread to new victims.
Various vaccines were developed and tried with no success. But the vaccines were based on a false premise. Researchers thought the bacteria collected from the lungs of the dead was the cause of the disease and worked to combat the pneumonia bacteria. What they couldn't see was the influenza virus itself—microscopes in 1918 simply weren't strong. That technology would take decades.
The Start of the Pandemic
Many medical and conspiracy theories circulated at the time. Some thought the Germans had planted the germ. The evangelist Billy Sunday blamed it on sin. Those in the medical field scrambled to identify what "it" was, at first misdiagnosing it as malaria or thinking it might be a new kind of infection or plague, as it was more deadly than any flu they had ever seen before.
John M. Barry suggests in his book, The Great Influenza, that The Flu began in America. The first reported cases were at Fort Riley, Kansas. An Army private and mess cook Private Albert Gitchell, reported to the camp hospital early on the morning of March 11, 1918. His complaints: fever, sore throat and headache. By noon, over 100 soldiers were ill. By week's end that number jumped to 500.
Fort Riley stretched 20,000 acres. Winters were brutally cold, summers sweltering, and dust storms blinding. In addition to housing 26,000 men, Camp Funston also held thousands of horses and mules that produced nine tons of manure each month. The common method of disposing of it was to burn it. On Saturday, March 9, 1918, a black sky and driving wind warned of a coming dust storm; yet, the camp burned its daily manure. The dust and ash of the burning manure combined in a stinging, stinking yellow haze. Soldiers ordered to clean up the soot and ash worked with no protection. Two days later, soldiers began falling ill. The Fort was thought to be "Ground Zero".
Yet, other evidence shows that the flu hit the United States, Europe and Asia at approximately the same time—in March of 1918. Viral sequence data suggest that the 1918 virus was novel to humans, and not a "reassortant virus" produced from old existing strains. Evidence points to swine and avianlike viruses jumping to humans—an H1N1 strain. Older individuals, those born before 1901, may have already been exposed to an earlier strain of The Flu, thus providing them with some immunity to the disease.
Whether Fort Riley was the lone source of the virus will likely never be definitely proven.
The Great Pandemic: The United Sates in 1918-1919; www.flu.gov
The Great Influenza; John M. Barry; Penguin Books; 2004, 2005, 2009
Influenza 1918: The Worst Epidemic in American History; The American Experience; produced by PBS; 1998
Pandemic Continuity Specialist; https://pandemicspecialist.com/2014/07/15/the-great-take-away-from-the-great-war-1918/
1918 Influenza: The Mother of all Pandemics; Jeffery K. Taubenberger and David M. Morens; wwwnc.cdc.gov
The Worst Flu Pandemic on Record; neiman.harvard.edu
The Medical and Scientific Conceptions of Influenza; virus.standford.edu/uda/fluscimed
Pathogenic Responses among Young Adults during the 1918 Influenza Pandemic; G. Dennis Chanks; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Volume 18, Number 2 – February 2012
The Great Migration: Chicago
April 4, 2016 June 17, 2016 / tamaratabel	/ Leave a comment
Thousands Flee the South for Chicago
Between 1915 and 1970, six to seven million African Americans left their mostly rural homes in the South to start new lives in the cities of the North, Midwest and West. Many moved to Chicago, Detroit, New York, Philadelphia and Los Angeles. Often, they followed the train lines.
These immigrants had strong reasons to flee the South.
Following the Emancipation Proclamation and Reconstruction, state legislatures throughout the South had passed laws to limit liberties of blacks and to keep the races socially separate–in marriage, housing, education, healthcare and government. Known as Jim Crow, these laws, combined with social mores of the times, created a racial caste system.
Blacks had to step off the sidewalk when a white person approached, couldn't contradict a white person or speak first, were relegated to the lowliest jobs, had sub-par schools and were virtually barred from social/financial upward mobility. Even though black men had been legally granted the right to vote in the 15th Amendment, (ratified on February 3, 1870), they were dissuaded from voting through poll taxes, literacy tests, intimidation and out-right physical violence. Without being registered voters, black men could not serve on juries; and, thus, those accused of crimes had little chance of a fair trial from all-white juries.
Their migration was a response to an economic and social structure not of their making. They did what humans have done for centuries when life became untenable. … They did what human beings looking for freedom, throughout history, have often done. They left. — Isabel Wilkerson
Migrants fled Jim Crow laws to more racially tolerant cities. They fled for the right to vote. They fled for the chance to make something of themselves. They fled to take jobs in the burgeoning manufacturing sectors–jobs that had now opened up due to WWI, as borders were closed to European immigrant workers and many white males workers joined the fight "over there".
And they fled in fear.
Lynchings were again on the rise in the South. Fear of losing their cheap labor, and increased resistance spurred by disgruntled sharecroppers and returning black servicemen, spurred white Southerners to a campaign of terror.
"Every time a lynching takes place in a community down south you can depend on it that colored people from that community will arrive in Chicago inside of two weeks." — Secretary Arnold Hill of the Chicago Urban League (As quoted in Carl Sandburg's book The Chicago Race Riots)
So many black men, women and children were murdered in race riots in 25 towns across the country from April – October 1919, (especially in the September 1919 Elaine massacre in Hoop Spur, Arkansas), that the summer of 1919 was named "The Red Summer".
Chicago: Beulah Land
Chicago already had an established black community going back to the 1840s. And in fact, Chicago was founded by a black man–Jean Baptiste Point du Sable–who started a muddy settlement on the shore of Lake Michigan at the mouth of the Chicago River in the 1770s.
Between 1916-1918, at least 110,00 migrated to Chicago alone, nearly tripling the city's black population. At its height, ten thousand blacks every month overflowed the Chicago railroad platforms and overwhelmed the already crowded Black Belt. Ultimately, more than 500,000 Great Migration immigrants settled in Chicago.
There was an almost reverant attraction for Chicago, as divinely inspired deliverance from the land of suffering, likened to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. It was viewed as "The Promised Land" and called "Beulah Land".
Employers, Relatives and the Chicago Defender
Early on, companies sent recruiters to encourage black workers to come for factory jobs, sometimes even paying train fare. Southern towns eventually taxed labor agents out and word of mouth drove enough new labor that businesses no longer needed to offer incentives.
"Pioneer" immigrants wrote glowing letters of ample and high-paying job opportunities, sent back photos of themselves in fancy clothes and sometimes even traveled back to bring their families North. These "migration chains" linked Chicago with many southern communities, especially in Mississippi.
Declaring May 15, 1917 as the date of the "Great Northern Drive," the Chicago Defender waged an aggressive recruitment campaign, reporting lynchings in detail and and lauding life in the North. The newspaper listed jobs and trains schedule to facilitate relocation. With a circulation of over 100,000, the Defender was the country's premiere black newspaper, with a large Southern readership, and is credited with driving thousands of Southern readers to move North.
The Illinois Central train line ran directly from New Orleans through Jackson, Mississippi to Chicago, so many new Chicagoans heralded from Mississippi. It was not always easy to get away. Blacks were forcibly removed from the trains and their tickets torn to shreds by white landowners fighting to keep their labor in place. To escape, blacks walked miles to the next town so they would not be recognized, often under cover of darkness. When the trains crossed the Mason-Dixon line, black travelers murmured prayers or a few even flexed their new-found freedom by moving into train cars that just minutes before were deemed segregated by law.
Adjusting to City Life
Train travelers were met by family members or former townspeople. Sometimes whole congregations moved to Chicago en masse, forming an instant network. The newly established Chicago Urban League often met travelers at the train station, first, to help them find housing and jobs; and, secondly, to help with employer problems and to better assimilate into their new surroundings.
The adjustments were huge. Rural blacks were not used to the crowded conditions, indoor factory work, constant noise and cold winters. There was also an inherent cultural difference. In the Jim Crow south, for example, a black woman seeking maid work would be viewed as "uppity" if she arrived at an interview dressed in nice attire. She was supposed to arrive "dressed to work." Yet, in the North, if she arrived at a job interview dressed in her work clothes, she was viewed as unprofessional and not really wanting the job as she didn't even bother to make herself presentable.
The Chicago Urban League held "Stranger Meetings," where black club women secured pledges from migrants to dress and act appropriately in public. They distributed a "Self-Help" handout listing rules: Do not loaf. Get a job at once. Do not carry on loud conversations in street cars and public places. Do not keep your children out of school. Cleanliness and fresh air are necessary for good health.
Still Far to Go
Although the migrants enjoyed more freedoms and better paying jobs than in the South, living in Chicago was not exactly as rosy as relatives and newspapers painted it to be. These newly relocated blacks were forced into already overcrowded, over-priced and under-kept tenement housing in Chicago's "Bronzeville" neighborhood.
Despite the best efforts of the League, the Defender and the established middle class, the influx of such a large number of rural, mostly uneducated blacks raised racial tensions, especially with Irish gangs who viewed them as competition for jobs and housing. Violence and discrimination ran rampant. August of 1919 would push opposing sides to the breaking point.
The Warmth of Other Suns; Isabel Wilkerson
On the Laps of Gods; Robert Whitaker
Chicago and the Great Migration, 1915-1950; Hana Layson with Kenneth Warren; The Newberry Digital Collections for the Classroom
Great Migration; History.com
Great Migration; Encyclopedia of Chicago, encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org
Newspapers: The Chicago Defender, Founder Editor Robert S. Abbott; pbs.org

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Phonegap app working locally, not working on phone I have written a phonegap application, and it performs a pretty simple task, it gets some JSON from a YQL link, and then displays it nicely to the user. This works excellently when I run it using Google Chrome on a Desktop, but, my client tells me that it does not work on his device which is Android 2.3. What can be going wrong? I'm using phonegap build to build to app, and they tell me that it is given internet permission, but, when my client puts the APK on the phone (its not on the market yet), does he need to do something special for it to access the internet?
Thanks a lot,
Dhaivat

A: in phonegap, allow external host : Open phonegap.plist -> external host and add your url or * to allow all

A: within the phonegap app the webapp runs under the file:// protocol - this might affect things.
you should test this at least on an emulator yourself - clients usually screw up anything some might screw up when testing ;) best would be to test on an actual device tho.

A: I'm not sure if this will help but I had a similar problem testing my app here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17496104/json-wordpress-feed-not-appearing-in-android-studio-emulator-using-phonegap
I needed to change access origin to ="*"/ in my config.xml

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Vote!! Primary election March 24. Jaxonpool endorses for Mayor: Bill Bishop (R), see Lenny Curry's plausible denial; for Sheriff: Jay Farhat (R); At-large city council seats: #1: Anna Brosche (R); #2: John Crescimbeni (D); #3: Tommy Hazouri (D); #4: Greg Anderson (R); #5: Ju'Coby Pittman (D); District city council seats: #1: Melody Shacter (D); #2: Lisa King (D); #3: Aaron Bowman (R); #4: Ramon Day (D); #5: none; #6: none; #7: James Eddy (R); #8: Terry Fields (D); #9: either Garrett Dennis (D) or Glorious Johnson (D); #10: Joseph Willis (I); #11: none; #12: Abner Davis (D); #13: none; #14: Jason Tetlak (D).