Making Amends With George Costanza
August 21st, 2008 by Rich FigelThe Advertiser blog strike is supposed to start Monday, Aug. 25, so after Sunday I don’t know when (or if) I’ll be back. One issue is staff writers want to be compensated for extra work, such as blogging, Fair enough. But shouldn’t freelance bloggers be paid for our contributions as well? Content is content, and the Advertiser should pay writers who provide it.
Anyhow, getting back to my Step Study series, here’s what I’ve covered so far: Steps 1 - 3, we admit being powerless over certain things and turn to a Higher Power for help; Steps 4 - 7, make a searching moral inventory of ourselves, admit our wrongs to another person, and ask our Higher Power to help rid ourselves of these defects.
Step 8 says, “Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.” Which is followed by Step 9: “Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.”
This ties in with the Step 4 moral inventory, but wisely the Steps provide a little reflection time before you make amends. Telling someone the complete truth might be hurtful in some instances, so Step 9 says that would be the exception.
I began making amends with my wife and family while I was still in rehab. Then I made long distance calls to friends on the Mainland or sent letters. Everyone was supportive and forgiving. Fortunately, I didn’t have a George Costanza in my life…
You remember that Seinfeld episode, right? The one where Jason, a recovering alcoholic (played by James Spader) fails to make amends as far as George is concerned. At a party years ago, Jason wouldn’t let George borrow his sweater because he was worried George’s “bulbous head” would stretch out the neck hole.
So after George learns from Elaine that Jason is making his amends calls, he confronts Jason and asks for an apology. However, George isn’t satisfied with Jason’s “sorry” and continues to pester the recovering alky until he has a relapse, and both of them wind up at a Rage-aholics Anonymous meeting.
Very funny riffs on 12 Step programs. Here’s a transcript link for “The Apology” episode.
Although Larry David didn’t write that Seinfeld episode, here’s a bonus link to a New Yorker article from last year about how schizophrenic mental patients responded well to his HBO show, Curb Your Enthusiasm (”television’s purest expression of social dysfunction”) because they identified with his character — “the perfect proxy for a schizophrenic person.” Now there’s a guy who should be in Rage-aholics Anonymous!
Just for fun, will post some snips from the “The Apology” episode in my comments for your weekend reading enjoyment.
Tags: 12 Step programs, addiction, George Costanza, Larry David, making amends, recovery, Seinfeld
August 21st, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Episode 165 - The Apology, Season 9, Broadcast date: Dec. 11, 1997
Script excerpts:
Jerry’s apartment…
ELAINE: So guess who called me last night? Jason Hanke.
GEORGE: ‘Stanky Hanke’? What did he want?
ELAINE: He called to apologize for standing me up five years ago.
JERRY: Why now?
ELAINE: A.A. It’s one of the Twelve Steps. Step number Nine is you have to apologize to anyone you’ve ever wronged.
GEORGE: Ho ho ho ho! I can’t wait for Hanke to come crawling back to me.
JERRY: Still with the neck hole?
GEORGE: Still upset. Very upset.
ELAINE: What neck hole?
GEORGE: Remember that New Year’s party he threw a few years ago? He had that very drafty apartment, you know, I think on Ninth Avenue. I asked if I could borrow a sweater.
JERRY: A cashmere sweater.
GEORGE: I said preferably cashmere, for warmth. So in front of the whole party, he says, ‘No. I don’t want you stretching out the neck hole.’
ELAINE: Ha ha ha ha!
GEORGE: Oh, yeah, sure, laugh it up. Everybody else did!
ELAINE: Well, it’s funny. I mean, you have a big head. Or is it ’cause of your neck?
GEORGE: Regardless. I had to walk around for the rest of the party in some cheap Metlife windbreaker. Now, it is payback time.
At diner…
(JASON) HANKE: Hey, George. Jerry. Listen, I just got sober, so I’ve been going through the Twelve Steps.
GEORGE: What are you up to now, uh, Step Nine?
HANKE: Yeah. Making amends.
GEORGE: Important step. Maybe the most important.
HANKE: Anyway, uh, Jerry, you know, this may sound dumb, but, you know, when we first met I thought your name was Gary. And, I think I may even have called you Gary a couple of times, and… I don’t know if you noticed, but I always felt bad about it, so, I’m sorry.
JERRY: Thank you. I did notice, and I appreciate you rectifying it.
HANKE: (eyeing George, who’s looking expectedly up at him) Great. Great. Well, I’ll see you guys later.
Back at Jerry’s…
GEORGE: Well, Hanke’s moved on to Step Ten. He was spotted taking personal inventory.
JERRY: That’s Step Ten?
GEORGE: All he has to do now is count his blessings, say a prayer, and he’s done. Do you believe this?
Back at diner…
GEORGE: (entering) Oh, hello… You know, Jason, I, uh, I couldn’t help notice, I… I didn’t get my apology.
HANKE: Apology? For what?
GEORGE: A drafty apartment? A… sweaterless friend? A ball-game giveaway Metlife windbreaker?
HANKE: George, come on, not that neck hole thing.
GEORGE: Yeah, the neck hole thing, and I would appreciate it if you would say you’re sorry.
HANKE: No way, you would’ve completely stretched it out.
GEORGE: You’re an alcoholic! You have to apologize. Step Nine! Step Nine!
HANKE: All right, George, all right. I’m sorry. I’m very, very sorry. I’m so sorry that I didn’t want your rather bulbous head struggling to find its way through the normal-size neck hole of my finely knit sweater.
Cut to Jerry’s apartment…
JERRY: Well, technically he did apologize.
GEORGE: Jerry, I felt like a straight man in some horrible sketch. He was riffing! Riffing! On my pain!
JERRY: So now you want an apology for the apology, plus the original apology?
GEORGE: That’s right. I’m two in the hole!
George then meets with Jason’s AA sponsor…
GEORGE: So you’re Jason Hanke’s supervisor?
SPONSOR: Sponsor.
GEORGE: Whatever. Listen, I’m very concerned about this guy.
SPONSOR: He’s doing very well. He’s already on to Step Ten.
GEORGE: Yeah, well when you don’t actually do the steps, you can go through them pretty quick. You can get through six a day.
SPONSOR: Is there some unresolved issue between you and Jason?
GEORGE: I don’t know. A little thing called Step Nine? Instead of an apology, he was beboppin’ and scattin’ all over me.
SPONSOR: I’m not sure what you want me to do.
GEORGE: Well, aren’t you the boss of him? You shouldn’t let him move up! When I was in the Cub Scouts, I got stuck on Weebolos for three years ’cause I kept losing the Pinewood Derby.
SPONSOR: You’re quite upset, George.
GEORGE: Well, I think you should drop him down to Step Two.
SPONSOR: Admit there’s a higher power?
GEORGE: Yeah, let him chew on that for a while.
SPONSOR: You know George, I think I can help you. We’re having a meeting tomorrow. Why don’t you just come by?
GEORGE: All right. That’s more like it. Thank you very much. (giving the sponsor the ‘be strong’ hand clench) By the way, my uncle was an alcoholic, so…
George goes to a 12 Step meeting…
SPONSOR: George, here, have a seat.
GEORGE: Where’s Hanke?
SPONSOR: (motioning to the leader) Shhhhh.
LEADER: OK, let’s get started. Welcome to Rage-aholics Anonymous.
GEORGE: What? Rage-aholics?
SPONSOR: George, this can help you.
GEORGE: Hey, I am not here for rage. I’m here for revenge.
LEADER: Excuse me. We have a ‘no yelling’ policy at these meetings.
GEORGE: Excuse me. Am I talking to you, Pinhead? Am I?!
LEADER: Please don’t call me ‘Pinhead’.
GEORGE: I’m losin’ it!
Back at Jerry’s…
JERRY: He took you to Rage-aholics? Why?
GEORGE: Probably because this whole Universe is against me!
JERRY: You’ve got a little rage.
GEORGE: I know. And now they want me to bottle it up. It makes me so mad!
George meets Jason at an ice cream store…
HANKE: Thanks for coming down to talk to me. I wanted to see you right away, but my hours here aren’t very flexible. I just started yesterday.
GEORGE: Well, I’m here. What is it?
HANKE: Well, I talked to my sponsor, and, uh, I’ve thought it over, and, you know, my apology at the coffee shop was sarcastic, and rude, and you deserve much better.
GEORGE: Well, thank you.
HANKE: You’re welcome.
KID: (entering the store) Can I get a Triple Minute Man Mint?
HANKE: Waffle or sugar cone?
GEORGE: Uh, excuse me, uh, um, Jason. I don’t want to get into a big thing here, but… I’m not sure if, technically, what you just said was actually an apology.
HANKE: What?
KID: Can you get on that cone?
HANKE: Would you hang on just a second, son? George, what are you talking about?
GEORGE: Well, it’s just, all you said was ‘your welcome’, which is nice. It’s very nice. But… I feel I gotta get the apology.
KID: Is there anybody else here but you?
HANKE: I’m alone, and it’s my second day. You know, I don’t even think we have that flavor so… George, really, enough, ok? You know, I admitted I was wrong, so what more do you want from me?
GEORGE: I would like an apology.
HANKE: All right, look, you know–
KID #2: (entering store) Did you try it?
KID: No, this guy doesn’t know what he’s doing.
HANKE: Oh, yes I do. Yes, I do. OK? I’m interacting with someone here, if you can understand that. Now, I’m sorry.
GEORGE: Baah! There it is! You just said it! That’s what I want! Now say it again, and tell it to me.
HANKE: I’m not saying anything to you. I’m not sorry. I was never sorry. It was cashmere. I hate Step Nine! Where’s that Rum Raisin? Where is it? Can’t find anything. I need a drink. Ah, daquiri ice cream. Here we go. What are you looking at? Get out! Come on, can’t you see we’re closed?! Get out!
Another 12 Step meeting…
HANKE: Hi, I’m, uh, Jason. I’m a Rage-aholic.
AUDIENCE: Hi, Jason.
HANKE: Uh, this is my first meeting.
GEORGE: Step-skipper. That man is a step-skipper! He skips Step Nine!
HANKE: Please. Step Nine.
GEORGE: That’s right! He never apologized to me for saying that I would stretch out the neck hole of his sweater.
(audience laughs)
GEORGE: It wasn’t funny.
HANKE: It was a very nice sweater. Take a look at his neck, not to mention the melon sitting on top of it. I don’t know if I’d trust him with a v-neck.
GEORGE: He’s beboppin’ and scattin’, and I’m losin’ it!
August 22nd, 2008 at 8:53 am
Hi Rich,
Thanks for sharing the Seinfeld transcript, it’s one of my favorite episodes and fun to read the dialogue. George is a great character. He’d drive anyone over the edge.
You’re right, content is content and I’ll bet your blog gets a lot of hits. All blog writers should be paid, even if they aren’t currently on the staff.
I hope things work out with the Advertiser. It’s understandable this situation is divisive, and too bad Gannett is so heavy handed and greedy. Who do they think their readers are, morons? Their profit margin more than allows for fair and just compensation, for everyone.
Good luck, I hope we’ll be able to read your posts in the future. Let your audience know what happens and where your articles might be available.
August 22nd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Rich, that’s a funny Seinfeld episode! Costanza rage makes for great comedy! Poking fun at that stuff is kinda bold.
Good luck with the strike! I agree with your stance - you and the nonstaff deserve compensation too. Your material is thoughtful, meaningful and present an important point of view.
Hope you do come back. Take care and hang tough!
August 22nd, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Thanks WF and Tankobu for the kind words!
Yeah, George was a great character — as a writer, I really love the rhythm of the dialog in Seinfeld, and how things escalate, especially with George when he gets obsessed with something! That particular episode really nails the 12 Step stuff too.
Hey, Tankobu, I saw your name on another blog post heading and thought it was all about you! Then I read it and saw the puka-head stuff. Pretty funny…
Anyhow, we’ll see how the blog strike plays out. I could use a break, so I can get back to the screenplays I’m working on. Have a great weekend!
August 22nd, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Not sure what was relayed to you, but the issue is about support for the six unions representing the paper. The contract expired 14 months ago.
Freelancers do get paid, and you should seek compensation, if you wish. Certainly you should pursue what you believe are your just rewards.
As for the “strike,” you’re free to do whatever you wish. Nobody should be forced to do what goes against their beliefs.
I’ve had several family members who have been various addictions. I appreciate your daily battle to remain sober. I hope is serves as inspiration for others.
Stephen Tsai
August 22nd, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Stephen -
That’s just it — nothing has really been conveyed to me as to what the goal of the blog strike is, or how long it’s supposed to last.
If you saw the earlier thread when I was first asked to stop blogging, you would have seen veiled threats from Advertiser employees who called me a “scab” just because I questioned what it would accomplish. That was when there was NO actual blog strike in progress!
Most of the staff blogs are “lite” stuff anyway, so how does withholding a few food pictures show support for the unions? My point was the union could achieve more by USING the blogs to educate the public about the underlying issues that are affecting all newspapers. And for that, I get slammed?
BTW, I was told the Advertiser does NOT pay bloggers. The only reason I offered to do it for no pay is because the Advertiser hasn’t done a very good job of covering addiction news, breakthroughs in treatment, or pointing out what a dismal failure the current War on Drugs approach has been… and in the meantime, people are suffering because of a lack of public awareness. It’s not just the Advertiser that has dropped the ball — it’s local TV news and the other newspapers as well.
For me, the real battle is trying to get the public to WAKE UP and tell our State leaders that we need to ditch the Prohibition mentality and follow the example of more progressive countries that emphasize treatment for addicts instead of simply locking them up in prisons.
But since the Advertiser doesn’t seem interested in putting my stuff in their print edition, it may be time for me to move on. At least I tried to make a difference.
August 22nd, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Rich:
The union issues would make for an excellent debate except we’re not allowed to discuss them on our blogs.
The leaders probably should have invited you to take part in the discussions. I know I was excluded, so when I was finally able to make a meeting, I had a lot to say.
We’re all individuals with our own unique opinions. I can understand the frustration in not getting clear answers before having to make a decision.
Stephen Tsai
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:41 am
Hey, Stephen -
You touched on a couple of of things that I want to address: the lack of intelligent “debate” or discussion about important issues — not just this blog strike. What I have seen develop on the internet and blog comments is an increasing amount of close-mindedness and moral certitude…
In a way it’s like we have all become George Costanza or Larry David, and woe to anyone who disagrees with our positions! I’m sure you see that all the time on your blog or the UH sports message boards. June Jones was God and no one could question his decisions — until he bolted. And then, boom, the flamers came out to call him a traitor and second-guess his play-calling in the Sugar Bowl (I have a whole riff on that BTW!).
I received a terse email from one of the Advertiser union leaders that closed with this: “There will be no non-combatants at this point. Again, which side will you be on?” His tone was like the McCarthy communist witch hunt hearings in the 50s!
Or take the latest Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona “tough on crime” posturing. Over a hundred university presidents issued a statement proposing a national discussion about lowering the drinking age, because of the increasing number of binge drinking deaths and alcohol abuse problems among young people.
But instead of keeping an open mind, Aiona — and much of the general population — immediately respond, “What, are you crazy! Change what we’re doing even though what we’re doing isn’t working too well? That’s nuts. We need to keep doing the same thing or it could get worse!”
In the sporting world, a coach would get fired for that kind of stuck-in-the-mud thinking. In American society, you get re-elected to office.
For my “last licks” post on Sunday before the blog black-out, I want to continue this thread and talk about why the future of newspapers and “free thinkers” are both in danger. However, I have to head out to a playwriting workshop class… this old dog is still trying to learn new writing tricks.
August 23rd, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Hey Rich,
You’re right about “free thinkers” becoming an endangered species and the lack of intelligent discussion throughout the media, especially on the radio and now on television as well. Open opinion and a liberal viewpoint have been assailed by design since the Reagan years.
Reasonable debate has been in decline since the emergence of conservative right wing talk radio and the likes of Newt, Rush, Cheney, and Bush who have been able to manipulate the media and script the news. Hate, fear, and lies dominate over fact and reason.
I was dismayed to see mainland “comment” writers target local newspaper stories about Obama on vacation just to keep up the smear campaign. What ever happened to civility and reasonable discourse?
I’ve also seen the movie Idiocracy, and while it was somewhat stupid and awfully juvenile, a lot of it was spot on about where our society in the U.S. is headed. That’s not very comforting.
I’m looking forward to reading your next post.
August 24th, 2008 at 4:39 am
Rich:
Funny stuff on Seinfeld..
You know, Writing Fan is right. There has been a decline in intelligent discussion on both sides of most issues these days. It looks like parties all around are feeling overwhelmed by circumstances and resorting to “scorched-earth” tactics, which is what you tend to do when you dont know what else to do..
I’m an independent voter who’s usually voted GOP. But I’ve been stunned and disapponted by the “expedience” thinking that the leadership has shown. And the rhetoric coming out of the conservative media is simply frightening.
Conservatives seem rife with “entitlement thinking” and a “how dare you have an opposing viewpoint” attitude. And what about having the right wing of the party being dominated by born-again christian thought nazis? That’s just terrific..
Then, as a result of feeling similarly overwhelmed, the unions and other liberal-affiliated groups feel obligated (or entitled) to use whatever strong-arm tactics they can muster to bring their points home.
And it just seems to perpetuate..
At this point, it seems to me that our only hope is that Barama gets elected and hopefully makes a sincere attempt to turn the ship, and the rhetoric, in a more positive direction.
Heaven help us..
Good luck with this “blog strike” crap..
These days, way too may people on both sides of issues are spelling “Justice” as “Just Us”..
aloha, jim
August 24th, 2008 at 8:46 am
“Just Us” is exactly right. For all the talk about what a Christian nation we are, what I see every day in the blogs, article comments and letters to the editor is mostly self-serving attitudes, and a lack of empathy for others.
I had always considered myself an independent when it came to politics. Liberal on social issues, conservative on fiscal policy, libertarian on personal freedoms, and even voted for Republicans in the past. But after Newt and like-minded win-at-all-cost neocon types hijacked the GOP, I could never and will never vote for anyone who supports those tactics.
However, I have to admit Newt and Rove were smart. They appealed to the lowest common denominator — fear-based thinking — and resorted to primal emotional attacks (Bill Clinton cheats on his wife and lies! Democrats kill unborn babies! Liberals believe we’re related to monkeys!)…
Sadly, a majority of Americans are so stupid they actually do NOT believe in evolution, science, or even simple math. Our leaders surround themselves with Yes Men and okole-kissers, who will gladly go spread their bosses manure for them — eg., Colin Powell helping to sell Bush’s and Cheney’s lies about WMDs in Iraq.
By contrast, look at Abe Lincoln’s presidency. He actually made his rivals and enemies part of his Cabinet and inner circle! He WANTED people around him to question his decisions and present alternative viewpoints.
Nowadays, independent thinkers wind up like McCain — they sell out to the campaign strategists and opinion polls, while pandering to religious groups that they privately abhor.
As for the blog strike, not sure anyone will even notice. Kind of ironic that freedom of speech is the first thing the press wants us to sacrifice. And for what — to show we care about union newspaper jobs? What it will actually show is the general public doesn’t really give a damn — they’ll just move on to other blog sites or post their “I’m right/you’re wrong” snap judgments on the other newspaper’s comments/blogs.
August 24th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Speaking of conservatives, interesting LA Times book review of “The Wrecking Crew,” in which the author suggests Republicans purposely WANT government to appear inept, because they are against Big Government and pro-business…
http://www.latimes.com/features/books/la-ca-thomas-frank24-2008aug24,0,7775862.story
Excerpts below. Last night we were watching the classic movie, NETWORK, and that is exactly what the character Howard Beale says at one point. There is no more “democracy” — corporations run everything…
August 24th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
One more relevant item — this one was about “immature” coworkers, but read it and tell me this doesn’t apply to our government’s way of thinking!
“Research on adult development consistently proves that maturity is not related to age. In fact, most adults never reach the more advanced stages of human development. To deal with immature adults, you sometimes have to treat them as if they are their shoe size and not their age.
People who are less mature tend to engage in the following habits:
1. Black-and-white thinking with no gray area.
2. Inability to see the world from the perspective of others.
3. Low empathy.
4. Low tolerance for painful emotions.
5. Low tolerance for differences.
6. Lack of insight into themselves and others.”
Could also apply to many of the commenters on the blogs.
September 3rd, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Yea.
1 - Lingle and Palin have a different view of abortion. You say Lingle is a hypocrite to support Palin. Why can’t she support Palin if she’s not 100% in agreement with every issue? Is that not a black-white position on your part?
2 - Not everyone thinks a train in Honolulu is worth the money that it will cost. Some people think that our politicians are just pandering to the unions that want to see the construction no matter what the cost to the taxpayers. You seem to attribute any opposition to the rail as just stupidity. Is it impossible for you to see any other view?
3 - etc.
4 - Keep trying.
September 3rd, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Lingle is a hypocrite not because she has different views than Palin. She’s a hypocrite because she WON’T state that she disagrees with Palin on abortion or abstinence-only sex ed. Her speech on a national stage gave implicit support for Palin’s stands on those issues.
As for rail, no, I have reservations about the route, the lack of master planning, and the terrible way our state government has presented it — going back 20, 30 years! But NOT taking the first steps is surely not going to help us 20 to 30 years from now. Plus we’re talking about a billion in federal subsidies, and job creation at a time when we will desperately need it, given that tourism is down and will continue to trend downward for the next couple of years in all likelihood.
But thanks for commenting and arguing your points! Really, I don’t hate all Republicans… I certainly think Dems can be and have been just as inept and incompetent when it comes to running things. But Dems have meddled far less with our lives than the Bush/Cheney/Rove Republicans who have actually made big government BIGGER during their tenure, and intruded more into our personal lives.
Didn’t Republicans used to oppose that sort of thing?