National Review: Victor Davis Hanson- 'Did 1968 Win The Cultural War?'

Source:National Review- Grant Park in Chicago in 1968. 

"Fifty years ago this year, the ’60s revolution sought to overturn American customs, traditions, ideology, and politics.

The ’60s radicals eventually grew older, cut their hair, and joined the establishment. Most thought their revolution had fizzled out in the early 1970s without much effect, as Americans returned to “normal.” 

Read the rest at The National Review 

"The Left WON the Culture WAR: Here's Why" 

Source:Black Pigeon Speaks- talking about Tami Lahren, who they see as a victim in the Cultural War.

From Black Pigeon Speaks

Not sure if 1968 won the Cultural War, simply because I don't see how a year could win a war. Wars are won by groups of individuals generally countries through their militaries and their people that back them. 

I'm being a little coy here, but Victor Hanson's basic point being that did the people from the 1960s especially the late 60s, the young people who were a big part of that era with all of those young Baby Boomers coming of age in the 1960s and graduating high school, starting college and even graduating college in that decade, did those people and the cultural and lifestyles, political views that they represented especially the Hippies, did they win the Cultural War? I believe the obvious answer to that question is yes.

As a Gen-Xer who was born in the mid 1970s and just one generation up from the Baby Boomers, I obviously don't remember 1968, but that's only because I wasn't even born yet. If I were born even in the early 1960s perhaps I would have some memories of that time. 

So what I have to do to familiar myself with that decade is to listen to, read, and watch the people who were not only alive through that period, not only lived through that period, but were major part of it. The new cultural and lifestyle changes from that decade, all the personal freedom and individualism that came from that decade, the anti-warmovement, the women's movement, the gay movement, civil rights movement, etc. One of the advantages of history is that you can't forget it because people are always reporting on it as it happens, but then later on with books and documentaries.

There are two main factions in the 1960s cultural movement: one, being perhaps the most famous the New-Left socialist revolutionary movement that not only wanted to get America out of the Vietnam War, wanted to fundamentally change how the American economy and government worked. 

Even with the New-Left you had at least two factions: the Socialist Revolutionaries lead by groups like The Weather Underground, Students For a Democratic Society and then later in the early and mid 1970s the Symbionese Liberation Army that's famous for kidnapping San Francisco area heiress Patricia Hearst, who wanted to rob banks to take care of the poor. 

And then you had the peaceful demonstrators who were part of the anti-warmovement and were simply interested in getting America out of the Vietnam War, but not trying to overthrow the U.S. Government through violence.

The socialist revolutionary nonsense ( tis the season to be generous ) I don't have much if any respect for as someone who believes in the rule of law and only believe in using violence in self-defense and to protect the innocent. 

But the Hippies who were growing up in the 1950s and remember that era well who wanted a new life that was different from their parents and grandparents, who wanted to make their own decisions, who loved their families, but didn't want to be dominated by them and be able to live their own lives even if their parents disapprove of their lifestyles, as a Liberal myself who believes in individualism and free choice, personal freedom I have a lot of respect for that movement.

By not even 1968 but really 1965-66 and perhaps even 63-64, America was changing drastically culturally, racially, and ethnically. 

The Anglo-Saxon Ozzie and Harriet lifestyle from the 1950s was becoming a thing of the past at least in Real America even if Hollywood was still producing shows that looked like they were from 1955. Instead of the husband walking in the door every night and saying: "Honey, I'm home!" with his devoted wife staying: "Hi dear, how was your day?" having his paper and favorite drink ready for him, the woman in many cases was just getting home from work herself. Because you had these Baby Boom Hippies and lot of them women who didn't want't to be housewives and in some cases didn't want to get married or even have kids. Who instead wanted to go to college, get a degree and start their own lives and be independent with the same freedom that the men have.

The so-called Cultural War from back then and today are fought by two factions: the Christian-Right, who believe the 1950s was the golden age for America and who've been trying to get every single American into some national time machine and take us all back to that 1950s Ozzie and Harriet lifestyle. 

And the New Americans ( let's call them ) who believe that Americans should be free to be Americans, who are a very diverse people racially, ethnically, religiously, and culturally who believe Americans should be free to be Americans and make their own lifestyle and cultural decisions. Even if that offends people who are a lot more conservative religiously. 

And the New Americans having been winning this Cultural War really since the 1970s at least with all the personal freedom that Americans have today. 

You can also see this post at The FreeState, on Blogger.

TIME Magazine: Chris Bailey- 'Why Being Lazy is Actually Good For You'

SourceTIME Magazine- Good lazy?

Source:The Daily Review

"I’m a lazy person. This surprises some people, especially considering that I write productivity books for a living. Take a day off, for example. Forget adventures — my preference for that free time is to lie on the couch, watch Netflix documentaries and read. And a week off? I’m the kind of person who prefers to stay home and eat pizza rather than travel the world. Luckily for me, this laziness is precisely what makes me so productive. And that’s a fact backed up by science." 

From TIME Magazine

"I’m a lazy person. This surprises some people, especially considering that I write productivity books for a living. Take a day off, for example. Forget adventures — my preference for that free time is to lie on the couch, watch Netflix documentaries and read. And a week off? I’m the kind of person who prefers to stay home and eat pizza rather than travel the world. Luckily for me, this laziness is precisely what makes me so productive. And that’s a fact backed up by science." 

Source:Seeker- Bad lazy?

From Seeker

I see the point that Chris Bailey is making here. He’s not arguing that people should sit on their asses and do nothing all day expect to pick up their I-Phone to order pizza or other takeout, including groceries and then sit on the couch and watch TV all day. And then after we do that for a few months, we’re now sitting on our fat lazy asses unless we run out of money and decide to become productive again and go back to work. If he was arguing that, I would have no respect for that argument.

Source:TIME Magazine- Overworked?

What Bailey is arguing here is that of course people should work and productive with their day and their time, but that we shouldn’t be consumed with those activities and make time to just chill-ax. There’s time for work and then there’s free time to do nothing that’s work and substantive. When you’re sitting on your couch watching a movie or just watching the tube, you should just be doing that. Perhaps eating as well and hanging out with your wife or husband, girlfriend or boyfriend or friends, family, but not hanging with just yourself or your people while also working, flipping through your iPhone or computer. That there’s work time and then there’s free time and that you shouldn’t combine the two.

Source:Let's Get Going- From Chris Bailey 

 I’m sort of the opposite of Chris Bailey on this, but I think I’m getting better. I work at home in my office and I write one blog article a week, but when I’m not doing that I’, doing other things that are related to my blog. Like looking for other things to blog about for the next coming weeks. updating older posts, doing research for future posts, talking to other people about what I’ve written and what I’m going to write about in the future. And as I’m doing this I got the news on as I’m working in my office to keep up with what’s going on during the day and seeing if there is anything else I should be commenting on for that day.

And then when I’m done for the day which now is around 9PM sometimes 7 nights a week, but as I said earlier I’m getting better at this and no longer working pass 11 five nights a week, I’m ready for dinner and just sitting back and watching the tube. Which is generally the news and hearing about what happened that day and what’s the most important stories for that day. What I’m working on now is once my workday is over and I’m ready for dinner is to turn off the news all together and just watch movies or classic TV, documentaries and sports that have nothing to do with what I’m working on or about to start working on. What I’m trying to do is completely separate my workday from my free nights and time in general and leave the news for the rest of the world and get back into it when I’m back at my desk the next day.

As great as new technology has been without how convenient it makes life for so many people, to also has at least two negative affects. It makes people obsessed with new technology because of how cool it is and how tied it has become to pop culture. The more you’re into new technology and the more knowledgeable you are about new tech, the cooler you are and since we have so many people obsessed with pop culture and being seen as cool and we have so many faddists in America now, we also have a lot more lazy people in the bad sense, because we have so many people that don’t think for themselves. Who are experts on the superficial like who their favorite celebrity is dating, what rehab they’re at, or why they’re in jail, what’s the latest i-Phone, when it’s coming out, what you have to do to be one of the first 5 people to purchase it so you can share that on Facebook, like you just won the lottery or something.

And because of this we have a lot of lazy people in the bad sense that they don’t think for themselves, because they’re so into to what’s the latest fad and being seen doing whatever the latest fad is and right now one of those fads is not just having the latest i-Phone, but being on it all the time. People don’t even watch football games or movies anymore without staring at their i-Phone while they’re doing that. Because they feel the need to respond to every single text when as soon as they get it, or someone else’s Facebook update or tweet, or responding to what someone else to said on their favorite social network. We have so many people who simply can’t relax, because they’re mind is always focused on several different things at one point. Even when they’re just watching a ballgame or movie, having out at their coffee house, they got multiple things going on with them at the same time.

Myself, I would like to work 8-10 hours a day or even more, but when work is over it’s really over and I don’t even feel the need to tweet a photo or plus it on Google+, or Facebook about what I’m doing after work. I would like to give up my social network habit even on my phone once I’m done with work during the day and just eat a good meal and enjoy a good movie or documentary, classic TV before I need to go to bed and be ready for the next day. It would be nice to take Saturday and Sunday completely off and not doing anything work related then, but even when I’m on vacation I actually need to be doing some work because I’m a blogger and get a lot of email. That’s just the life of a blogger and perhaps anyone who works in the media at all. But during the day, bike ride, work, and then be free at night and live the good lazy life. Not the the life of a lazy ass, which is different.

Jayne Mansfield Diamonds To Dust : 'A Guide For The Married Man (1967) Jayne Mansfield'

Source:Jayne Mansfield Diamonds To Dust- Son of a beach! 

"Jayne Mansfield Diamonds to Dust: The official trailer for the 1967 film which Jayne Mansfield has a cameo and is actually the last time she appears on the big screen. Her cameo is shown in this trailer. Watch Diamonds to Dust to learn about her life now available on Amazon Prime."

Source:Movies Ala Mark- Baby Jayne Mansfield and Terry Thomas, in A Guide For A Married Man 

From Jayne Mansfield Diamonds To Dust

Source:Flickr via Podie- Baby Jayne Mansfield, in A Guide For A Married Man

I'll be the first to say, actually I would run to make sure I was the first person in line to say that A Guide For The Married Man is not a great movie. It's also not a horrible movie, but perhaps I wouldn't make the same effort to say that. It's a good, funny movie with a great cast: Walter Matthau, Robert Morse, Inger Stevens, Lucile Ball, Phil Silvers, Art Carney, and someone named Jayne Mansfield. ( Perhaps you've heard of her as well )

Except for the bit part or cameo A Guide For The Married Man is right up Jayne's dress, I mean ally for her. Comedy especially romantic comedy was her shtick and it would've been nice if she had a bigger role in this movie. Perhaps playing one of Robert Morse's 10 girlfriends in the movie.

By 1967, Jayne Mansfield was doing most of her work and making most of her money outside of Hollywood. She literally was on the nightclub circuit and doing comedy and music all over America.

Think about that for a second: one of the most popular Hollywood Goddesses from the 1950s reduced to singing and doing comedy at nightclubs by 1965 or so. She was also doing films in Britain and Europe, including in Italy. She was tired of doing comedy in Hollywood and by the early 1960s, wanted a newer role and do other things and expand her acting resume.

Which is sort of like saying that Michael Jordan or Larry Bird is tried of shooting the basketball and scoring points, so what they're going to do instead is just rebound and play defense, pass the ball when they have it instead of leading their team in scoring and leading them to victory.

Comedy for Jayne Mansfield, was like the passing game for the New England Patriots: it was her bread and butter, her go to offense and what made her famous and popular to go along with her goddess body and little girl adorable appearance. And ironic that her last trip back to Hollywood for work was to do another comedy which is what she was doing in the late 50s with movies like Will Success Spoil Rockwell Hunter and The Girl Can't Help It.

If you want a full post or report on A Guide For The Married Man, I suggest you go somewhere else for that, because I'm really just interested in Jayne Mansfield's role in it. She plays the comic relief in a movie that's pretty funny to begin with but is so good at it playing the mistress of a man who is married and her wife catches them together in their bed and he and Jayne play it off like nothing is going on at all and the wife is completely imagining what she's seeing.

And the guy and Jayne just get out of bed, make the bed, get dressed while the wife is in the room and has already seen everything and Jayne leaves the room and house as if nothing had just happened. And they do it so perfectly that the wife starts actually believing that she's imagining everything that she just saw. Great scene with Jayne just making a pretty funny movie even funnier. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress.

Susan Hayward: The Working Girl

Source:AZ Quotes- Susan Hayward, on reaching the mountaintop of Hollywood. 

""What was your favorite Susan Hayward quote? 'Like' and leave a comment below, then jump over to Quote Tank and make a list of your favorites, so you'll never forget!"

Source:Quote Tank- One pf Susan Hayward's movies 

From Quote Tank

There are a lot of rags to riches success stories in America which is one thing that makes America great as well as exceptional. America tends to get stereotyped as a rich country that's dominated by rich people who control so much of the country's wealth and that all Americans are rich. And if you're from a third world country and grew up poor before you came to America, you might believe that as well at least before you get to America.

But the fact is most Americans aren't wealthy. Most of us aren't poor either, but a lot of come from either middle class or working class families which is the overwhelming majority of Americans. Americans who aren't poor or who are hungry, but struggle to survive, work hard, to pay their bills. Can't afford to send their kids to college which means their kids have to work through college or get student loans, or both especially if they're not on scholarship.

Susan Hayward growing up in New York City in the 1920s and 30s didn't even have it that great. She came literally from nothing where her parents couldn't afford to feed all of their kids at the same time. Sometimes couldn't afford to even do laundry, couldn't replace shoes and other clothing that were falling apart. What Susan Hayward did have going for her growing up and as a very young woman was that she hated poverty and wanted to escape it. As well as a talent and desire to succeed that would allow to her live well for the rest of her life.

When I think of Susan Hayward, I think of President Richard Nixon and his background growing in rural and poor California in the 1920s when a lot of America was actually doing very well economically, but where most of that economic wealth was in big cities like Boston, New York, Chicago, and other big cities not in rural California hundreds of miles out of Los Angeles.

I think of President Nixon giving his farewell address where he says: "Only when you've been in the deepest valley can you ever know how magnificent it is to be on the highest mountain." President Richard Nixon from August, 1974 the day he left the White House after resigning the presidency, because of is involvement in the Watergate coverup.

Susan Hayward, was able to reach the mountaintop in Hollywood and to go down as not just one of the greatest actresses in her generation, but who ever worked in Hollywood because she grew up in the deepest valley in America. And to know what it was like to live on the bottom not knowing where your next meal was coming from and would you even have a home the next month.

Not that I would recommend poverty to anyone, but when you have nothing is does teach you a few positive things like how important hard work and success are and what it means to earn what you get. As well as always knowing at least in the back of your head what it's like to be poor and to know that you never want to live that way again.

Susan Hayward, is a great rags to riches story who came from nothing to become one of the best actresses that America have ever known and a story that we should all celebrate.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily Times, on Blogger.

The Atlantic: Thomas P. McBee- 'Men Are Socialized To Act Inhumanely'

Source:The Atlantic- A look at the American man. 

“American men are in crisis, the conventional wisdom goes. And, according to some experts, they have been for a while. For a few decades, perhaps. Maybe for more than a century.”

From The Atlantic 

“Thomas Page McBee transitioned at age 30. In his male body, he “started to experience the world differently immediately,” McBee says in a video filmed at the 2018 Aspen Ideas Festival in June. “I immediately gained a lot of privileges and also immediately lost a lot of connection.”  

Source:The Atlantic: Opinion- Thomas P. McBee: 'Men Are Socialized To Act Inhumanely'- Thomas McBee's take  

From The Atlantic 

When I first saw the title of this video for this piece, I was expecting to hear some Far-Left radical feminist view about what’s wrong with men, especially straight men and even more so straight Caucasian men. What the Far-Left just calls White boys or White males. They don’t even have enough decency to refer to this group of Americans as men. But I was pleasantly surprise to hear Thomas McBee’s point and what he was arguing about really was the extremes of straight men in America regarding their behavior when it comes to female relations especially in the workplace.

American boys regardless of their race or ethnicity, especially if they come from a straight two-parent family with a mother and father who are in love with each other, are raised to be men. Now, once a boy reaches puberty and starts thinking sexually it might turn out that boy is not straight and gay and there might be signs of that early on with the boy having a more feminine take on life and not interested in at least traditionally boy activities growing up like sports and other activities like that. But for most of us regardless of race or ethnicity especially if we come a starlight two-parent home we’re raised to be men, meaning straight men.

American males are expected to be manly. Meaning we’re expected to speak with strong voices, be sure about ourselves, at least look like we can handle ourselves physically and not to be picked on physically. Be able to handle criticism and humor about us because we’re not overly sensitive, ( not including the current President of the United States ) we’re expected to be into sports, interested and knowledgeable about cars, not just interested, or like women, but love women and think about them constantly and love talking to them and being around them, checking them out and everything else. We’re expected to be the man of the house and lay down and enforce the rules for how our kids are supposed to behave, as well as handle the security and the home improvements of the house.

Some might argue that I’m just throwing out a lot of stereotypes out there like QB throws out a lot of balls in a two-minute drill, ( another male stereotype being that men use a lot of sports references to make their points ) but the thing about stereotypes is that there’s always some truth in them or it wouldn’t become a stereotype that’s used over and over again by intelligent people even. As far as the gay movement has come now in America with gays even getting the right to marry each other in America, 90-95% of whether you just include outed gay men or closeted gay men, are not only straight, but we still tend to be masculine in America. There are gay men even who aren’t queens and you wouldn’t know right away after meeting them that they’re gay.

To Thomas McBee’s point about what it means to be a man and to be masculine, I agree with him. There’s nothing unmanly about guys who care about other people and not just people who are related to them or are their friends or associates. There’s nothing unmanly about guys hugging each other and I’m not just talking about hugging our father, grandfather, brother, uncle, cousin, etc, but guys who hug their male friends, because they love their male friends. The strong handshake plus one-arm hug that’s popular now with straight men, I do that with my good buddies as well especially if I haven’t seem them in a while. I have two brothers who live on the West Coast and live 3000 miles from me. Every time we see each other which isn’t very often we give each other big hugs. Nothing unmanly about guys showing physical affection for each other.

At risk of sounding politically incorrect here, but I’ll qualify what I’m going to say here and not just because this will probably be politically incorrect and again as a Liberal who believes in free choice and personal freedom there’ nothing wrong with homosexuality and nothing immoral about it. I believe Americans have a right to be themselves and even a responsibility to be themselves regardless of who they are short of hurting innocent people with what they’re doing, but being unmanly is not manly. ( To state the obvious ) Again, all Americans should be exactly who they are, but men who speak with high voices and they tend to be gay, or feel the need to use their hands move their cheeks and eyes, necks when talking, talk like valley girls, but have feminine interests and mannerisms and I’m not talking about being interested in women, but interested in what women tend to be interested in, to me at least queens aren’t manly otherwise they wouldn’t be queens. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, if that’s who you are. ( To use a Seinfeld line )

Again at risk of stating the obvious, you can be a straight man even and still be human. My only advice there would be to take things meaning life as they come and not to overact. Use proper analysis about what’s going on and how it affects you and not to overreact to. Don’t have a teen age girl moment ( again, to sound politically incorrect ) and act as if your life is over because you didn’t get the job that you wanted or someone said something awful about you.

I hate the term man up, so I would say be a man about life and take it for what it is which comes with a lot of highs and lows. Enjoy the highs because those are the pleasures of life, but don’t view yourself as invulnerable because now you’re on top. And use your lows as learning experiences and opportunities to improve. Instead of thinking your life is now over screwed up and suffered some disappointment and you’ll get a lot more out of life and enjoy it a lot more. That to me is what being a man is about which is taking life for what it is and acting accordingly. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Brandon Behle: 'Inside a Hollywood Scandal: The Cheryl Crane-Lana Turner Story'

Source:Brandon Behle- Cheryl Crane on trial?

"It was a scandal that captured the attention of the nation: the gangster boyfriend of Hollywood starlett Lana Turner murdered in her Beverly Hills home and her teenage daughter Cheryl is the prime suspect.  KMIR 6 News anchor Elizabeth Cook sits down with Cheryl to talk about that fateful night. 

2009 NATAS Emmy Award winner for Best Historical/Cultural Story."

Source:Brandon Behle

If you're familiar with the movie Where Love Has Gone with Susan Hayward and Mike Connors and many other great actors and actresses, you're probably familiar with the Cheryl Crane-Johnny Stompanato story as well. Because Where Love Has Gone is based off the Crane-Stompanato story ( at least unofficially ) and is about a rough relationship between the Hayward character and her boyfriend with her daughter being present with it getting violent and the daughter believing she needs to step in to save her mother and herself and sees a gun and shoots and kills the boyfriend. The difference being in the Hollywood movie that case goes to trial and the girl ends up in a home for juveniles. The Crane-Stompanato case, never even goes to trial.

Source:Los Angeles Times- Lana Turner, testifying? 

Lana Turner, as adorable as she was with always looking like she could still be a little girl in and outside of her movies, wasn't as sweet and innocent in real-life as she appeared on screen. She lived the life not only of a wild child, but a soap opera character who always needed danger and drama in her life for her life to seem exciting enough for her. Which certainly explains why she was married seven times. Which might be more marriages than your typical soap character and would rival all of the marriages at least in numbers that another Hollywood Goddess and Babydoll Elizabeth Taylor had. Lana, was not only a Hollywood actress, but a real-life soap opera character no naturally she would be physically and personally involved with a Italian gangster like Johnny Stompanato or any other gangster.

Source:Alchetron- Lana Turner and her daughter Cheryl Crane 

Just because of the life that Lana lived and who Johnny Stompanato was in real-life, that Lana's daughter Cheryl was just 14-15 at this point in 1958 and there is no evidence that the shooting was planned, I would have to assume that this was justifiable homicide and that Cheryl was simply trying to protect herself and her mother from an abusive gangster. The only detail that doesn't make a lot of sense and isn't very believable and looks more like a scene from a Hollywood soap opera or movie or soap movie like Where Love Has Gone is that you have a 14-15 year old girl who knows how to use a gun and acts immediately and uses it to shoot Stompantao who presumably at least was getting too physical with Lana. But every other detail about this case falls into place. 

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at The FreeState, on Blogger.

New York Magazine: Michael McKeever- 'Watch a Private Eye Fact-Check Detective Movies'

Source:Vulture- NYC private eye Michael McKeever & Humphrey Bogart in The Big Sleep. 

“In Vulture’s video series, Expert Witness, we ask scientists, historians, and other professionals to give Hollywood movies a good old-fashioned fact-check.

Private eyes are one of Hollywood’s greatest legacies. From the likes stone-cold Philip Marlowe to bumbling clown Gene Parmesan, private detectives have long been a source of drama, comedy, and everything in between. But would a real PI really break through a window to get evidence? Would they really ride a bus to avoid being tailed? We talked to veteran New York City private investigator Michael McKeever to expose some of the biggest movie myths about private eyes.”

From New York Magazine

This video gets off to a perfect start for me at least in the first few seconds with a clip from The Big Sleep with Lauren Bacall and Humphrey Bogart. Because you have Slim and Bogie together in the same movie, but when I think of great movie detectives I start with The Big Sleep with Bogie playing private eye Phil Marlowe in that great film noir movie.

Source:Gifer- Slim & Bogie in The Big Sleep 

Bogie plays a guy who is simply out to do his job and solve the case that he's working on and doesn't play the saint or devil in that movie, but a guy who is a lot more complicated than that who plays a no nonsense ( except for the great quips and wisecracks ) detective who is working on a case. And of course Lauren Bacall, is Lauren Bacall I would watch her driving a bus in a movie simply to watch her because she's Lauren Bacall and a chance to see her gorgeous, adorable, sharp witty self doing anything.

And I think Michael McKeever is right where he says that you can't assume the truth and that people are telling you the truth that what private eye and police detectives have in common is that they have to know what's going in the case and know about the important players and the key evidence, simply because it's their job. The detective profession is the last of the romantics and idealists where you would find people who are always looking for the best out of everyone and everything they see. Similar to reporters it's their job to know exactly what's going and make the best possible case about the case that they're working on and then to report to who they're working for whether it's a private citizen or organization or a detective lieutenant or sergeant exactly what they found out.

When I think of great movie detectives I think of Humphrey Bogart and James Caan who both played Phil  Marlowe, but in different movies. Bogie, played Marlowe in The Big Sleep and Caan played Marlowe in a not nearly as famous movie Poodle Springs from 1998. Where they both play guys who are simply out to do their jobs and aren't looking to change the world and are very unromantic with who they go about their business.

The great TV and movie private detectives go about their business and do their jobs. This is their assignment, this is the important facts and evidence, these are the important players in the case. And it's their job to find out what happened and how it happened and then report what they found out and turned up back to the people they're working for. My two favorite TV detectives are Joe Mannix ( from Mannix ) and Jim Rockford ( The Rockford Files ) for the exact same reasons.

I think the main problem with current TV private eye shows and movies is what Michael McKeever ( New York City real-life private detective ) is talking about which gets to realism. When you're talking about Hollywood they have TV shows and movies to sell and for them to do that they have to be popular and for them to be popular they have to be cool or awesome. And for that to happen their characters have to be cool or awesome with a lot of young viewers.

And for that to happen that means their shows and movies might have to look unrealistic with heavy usage of new technology, expensive style and taste, a lot of violence, the detective physically getting involved with one of the key players in the case, heavy focus on their perusal lives, etc or young hipsters won't be into the show or movie. Back in the day these shows and movies were less fashionable, but better simply because they were more believable and the actors and material was also much better.