The Last of Us Season Two

/ ronnyjames / 1 Comment

Do you remember the movie critics Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert? Admittedly quite awhile ago, their show “At the Movies” syndicated in 1982 until Gene Siskel’s death in 1999 ran for 17 years, and featured their often conflicting reviews of a new movie. Before that they first appeared together in a monthly show on a local Chicago PBS station in 1975, quite a career for critics! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siskel_and_Ebert

I never saw most of what they reviewed but I greatly enjoyed watching them and how they did what they did: two friends discussing the themes and performances, often clashing but clearly friends, each arguing his point of view, thumbs up or down.

As I watched Season One of the HBO series, The Last of Us, (and wrote about it here), in February 2023, I had hoped to read an online review with that same sort of give-and-take. Alas, none to be found. 

Well, Season Two is finally here and, after Sunday’s grueling episode (IYKYK) I had some thoughts. So I turned to my new writing partner, ChatGPT (Chet) to help me work through some of the tricky and emotionally difficult terrain of this season’s show. Hopefully no spoilers below, and truthfully this show or genre isn’t for everyone, but if you are a fan of post-apocalyptic doomscapes, read along. My questions appear in bold, followed by Chet’s response below.

In the video game and TV show The Last of Us, the infected humans infect others by biting them. How do they continue to exist? What do they eat?

Chet replied:

Great question—and a creepy one, too! In The Last of Us, the infected are people who’ve been taken over by the Cordyceps fungus. This fungus hijacks their brains and bodies, turning them into violent, zombie-like creatures that spread the infection by biting others. But yeah—it raises a big question: How do they survive if they don’t seem to eat like normal living things?

Here’s the breakdown:

1. They don’t need traditional food

The infected aren’t technically “alive” in the way humans are. Once the Cordyceps fungus takes over, it controls the host’s body primarily for the purpose of spreading itself. So the infected may not need to eat regular food at all. The fungus likely sustains itself by feeding on the host’s body, breaking it down over time—kind of like a parasitic mushroom would do to an insect in real life.

2. They’re driven by the urge to infect

Their primary “purpose” is to spread the fungus. That’s why they bite others rather than eat them. Once someone is bitten, they’re doomed to become another infected, which is how the infection spreads rapidly.

3. Later stages show decay

As infected progress—Runners, Stalkers, Clickers, and then Bloaters—they become more fungus than human. They’re increasingly overgrown with fungal growths, and eventually they stop moving altogether, sometimes becoming spore-spewing corpses attached to walls. So they have a limited lifespan—they’re not immortal.

4. Do they eat people?

There are moments in the games and show where infected attack people violently, but it’s not usually out of hunger—it’s instinct. They don’t really “eat” them like traditional zombies. Their aggression is all about spreading the infection.

So, in short: the infected survive for a limited time because the fungus sustains itself off the host body, and they’re driven by instinct to infect, not eat. Eventually, they rot away or merge with the environment.

It seems the only way they are stopped is by shooting them in the head, blowing them up, or burning them. 

Chet replied:

Exactly—those are pretty much the go-to methods for taking them down. The infected in The Last of Us are resilient and dangerous, especially as they evolve through the different stages. Here’s why those methods work:

1. Shooting them in the head

Since the Cordyceps fungus controls the brain, destroying the brain effectively kills both the host and the fungus. It’s the most direct and clean (well, relatively) way to put them down. That’s why headshots are emphasized in the game and show.

2. Explosives (blowing them up)

Blunt force trauma or high-impact explosions can tear them apart, which works especially well on tougher enemies like Bloaters. You can’t always get a clean headshot, so grenades, nail bombs, or Molotov cocktails are a solid plan B.

3. Fire (burning them)

Cordyceps is a fungus—and fungi don’t like fire. Burning them not only destroys the host, but also prevents spores from spreading. That’s why Molotovs are super effective in the game. It’s one of the few ways to really cleanse an area of infection.

Bonus: Stealth and melee

In the early stages (like Runners and some Stalkers), stealth kills can take them down if you’re quiet and precise. But once you get to Clickers or Bloaters, that’s not an option without heavy firepower.

So yeah, you’re spot on—those methods are essential. Anything less, and the infected just keep coming. Kind of makes the post-apocalyptic survival vibe feel that much more intense, huh?

Yes, the scenario looks like the humans will eventually be over run, or their enclaves will be over run by infected. 

ChatGPT said:

Yeah, and that’s one of the most chilling things about The Last of Us—it doesn’t just throw zombies at you, it builds this slow-burn sense of inevitability. You can feel it: humanity is on the ropes.

Let’s break that down a little:

Why the infected are so overwhelming:

  1. They never stop coming. The fungus doesn’t need rest, food, or shelter in the traditional sense. Once someone’s infected, they either turn quickly or become a spore factory. There’s no diplomacy or reasoning—just endless aggression.
  2. It only takes one bite. The infection spreads fast. One breach in security—one runner sneaks in, one careless mistake—and boom: a whole settlement can fall in hours. You’ve seen it in the show and the game. Nobody’s ever fully safe.
  3. They get stronger over time. As the infected progress from Runners to Clickers to Bloaters (and eventually Shamblers or even Rat Kings), they become harder to kill and more terrifying. That slow transformation makes them a long-term threat even if they’re not immediately aggressive.
  4. Spores make containment a nightmare. Infected bodies often release spores when they die or decay, which can spread the fungus invisibly through the air in enclosed spaces. It makes cleanup extremely difficult—and makes any underground or sealed area a potential deathtrap.
  5. Resources are scarce. Ammo, fuel, medicine, manpower—all limited. Humans have to use stealth, strategy, and rationing just to survive day-to-day. That’s not sustainable against an ever-growing horde.

Why humanity hasn’t been wiped out (yet):

  1. Enclaves with tight control. Places like FEDRA zones, Jackson, and others survive through strict rules, armed patrols, and serious consequences for mistakes. That control is the only thing keeping the infected out.
  2. Knowledge of the threat. By the time of the game and show, survivors know how the infection works. They know how to fight, how to fortify, and when to cut their losses.
  3. Hope through immunity. Ellie’s immunity is a game-changer—at least potentially. It suggests a future where a cure or vaccine could turn the tide. But that future’s murky at best, and morally complicated as hell.

You’re totally right: the world feels like it’s in a slow decline. Humanity is surviving—but barely. The feeling that no place is truly safe is one of the things that makes the story so gripping.

One last question: the authors have said that the show is primarily about how we deal with grief and loss (Joel and his daughter Sarah, Ellie and Joel) but it looks to be more a revenge saga. 

Chet replied:

That’s a really thoughtful observation—and you’re absolutely right to pick up on that tension.

The creators (Neil Druckmann and Craig Mazin) have consistently said that The Last of Us is fundamentally about love, grief, and what people are willing to do because of those emotions. But the line between grief and revenge gets very blurry—and that’s completely intentional.

Season 1 / Game 1: Grief, love, and survival

  • Joel starts the story emotionally dead after losing his daughter. His journey with Ellie isn’t about saving the world at first—it’s about learning to feel again.
  • By the end, when he chooses to save Ellie instead of letting her die for a possible cure, it’s not just a selfish act—it’s an act of love born out of deep loss. But… it also comes with violent consequences.
  • That final choice—massacring the Fireflies—is arguably a revenge story, too. It’s Joel taking revenge on a world that already took his daughter, and now dares to try and take Ellie too.

Season 2 / Part II: The cycle of revenge

  • This is where the story doubles down on your point. The second part is absolutely a revenge saga. But it uses that revenge arc to deepen the themes of grief, trauma, and the cost of violence.
  • Characters like Ellie and Abby are both on their own brutal revenge journeys—each convinced they’re justified. And both are completely wrecked by the end of it.
  • The whole point is to make the player/viewer feel the weight of that revenge. It’s not cathartic—it’s devastating.

So which is it—grief or revenge?

It’s both. The show (and game) use grief as the fuel. Revenge is what grief looks like when love turns to rage—and that’s what makes The Last of Us different from typical zombie fiction. The monsters aren’t just the infected—they’re the people who can’t let go.

And what’s wild is: the story never gives easy answers. Was Joel right? Was Ellie? Was Abby? There’s no clean morality. Just hurt people trying to find meaning in a broken world.

These themes are very heavy. I haven’t played the game but I wonder about the “slim ray of hope” that exists here, maybe personified by Joel’s brother Tommy and his wife and their son. 

Chet said:

Yes—exactly. That “slim ray of hope” is one of the most powerful parts of The Last of Us, and it’s not just there for contrast. It’s deliberate. It’s a reminder that amid all the grief and brutality, there’s still something worth holding on to.

And you’re spot on: Tommy, Maria, and their growing family represent that hope. Let’s unpack why:

1. Jackson is a symbol of what could be

  • Jackson, Wyoming—where Tommy and Maria live—is a functioning town. It has electricity, farming, schools, movies, families, and even a sense of community.
  • It’s not perfect, but it’s safe. People have found a way to live instead of just survive.
  • It’s the first place in the show where we see what rebuilding could actually look like.

2. Tommy is Joel’s opposite

  • Joel is hardened, emotionally locked down, willing to do whatever it takes.
  • Tommy, while still a fighter, chooses connection. He chooses love, partnership, and fatherhood.
  • When Joel sees what Tommy has, it terrifies him—not because it’s bad, but because it’s vulnerable. Joel’s whole identity is wrapped in loss, and Tommy shows that healing is possible… if you let yourself feel again.

3. The idea of legacy

  • Maria being pregnant is a quiet, emotional moment. New life. A future.
  • In a world where everything feels doomed, the idea of raising a child isn’t just hopeful—it’s radical.
  • Ellie seeing this, too, matters. It shows her that even though her existence has been wrapped in violence, there are still other paths.

Why it matters so much

The heavy themes—grief, revenge, loss—are the emotional core. But that tiny sliver of hope? It’s what gives the story depth instead of just despair. It asks, What would you fight for? What would you rebuild for?

In the second game, Jackson becomes even more important, especially in contrast to the darkness that follows. It’s the light that shows just how dark everything else has become—and a reminder that not everyone has to fall into the cycle of hate.

Would you ever consider playing the game (even just watching the cinematic playthroughs)? Because it digs even deeper into all this—and honestly, it’s one of the best examples of storytelling in modern media.

I’m not going to play the game, primarily because the emphasis in many role-playing games seems to be death, destruction, mayhem and revenge rather than the hopeful contrasts presented in the film version. But the series is excellent. 

Chet said:

That totally makes sense—and honestly, you’re not alone in feeling that way. A lot of people have found the show’s take on the story more accessible, more emotionally resonant, and even more human than the game, precisely because it lingers on the quiet moments, the relationships, and those precious glimpses of hope.

The games, especially Part II, lean heavily into violence—not for thrill, but to force players to feel the consequences of every choice. It’s powerful, but also emotionally exhausting, and it doesn’t always offer the same kind of balance or reprieve the show provides.

What the show does really well—and maybe even better—is:

  • Highlight characters like Bill and Frank, showing what love and peace can look like even at the end of the world.
  • Spend time in places like Jackson, focusing on community and rebuilding, rather than just the road and the ruin.
  • Deepen characters like Joel and Ellie with subtle performances and more space to breathe emotionally.

So yeah, totally fair to prefer the show. It captures all the emotional weight of the world, but lets hopehave a little more screen time. It feels like it’s saying, Yes, this world is broken—but not everyone has to be.

Glad you’re enjoying the series—any particular episode or character arc that’s stood out most to you so far?

I am intrigued with some of the new characters especially Eugene’s wife Gail, the therapist. She seems to act as our Greek chorus or guide thru some of the emotions Joel and others are feeling, yet feels herself as well. 

Chet said:

Oh, that’s a really insightful take—Eugene’s wife, the therapist, absolutely does feel like a kind of Greek chorus, or maybe even a moral compass in a world that’s largely lost its bearings.

(And if you’re referring to Marlon and Florence from the beginning of Season 2—or if it’s a newer character introduced in Season 2—I’m guessing you’re talking about Florence, or potentially another addition the show has made who wasn’t in the game. Feel free to correct me if I’m off!)

But what you’re describing is spot-on in terms of function:

1. The voice of reflection

Characters like her are rare in this universe—people who have both the emotional intelligence and the space to reflect. She doesn’t just survive; she thinks and feels deeply, and helps others process things they can’t put into words.

That’s very Greek chorus-esque: observing, commenting, empathizing, and mirroring the audience’s own emotions.

2. The subtle strength of empathy

She’s not there to fight or take control. Instead, she offers insight and comfort—without being naïve. That kind of emotional presence is powerful in a world that’s all about power through violence.

She understands that Joel’s anger and protectiveness are born from loss. She might not condone his choices, but she getsthem. That nuance is important.

3. She gives grief room to breathe

Most characters in The Last of Us are too busy surviving to really grieve. But she lets grief exist. She helps others hold it without immediately pushing them toward vengeance. And that makes her a counterbalance to the cycle the show constantly wrestles with.

It’s characters like her—quiet, thoughtful, emotionally grounded—that make the show richer than just a survival story. They hold space for hope, healing, and meaning, even when everything seems lost.

A casual read would have Ellie become the worst version of herself, all strength, rage and revenge. However, I wonder if maybe she fulfills or completes Joel’s circle? Where he couldn’t change, perhaps she can.

Chet replied:

Yes—exactly that.

A surface-level read of Ellie’s journey, especially in Part II, might suggest she’s just following Joel’s footsteps into a darker, colder version of herself. But when you look closer, it’s possible that Ellie is actually the one who breaks the cycle—the one who chooses not to let her grief destroy what’s left of her humanity.

That idea—that Ellie completes Joel’s arc, rather than just echoing it—is incredibly powerful. Here’s how that might work:

Joel: Love that consumes

Joel’s love for Ellie saves her life—but it also damns him. He couldn’t let go of Sarah, and when faced with losing Ellie, he couldn’t bear the loss again. So he acted out of fear and grief, violently. And while it was human and relatable, it wasn’t healing.

Joel couldn’t change. He couldn’t forgive the world. He couldn’t find peace. But he gave Ellie love—something real, flawed, and unconditional—and in doing so, maybe gave her the tools to grow beyond him.

Ellie: Grief that evolves

Ellie goes down a similar road—loss, revenge, obsession—but she takes it one step further. She gets to the brink. She has the chance to destroy the person who hurt her (and who destroyed her “father”), and then… she doesn’t.

That choice—not killing Abby, even after everything—feels like the first real step toward breaking the cycle. It’s not triumphant. It doesn’t erase the pain. But it’s Ellie reclaiming agency over her own soul, where Joel couldn’t.

That’s a completion. Or maybe, a kind of redemption through her.

“You keep finding something to fight for.”

That line from Joel comes back again and again. But maybe what Ellie chooses to fight for, in the end, isn’t revenge. Maybe it’s forgiveness. Maybe it’s peace. Maybe it’s simply herself.

If Joel’s story is about love that breaks the world, then maybe Ellie’s is about love that survives it.

You’ve tapped into something really deep here. It’s what makes The Last of Us more than just another dystopian story—it’s tragic, but not hopeless. Painful, but not meaningless.

Thanks for your insights into some of the themes and characters of this second season; I can’t wait to see where we go from here.

Major and Minor Milestones

/ ronnyjames / 2 Comments

When I first retired, my wife Deb suggested that I consider writing a blog. Perhaps in jest, who knows, but it was something I thought I could do that would at least keep me occupied while I discovered what to do with my retired life. 

Our family inherited quite an extensive genealogy compilation on my mother’s side and I’ve worked a bit to learn more about my dad’s side of the family. After I started my blog in 2019, family history became a fruitful topic to write about and has become one of the most read categories on my blog. Recently I discovered our family’s roots in America go back to the 1650s so there is more rich material to mine; I’ve already got a few posts teed up over the next few months.

While the blog has grown slowly these past five years, I was very surprised to get my latest stats: the numbers are in and it’s time for the big reveal, the Milestones both Minor and Major.

This is Number 100

Today’s post is my 100th entry, and coming from someone who thought he had little to nothing to say (or write) I am amazed, astonished, and astounded. We made it over the first big hurdle.

10,149 Views

I know there are Instagrammers out there whose posts easily surpass 10,000 views at a time, but I’m still putting this one in the Wins column.

4,698 Visitors

Thanks for stopping by, friends! It might not always be your cup of tea, or coffee, but I appreciate all of you.

71,000 Words

So many words! With an average of 718 words per post, it looks like I’ve written well over 71,000 words, though I’m sure I’ve repeated a few. While the average novel features 80–100 thousand words, I’ve definitely written enough for a shorter autobiography. Yet I’m struck by these words from Ecclesiastes 5:2-3 “Be not rash with your mouth, nor let your heart be hasty to utter a word before God, for God is in heaven and you are on earth. Therefore let your words be few. For a dream comes with much business, and a fool’s voice with many words.

It’s been an exciting five years and I can’t wait to see where the Lord leads us next. Hope you stay with me!

200 Years and Looking Good

/ ronnyjames / 1 Comment

Last week we went for a preview of items to bid on from an auction at Frascasti, an 1823 brick mansion in central Virginia. Frascati was built for Philip Barbour, Associate Justice for the Supreme Court. John Perry, known for his work for Thomas Jefferson in building the University of Virginia and Monticello, oversaw construction. Frascati is on the National Register of Historic Places and is a Virginia Historic Landmark. The Federal-style brick home has a commanding view of the valley down through Somerset and on to the Blue Ridge Mountains. Hidden from the road by overgrown boxwoods, it must have been an imposing presence on the hill two centuries ago.

While the home isn’t open for tours, it was recently sold and the family, who had held the property for over four decades, released many of the furnishings in an estate auction. We went for the preview and had the opportunity to walk through the home as we marked our list of items to bid on.

The peeling paint on the first floor walls gave no indication of the grandeur the home once possessed. Entering the parlor I was surprised at the size of the room, dominated by a large chandelier set within an immense ceiling medallion. Oftentimes even the light fixtures are auctioned off—this one wasn’t and I imagine that it will be staying with the home.

We walked from front parlor to office, on through the dining room and made our way upstairs to one of the bedrooms which had items on the auction list. We had intended bidding on a pair of crystal bedroom table lamps. They were as beautiful in person as they had appeared in the online catalog though their fragile shades would need replacing. Up another flight of stairs we found a third floor lunette window at the front of the house with an amazing view over the boxwoods to the neighboring properties beyond. 

Frascati was one of four plantation homes in the area, only three of which still exist intact. A mansion designed by Thomas Jefferson, home to Governor Barbour, was built in 1820 and destroyed in a fire in 1848. Somerset Plantation, just down Rt 231 the Blue Ridge Turnpike, was built in 1821 and served as a design inspiration for Frascati. Montpelier, home to President James Madison and his wife Dolly, is now a historic site overseen by the Montpelier Foundation and owned by the National Historic Trust. 

My first impression of the mansion? What an opportunity for a grand event venue or a ballroom! The ornate plaster crown moldings and soaring interiors just speak of the Regency era in England. With examples such as Downton Abbey and Bridgerton, what a venue this could be for concerts or recitals. There is an existing deed of easement signed by the owners in 1999 with the Virginia Board of Historic Resources which guides what can be done with the buildings and the 64 acres. It remains to be seen what the new owners choose to do with this historic property. 

We ended up with a few items from the sale: a pair of crystal table lamps, three side chairs upholstered in a beautiful striped damask, two silverplate chafing dishes we hope to use for a party, a vintage illustrated book on Paris. As I was leaving, one of the daughters of the homeowner handed me a tiny green plastic house she had found while cleaning upstairs. A missing Monopoly game piece, she said, which went with the collection of games we had acquired. And then she spent several minutes telling me about each of the items we had purchased. I suppose it was her way of saying goodbye to a home she and her family had loved for more than 40 years and which had survived more than two hundred.

Let’s Chat (GPT)

/ ronnyjames / Leave a comment

Sometime back I wrote a post on my website using ChatGPT; actually, I asked the questions and then used the system’s responses in an effort to sus out the narrative and possible conclusion of a series on HBO. The series was a takeoff from a popular roleplaying game (which I had not played). And so, while it seems most of the show’s viewers already had the end in sight based on their familiarity with the video game, it was new territory for me. You can read the post here or watch it online here. No spoilers! But it writing the post did give me an appreciation for and a tiny peek into the world of AI.

Over lunch with a friend this week, the topic of AI came up again during our conversation. It has been all over the news recently, at least here outside the nation’s capitol, and with President Trump’s announcement of Stargate datacenter infrastructure investment, well it seemed like a good time to take another look under the covers. That, and with every software or App update seeming to push their own version of AI, I wondered how much it may already be impacting my life.

So Dave challenged me with a small stress test. I had used AI before, but would I be interested in using the technology to plan out an upcoming (hopefully!) overseas trip? Game on and challenge accepted!

We are interested in a possible ten day adventure to a country I have never visited before. I started by posting what seemed like a pretty modest request: plan an itinerary for a seven day driving excursion. stops for sites of interest, accommodations, and dining. In seconds I was rewarded with a detailed plan for my adventure. Pushing on, I asked for tweaks in the results: what about stops for pubs and restaurants? How about interesting castle or garden tours along the way? What about historical sites to visit, distilleries, shopping? There is a limit to what a free session will return but I had what I was looking for. When copied into a Word doc, I had ten pages of preplanned travel adventure.

One last outing with the software before I close. With ten pages of results, I wondered if ChatGPT would condense or summarize the information for me. Rather than wading thru all that paperwork with a yellow hilighter, let’s let the AI do the work. Again, seconds later, a condensed version of my summer itinerary in was delivered, one and a half pages of pure travel fun waiting for me. In the past we’ve spent considerable amounts on Fodor travel guides and read thru numerous online reviews of hotels and restaurants, various travel experiences recommended by others. This year we are going to give AI a shot as our personal travel planner.

Comment below with your own experiences with AI; for good or il, it looks like it will be with us going forward. Oh! one last thing. I had used Adobe Firefly to generate a graphic for this post. Not satisfied with the results, I went old-school and ended up creating my own montage of text images. It took quite a bit longer than a few seconds.

Come to America

/ ronnyjames / Leave a comment

Why? Why did my distant relatives come to America? I’ve pieced together the Who and the When and also the How. Through genealogical websites, librairies, and church records I’ve managed to sketch a fairly accurate account of my great-grandfather Paul Hilbig’s journey to America beginning with his birth in Prussia in 1870, his family’s immigration in 1874 and their settling in Petoskey, Michigan. But Why? Leaving Germany in the late 19th century would have been an arduous journey to make, especially with a young family.

Considering the political and economic climate of Germany in the late 1800s, it’s not surprising that many families made the decision to leave for what they hoped would be a more prosperous, and safe future elsewhere. On 16 July 1870, the French parliament voted to declare war on Prussia; France invaded German territory on 2 August. In the final days of the war, with German victory all but assured, the German states proclaimed their union as the German Empire under the Prussian king Wilhelm I and Chancellor Bismarck. With the notable exceptions of Austria and German Switzerland, the vast majority of German-speakers were united under a nation-state for the first time. Following an armistice with France, the Treaty of Frankfurt was signed on 10 May 1871. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Prussian_War)

Meanwhile, back in Michigan, immigrants were being actively recruited from Northern Europe and especially Germany to help settle the area. Michigan was rich in mining, logging, and agricultural resources, but poor in human resources. Beginning in 1845, Michigan established an Office of Foreign Emigration in New York and published a pamphlet which promoted the virtues of the state. Between 1860 and 1900, more than 700,000 immigrants came to Michigan, and nearly 400,000 of these new arrivals were born in foreign countries.

In 1869, the governor of Michigan appointed a Commissioner of Emigration to reside in Germany “. . . for the purpose of encouraging immigration to Michigan from German States and other countries of Europe.” (A Brief History of Michigan)

Portrait of Max H Allardt, from Michigan’s Thumb, a Paradise for Saxonia Settlers

The agent, Max H. Allardt, was posted to Germany from 1870-1875 where he published a periodical and a pamphlet extolling the wonders of Michigan. Allardt was born in Germany in 1829, immigrating with his family to the US in 1833. He studied law in Cleveland, and before being appointed Commissioner, had published the Daily Review newspaper in 1861. Immigration efforts proved to be very successful and the program was closed in 1885. By 1890 an estimated 2.8 million German-born immigrants lived in the United States with a majority of the German-born living in the United States located in the “German triangle,” whose three points were Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and St. Louis.

The 1880 census lists the occupation of my great-grandfather’s stepfather as farmer. Later occupations are listed as carpenter or cabinet maker, skills he would have picked up living among the German immigrants in northern Michigan. My great-grandfather’s occupation was also listed as carpenter, the family evidently having given up on farming perhaps when they moved closer into the town of Petoskey. Whether farmer or carpenter, they exhibited skills that would have been essential in the early development of northern Michigan, at that time abundant in natural resources but lacking in manpower to develop the area. A summer of research along the Hilbig Heritage Tour has essentially answered the Who What Where When and Why questions of my ancestry. But I’m sure there are still more discoveries to be made!

You can read the first blog post about this family search on my blog here: Coming to America

Photos from Michigan’s Thumb, by U.H. Schmidt

Bucket List

/ ronnyjames / 1 Comment

Do you have a Bucket List that you’ve been slowly working on, crossing off items as you accomplish a goal or visit someplace special?

I hadn’t really considered myself as having much of a list; if I did at one time, that list has definitely gotten shorter over the years. This month we were able to see Bruce Springsteen in concert (the tickets were a gift) so that was a major item checked off. We had seen U2 for my birthday a few years back at Madison Square Garden. The view of the Garden from the Empire State Building, below, was taken on a trip to New York City in 1985. I had seen Elton John in the 70’s and then again in the 80s in Germany, that was special. We saw Sting at Wolftrap a couple of years ago, but that’s it for Big Name Artists. I’m hoping to see Adele at some point although she has announced a hiatus from performing for the next several years. Deb saw Barry Manilo in concert many years ago. We both saw the Beach Boys recently, but after performing for 50 years, who hasn’t seen them? Check.

I’ve been to Taiwan on a missions trip but I would still love to visit Japan one day. Deb has been to S. Korea which I thought was pretty special. We’ve both lived in Germany and visited a number of European countries but I still have a visit to the Hermitage museum in St. Petersburg on my list. I doubt I will ever get to Russia considering the political climate today but I’m leaving it on the list.

Toured the Eiffel Tower, the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris and the Louvre but still haven’t been to the Vatican. The second view of the Eiffel Tower (below) is the smaller version from Las Vegas; we took our granddaughter there on our trip to Arizona. I’ve walked about on the observation deck of the Empire State Building, the World Trade Center before it fell, and the Top of the ROCK. So I don’t think I have any more tall buildings on the list. Having toured two of Frank Lloyd Wright’s landmark homes, I would really like to see a few more of those. We shall see. 

One day I hope we get to Niagara Falls. We’ve crossed the Golden Gate Bridge into San Francisco, sat on the South Rim of the Grand Canyon, and flown across the glaciers in a seaplane in Alaska so pretty good with those. Devil’s Tower is still on the list. Maybe an African safari someday though we drove through a nice, little safari in southern Oregon! 

Alaska by seaplane

The Redwoods. Check. The Matterhorn in Switzerland. Check. Walked with the flamingos in parade in the Bahamas so that was fun. Never ridden an elephant or a camel but they can stay off the list. I did finally get to go up in a small piper cub airplane with a friend and that was better than I expected. Haven’t been in a helicopter yet. 

We finally saw the Rockettes in New York City and the Christmas Tree in Rockefeller Center, definitely a Bucket List item! And catching a Broadway show was pretty special (considering what ticket prices are like today) but I would still like to see a show in the West End some day. The only time I went to London, going to a theater wasn’t on my list, though I did enjoy the Hard Rock Cafe in Piccadilly Circus; that was definitely a show.

We’ve enjoyed beignets and cafe au lait at Cafe DuMonde and listened to jazz in New Orleans, lobster and cold beer in Maine with fireworks, flamenco dancers and sangria in Spain, and Shakespeare in the Park, but I think it would be fun to experience a Mariachi band in Mexico, or at least in Texas, with a margarita, that would be nice. 

I’ve stayed in a small castle in Austria, a yurt in Maryland, camper trailers and Army tents, cottages and cabins, but I would still like to stay in a treehouse. Also a tepee. 

We’ve been trying to give our granddaughter a variety of experiences that I don’t believe she would normally get (though she has been up in a helicopter, jealous!) New York City, Boston, Las Vegas, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco (hopefully Los Angeles or perhaps London next year). I’m not sure how many more different trips we can take her on but we are hoping to keep up these summer trips with her. At some point it will be fun to see what she puts on her bucket list.

How are you doing on your Bucket List? Making any progress? or are you starting to add more items to the list after checking off others? It’s definitely a lifetime adventure, let me know what you have planned next!

Bandits Part 3

/ ronnyjames / Leave a comment

The effort to rid the city of vice brings to mind the Batman movies and Gotham City except that here, there wasn’t a caped crusader fighting the sinister dark elements of the criminal underworld. But much like watching a movie for the second time, reading back through events that have already transpired, in this case more than 90 years ago, we can know the ending from the beginning. And the ending in this particular story was very interesting.

While my grandfather may have been just one of many individuals caught up in local efforts to control vice, there were other factions involved that eventually took center stage. The long list of names covered in the newspaper at the time also included one of the arresting officers, along with the recently elected mayor and his appointed Chief of Police. There were others as well, including the county sheriff, but the mayor, police chief, and deputy police chief were at the center of the investigation.

Mayor Seccombe had been elected in April with a substantial plurality of votes out of a field of six candidates for mayor. He had been a city councilman running against several other businessmen, a lawyer, and others who all vowed to “cleanup the city”.

Upon election, the new mayor chose for his chief of police Dan Murdock, a deputy sheriff in the county. Speculation at the time had him choosing another individual and the choice eventually came down to Murdock or another San Bernardino policeman, C. Lawrence Jordan. With Murdock as Chief, Jordan was named the night Chief of Police.

By December of 1933 a grand jury was conducting an inquiry into city vice and gambling during which Mayor Seccombe, Murdock, Jordan and others were called to testify.

At the heart of the investigation were allegations that the police department, or some individuals therein, had been operating a “pay-off” system in regards to gambling in the city, which perhaps had related to the low number of raids and arrests conducted that year. Surprisingly, or perhaps not, no indictments were returned as a result of their investigation.

In March 1934 assistant chief Jordan was suspended by Chief Murdock over accusations of receiving kickbacks regarding the operation of lotteries in Chinatown. Jordan did not resign and the Chief ended up filing charges with the civil service commission which would eventually call both men, and others, to testify regarding the accusations.

The police chief filed charges of extortion against his assistant in what must have felt like a bit of payback in that, the previous year, both had been considered for the position of Chief of Police. Awkward! The extortion charges relied on testimony from three lottery game owners who basically stated that assistant chief Jordan had accepted money from them in exchange for immunity from arrest. How much was he accused of having received in consideration for allowing their operations to continue unabated? $1.50 per week. Well then.

In answering the allegations, assistant chief Jordan maintained that $1.50 per week payoff for a gambling operation that reportedly netted thousands of dollars a week was absurd. He also maintained that it was the chief of police who “expressly forbid” him to raid those or any other form of vice in the city “except under his direct and detailed command.” So then, now we have a very awkward situation! Whom to believe?

So then it seems that the individual responsible could be the police chief and not his deputy. But wait! After the civil service commission hearing regarding his suspension, Jordan was exonerated and his job reinstated. He was however reprimanded for “frequenting of questionable places other than in the performance of his duty as an officer and the intimated purchase by him of lottery tickets.” Result? Suspension without pay for thirty days.

Several weeks later, two members of the city council sought to have the chief of police removed from office; the move was blocked by the mayor but taken up a week later at a special session. During that session, one of the councilmen who had voiced opposition to the chief changed his position. The inquiry ending up with yet another exoneration, this time for the police chief who ended up retaining his job. Following his exoneration, the city councilman who had spearheaded the drive to have the police chief removed was himself facing a recall effort by voters in his own ward. Those efforts proved to be short lived and the councilman not only kept his seat but shook hands with (forgive and forget) with the police chief he had attempted to have removed.

It seems with that last city council session, the dust-up involving the assistant chief, the chief of police, and the city council had come to an end. Chief Murdock continued to make periodic arrests for gambling and other forms of vice within the city; assistant chief Jordan was reinstated though not at his previous position; and the councilman who was at the center of the police chief recall movement managed to retain his seat. Arrests continued to result in hefty fines being added to the city’s treasury. All-in-all, it reads like another episode of Law and Order in Gotham City. Admittedly my grandfather’s part in all of this was quite small, but in researching him I did get a very up-close look at small town politics, intrigue, and the way public morals have shifted over time here in the US. Ninety years ago but it sounds like today.

*UPDATE*

In a surprising, somewhat ironic note, my Mom wrote this to me:
“When your dad and I got married, the former mayor’s  grand daughter, Evelyn Seccombe, was my maid of honor.  Her mother and my mother had been close friends in San Bernardino High. They were both in the very first graduating class…1918, of the new High School.” Lora Lea (Willis) Chamberlin 9/10/2024

Bandits Part 2

/ ronnyjames / Leave a comment
Some Comparisons…

It started with an election, as these things often do, and a new mayor promising to “clean up the city.” The election in April of the that year brought in a new mayor and with him, a new chief of police with a renewed emphasis on curbing vice in the city. And so they took action: 60 people were arrested in a series of raids in July, 1933. While 60 doesn’t seem to be such an extraordinary number to us today, in 1933 there were only 39,000 people living in San Bernardino, California. That seems like quite an effort.

In a campaign to “rid the city of vice and lawlessness”, the mayor added two additional police members to the vice task force, “and the drive will include gambling establishments, houses of ill repute, boot legging places, and other similar dens of vice in our community.”

In December of 1933, Police Chief Murdock reported that he had made an initial survey of gambling establishments in the city after he first took office in April and found 20 of them. So something was going on that needed looking into.

A postcard from the 1933 Chicago World Fair

A chatty social article in the San Bernardino Sun mentioned that Mr. and Mrs. Ralph A. Hilbig left in late June, driving out to Chicago. It was understood that they would be visiting the Century of Progress Fair (Chicago World Fair) and later visit with relatives in Michigan where Ralph Hilbig grew up. 

On the 8th of July nine San Bernardino business men were placed under technical arrest during a slot machine war. The District Attorney had issued 10 complaints at the request of a private citizen who attested that the machines were gambling devices as he had played all of them. Arrested were a bar owner, cigar store owner, several cafe owners and a billiard hall owner. My grandfather Ralph A. Hilbig, who was out of the city at the time (the Chicago trip) could not be brought in. All the men were fined $25. While the police had raided 11 establishments, they only seized 9 slot machines, two of which were at my grandfather’s pharmacy. I can only imagine now why he would “assertedly” have gambling devices in his drug store (what could they possibly pay off in 1933?!). But later news articles never indicate the eventual disposition of the seized machines.

When my grandparents returned from Chicago on the 14th of July, they assumed that the drug store had been burglarized while they were away; however two slot machines had been seized from his drug store and a warrant had been issued for his arrest on charges of possession of gambling devices. He pleaded not guilty to the possession charge and was released on $50 bail with a trial set for the following Monday.

An article from December 12, 1933 has Ralph A. Hilbig listed again with a group defendants who were charged with possession of slot machines and released. Additionally, there were arrests for running a poker game, a domino gambling game in chinatown, penny ante games—all in all 48 individuals arrested. He forfeited the $50 bail when he failed to appear in court. Nine other businessmen forfeited their bail as well for the same offense in a series of gambling and vice raids which had netted almost 60 individuals. Looking back, it seems my grandfather took the fine and bail forfeiture rather than the trial.

That seems to have been my grandfather’s last close brush with the legal system. In 1934 his name appeared in a rather long list of individuals who had been selected to serve in a jury pool and indeed, he ended up serving on two juries.

But the story doesn’t end here; what was happening behind the scenes is often more interesting than the actual drama. And next week we will finish up this three-part story with a look at the police officer, the chief of police, and the new mayor. Oh! And their appearance before the grand jury. That’s when things really get interesting.