RichardHowe.com – Voices from Lowell & Beyond

Seen & Heard: Volume 27

A weekly report on things I’ve read, heard and seen since last Wednesday. 

Article: “Inside Trump’s Great American State Fair” by Jim Puzzanghera, et al, Boston Globe, June 29, 2026. The Great American State Fair is a 16-day event on the National Mall in Washington, DC that runs from June 25 to July 10, 2026, to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the United States. It is organized by Freedom 250, the outfit created by President Trump to run various semiquincentennial events (as opposed to America 250, the official, bipartisan entity created by Congress for the same purpose). For this article, the Globe dispatched a team of reporters to the fair to see what was going on. They observe that even though there is a booth from Massachusetts, no official state presence since Governor Maura Healey opted not to participate after seeing the price the state was expected to pay for the booth. But Massachusetts is not completely unrepresented – a Trump supporter from Greenfield hit up a local maple sugar plant for some sample then drove to DC and sits at the booth each day handing out maple syrup bottles. New Hampshire has an official presence but none of the other New England states are present. The reporters also describe some of the other state booths, especially for states with Republican governors, have more robust offerings. I thought the article was straightforward with no editorializing, but there was nothing I read that made me regret missing out on this. 

Article: “NFL ‘Insider’ Whose Access Became the Story” by Katherine Rosman and Ken Belson, New York Times, June 26, 2026. This was a fascinating article in many ways. Essentially, it was the Times investigating the sports journalist Dianna Russini – who worked for the New York Times. The thing being investigated was Russini’s relationship with Mike Vrabel, the head coach of the New England Patriots football team, who she’s covered in the media for years. Earlier this year, other media outlets published photos of Russini and Vrabel in intimate-looking situations. They are both married, though not to each other. The investigation was not prompted by moral issues but by questions of journalistic ethics, specifically, did the reporter’s personal relationship with the coach influence the coverage of said coach by said reporter. There’s a lot going on here. First is the gender dynamics. Had this been a male reporter socializing with the coach in a non-public way, I doubt the resulting angst would be comparable since in our misogynistic society, women are held to different standards than are men. Next is an internal feud at the Times. Russini actually worked for the Athletic which started as an edgy, web-based, all sports site that became hugely popular among sports fans but didn’t make much money. In January 2022, the Times bought the Athletic for $550 million and turned the Athletic into the paper’s sports department (shedding many sports reporters in the process). Many of those who came over from the Athletic are paid substantially more than are most Times reporters, but they are also said to be held to much looser ethical constraints. I’m ambivalent about most of this but what bothers me most is this whole “insider” philosophy, that there are people who cultivate sources to gain access and obtain news before anyone else. While I value getting news promptly, my sense is this whole system is just a game among insiders and we’re the dupes who pay subscriptions or watch ads to fund the insiders, their employers and their sources. The setup is inherently manipulative with the reporter being the one easily played by the source. This is one of the things that’s most soured my interest in sports recently. Whether it’s MAGA-loving Bob Kraft (owner of the Patriots), the underperforming Red Sox, rampant gambling, both legal and by insiders that I think gets a wink and a nod acknowledgement, and high cost of in person events that exclude many, sports has lost much of my affection and of my attention. 

Article: “Trump Rants Divide Court on Race Bias” by Adam Liptak, New York Times, June 28, 2026. By a 6 to 3 vote, the US Supreme Court upheld President Trump’s power to dissolve the Temporary Protected (Legal) Status of 350,000 Haitian refugees who have been living in the United States which will likely lead to their imminent deportation (after being snatched off the street by ICE). Those challenging Trump’s decision alleged it was based on his racial animus which would make it illegal. They cited his claim (with no evidence) that Haitian people living in Ohio were eating the pet dogs and cats of their neighbors; that Haitians “probably have AIDS”; that Haitian immigration is “like a death wish for our country;” that Haiti is “a shithole country”; and that Haitians “are poisoning the blood of our nation.” Writing for the majority, Justice Alito said none of this was overt racism and that the President likely had reasons unrelated to race for his decision. In dissent, Justice Kagan said Trump’s comments were “shot through with racial stereotypes and tropes.” Chief Justice Roberts and his conservative colleagues long ago lost any legitimacy in my eyes. Fortunately, decisions like this will, when viewed by future historians, will enliven the debate about whether this court or the one that decided the Dred Scott case in 1857. 

Article: “Israelis Watch Ties With US Coming Loose” by David M. Halbfinger, New York Times, June 28, 2026. This story came after three Congressional candidates in the New York Democratic primary all of whom were critical of Israel and its policy in Gaza, won their races with two beating incumbents who were longtime supporters of Israel. This article is mostly about the anxiety that people in Israel feel about the wavering support the country has from America, both from the government, since many think that President Trump’s agreement with Iran stabbed Israel in the back; but also by individual Americans whose support for Israel has dropped considerably. My personal turning point came in 2015 when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was invited to address Congress by its Republican leadership and his remarks he harshly condemned the agreement that President Obama had negotiated with Iran. It was Netanyahu’s prerogative to criticize the agreement (although as subsequent events have demonstrated, it was a pretty good deal), but for him to come into Congress and blatantly disrespect the President from that podium was outrageous (although not as outrageous as the Republicans who had brought him there). I fully understand the horrors of the Holocaust and the evil of antisemitism, but that should not mean that we all have to fully back Israel’s policies, right or wrong. I suppose I feel about Israel the way many in the rest of the world feel about the United States these days. The country has a horrible leader and the people bear some responsibility for that, but that does not erase the affection I have for the country and its people. 

Article: “Questions swirl around Duck Boat accident” by Brian MacQuarrie, et al, Boston Globe, June 30, 2026. If you ever are in downtown Boston in the nice weather, you can’t miss the “Duck Boats” filled with tourists cruising through the city’s streets. It’s undoubtedly one of the most popular tourist experiences in town. Besides a narrated driving tour through the city, riders get a cruise on the Charles River while still in the vehicle. This weekend, one of the Duck Boats stalled while in the water and another attempted to tow the disabled one up the launching ramp which is near the Museum of Science. As the two vehicles ascended the ramp, the tow rope broke and the disabled vehicle rolled back down the ramp then fell onto its side, injuring 11 passengers. Fortunately, it did not turn over into the water. Although the Boston vehicles are replicas built specifically for tourism, the original Duck Boats were built for the US Army in World War II as an amphibious utility truck. Back in the late 1960s, I read a Young Adult history of the D-Day invasion. Twenty-four of the Ducks were used in the first wave to bring 105mm howitzers ashore to provide direct fire support to the infantry, except all 24 sank in the heavy swells before reaching the beach. That story always comes to mind whenever I see a brightly painted civilian version chugging up Tremont Street, filled with people making “quacking” noises, two dozen of the 600,000 each year who pay $60 to take a ride.

A Bigger Splash in a Bigger Heat

A Bigger Splash in a Bigger Heat (1)

By Louise Peloquin

A bigger splash

After an unusually early record-breaking heatwave at the end of May, June 15th temperatures started rising past the three-digit mark to top 106 in Paris on the 24th making the City of Lights the hottest spot on the planet. The thermometer started inching down again on June 28th, but the extreme temperatures left disturbances in their wake from disrupting end-of-the-year baccalaureate exams in classrooms turned into saunas to cancelling outdoor music festivals to closing the Louvre and the Eiffel Tower early in the afternoon much to the disappointment of summer tourists.

Newly-elected Mayor Emmanuel Grégoire limited city traffic by instituting alternative driving days for vehicles according to their odd or even license plate numbers. Another decision was lifting a Canal Saint Martin swimming ban in Paris’s 10th arrondissement. (2) Back in May, many coolness seekers had violated the ban by cannon-balling off of bridges into the murky, moss green waters. How can a police officer nab a sweating kid about to make a big splash? Lowell youngsters have similarly jumped into canals in the past, haven’t they?

Temps climbing well into the 100’s in a city whose old Lutetian stone, brick and granite buildings are largely lacking AC, persuaded Mayor Grégoire, from his air-conditioned Hôtel de Ville (City Hall) office, to empathize with Parisians, and turn the Canal Saint Matin into a gratuit swimming pool. He also decided to leave all of the usually-locked-at-dusk city parks open 24/7 to allow suffocating flat-dwellers to escape stagnant air, picnic in the dark and, if so inclined, dance in the moonlight.

On June 16, the mayor tweeted:

You asked for it; we did it!
As of tomorrow, in anticipation of the extreme heat, swimming in the Canal Saint Martin will be authorized!
Take advantage of it from 4 to 8 PM!

— Emmanuel Grégoire (@egregoire)

With photographer lagadelle’s permission, here is a September 2017 shot of le Canal.

Canal Saint Martin

    Le Canal will be a Paris swimming venue in early July, as it has been since the 2024 Olympics, covered here with 7 reports. (3) “Using le Canal as a tool for refreshment… along with other measures, like offering discount tickets to air-conditioned cinemas, is a way for the city to combat global warming,” declared one city official. Political opponents did not necessarily agree with the statement.

Canal shot by photographer Steffi Emmi

The Agence Régionale de Santé (Regional Health Agency) states that water quality testing guarantees meeting sanitary standards in le Canal.

Some people are not so sure about that and had already questioned Seine water cleanliness during the 2024 Olympics as the pieces in footnote 3 reported.

An Instagram video posted on June 21st showed a municipal agent throwing garbage right into le Canal. It went viral. That didn’t prevent hundreds of Parisians from joining millions of microbes in the newly-opened swimming hole.

Swimmers on the bank of le Canal

Now that the two-week heatwave has subsided, what is happening?

Mayor Grégoire has reinstated the Canal ban as of June 27th after a man swimming after dark outside the authorized Canal zone drowned and violent thunder and lightening storms hit Paris. Some city parks were once again closed at dusk. To offset the bans, Paris officials reminded everyone that more than 1,300 drinking water distribution points continue to supply thirsty city dwellers and tourists.

The planned reopening le Canal Saint Martin will depend on meteorological conditions but the official calendar is set from July 5th to September 6th, 2 to 6 PM on Sundays, if water quality allows.

Since 2007, from July to the beginning of September, the City of Paris has set up artificial sandy beaches along the Seine – Paris-Plages (Paris Beaches). All are welcome and entrance is free. Since 2024, three free, supervised, Seine swimming sites will open as they did in 2025. Details are found here.

Here is the map, published in the latest edition of Le magazine des Parisiens, on swimming in the city in 2026.

After covering bigger splashes, let’s take a look at the unprecedented bigger heat endured by Europe from the middle to the end of June.

The UK recorded its hottest day on June 25th when the thermometer hit 98 degrees in southwest England. Germany reached 98.6; Spain 96.8 and Italy 95.

France was the hottest spot because of its location on the continent, situated at the heart of the heat dome. Hot air, trapped under clear, breezeless, blue skies, caused heat to accumulate and immobilized the hot air making it stagnate for several days. Spain is more protected by the Atlantic Ocean and Eastern Europe is closer to cooler continental air masses. So in mid-June, it was hotter in Paris than in Madrid or in Rome and meteorologists see another heatwave looming as of July 6th.

What did the French say about the 12-day canicule? (4) “No one was ready for this, neither the schools nor the hospitals, nor anyone.” A cyclist commuter described his daily ride to work: “your skin burns, it really burns.” One network reported that an initial overview of the consequences of the June 2026 canicule showed a considerably higher mortality rate than that of the previous months with approximately 1000 additional deaths occurring mostly in private homes. During the week of June 22nd to 27th alone, 105 people died in Paris of heat-related causes. Fifty-five people drowned between June 15th and 26th, most of them in unauthorized locations like the river Loire whose strong currents and whirlpools quickly subdue even the strongest of swimmers.

Assessing the many consequences of the canicule will take some time. Twenty-three years after the August 2003 heatwave which caused 15,000 causalties, some French people maintain that their country has not begun to seriously deal with changing weather patterns. On June 29th, a meteorologist and historian declared that Paris will undoubtedly be the deadliest city in Europe should the upcoming heatwave hit 120 degrees.

A heat dome is now suffocating parts of the United States including New England. Although America is better-equipped with reliable AC than is Europe, is it ready to face the future?

****

 1) Reference in hommage to David Hockney, the British artist who died on June 11, 2026 at the age off 88. A Bigger Splash is a large pop art painting measuring 95.5 by 96 inches, depicting a swimming pool with a large splash of water created by an unseen diver. It was painted in California between April and June 1967, when Hockney was teaching at the University of California, Berkeley.

2) The Canal Saint-Martin is a 2.8 mile canal in Paris, connecting the Canal de l’Ourcq to the Seine.

3) Click on these links for the 3 pieces on swimming during the 2024 Paris Summer Olympics:

https://richardhowe.com/2024/07/09/the-last-lap-pariss-summer-olympics/

https://richardhowe.com/2024/07/16/olympic-happy-hour-ahead/

https://richardhowe.com/2024/07/24/go-jump-in-theseine/

4) French word for heatwave. “Can” refers to “dog” (“canine” has the same linguistic root) and to the “dog days” which are said to be from July 3rd to August 11th. Global warming will certainly modify this definition of “dog days.”

July 4, 2026: toward a more perfect nation by Marjorie Arons-Barron

The entry below is being cross posted from Marjorie Arons-Barron’s own blog.

Four hundred thousand people attended the July Fourth Bicentennial Boston Pops Esplanade Concert in 1976. I was one of them. It was a gorgeous summer night, a peaceful crowd enjoying the music and spirit of post-Watergate comity. A shared sense of patriotism and pride. Fifty years later it’s hard to replicate that sense of optimism.

Fewer than a third of Americans claim they feel excitement on this anniversary, with 59 percent saying that the country’s best years are behind us. Forty percent say our best years are yet to come. To quote a former First Lady, “hope is a choice.”

It’s all too easy to be consumed by outrage at our 47^th President. His Brobdingnagian corruption and lucrative self-dealing. His abuses of power and gratuitous bullying at home and abroad. His contempt for the Constitution he swore to uphold, and his repeated debasement of the office itself. His gob-smacking stupidity and habitual meanness.  His pathological narcissism and emotional dependence on the toadies with whom he surrounds himself. I don’t need to go on and on to make my point.

Even without focusing on him, this milestone national birthday invites a sobering reckoning, acknowledging our shortcomings along with successes.   It may not seem so in Boston’s medical mecca, but the United States has the poorest health outcomes of among high-income countries. Fifty-five countries have better infant mortality rates than we do. We have fallen behind Europe in responding to climate change. The United States is 30^th among the 33 countries in OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.  The list goes on.

Polls confirm that people have lost faith in institutions, their neighbors and themselves. A record 53 percent of Americans say that their fellow citizens have bad morals and ethics. That’s the highest rate of pessimism among the 25 countries that Pew Research surveyed.

Even our belief in democracy is challenged. While 81 percent of those 60 years and older embrace its importance, only half of Americans under 30 years old understand that democracy is key to our nation’s identity. Perhaps they just feel it’s not working for them. Or perhaps, taking it for granted, they just feel there’s no need to work to make it endure.

Walter Isaacson claims these words from the Declaration of Independence constitute the “greatest sentence every written:” “ We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  No country since ancient Greece had so embraced the value of democracy, and it became a model for much of the world.

In penning that “greatest sentence,” however, the Founders were no stranger to hypocrisy. The sentence is full of contradictions, and the American story is the history of how we struggle to resolve those contradictions and form a “more perfect union.”  Our principles were always aspirational, and we have always been a work in progress, starting most obviously with the Constitution’s silence on the fate of some 700,000 enslaved people. (It’s worth remembering that the Fourth of July was for years a day for widespread slave auctions in the South.)

We shouldn’t lose perspective. You can tell from recent visitors to the United States for the FIFA games, how thrilled so many visitors are to be here. They are smitten with our hospitality, abundance, sense of freedom and the vibrant opportunities afforded by a democratic way of life.

Donald Trump may have hijacked the Congressionally authorized non-partisan America 250^th celebration, spreading his likeness all over town (including on the special edition U.S. passports), and turned his White House alternative Freedom250 national birthday party into a MAGA rally. But his tawdry events must not hollow out the fact that this nation is ours.

Our nation’s Founding Fathers left us a foundation of Enlightenment values: rule of law, equality under the law, balance of powers, freedoms of religion and press, individual liberty, consent of the governed. Upon those principles, generations have expanded – sometimes fitfully –  civil rights, economic opportunity, scientific knowledge, and protections for the vulnerable.  Is there more to do? Always.

The current administration has effectively spat on our founding principles, but we know what they are and, if we care about them, we can fight back. People around the world have admired and emulated our democratic experiment.   If the Founding Fathers returned today, would they be disappointed by what they saw?  Most Americans overwhelmingly agree with this negative assessment. But the Founders wrote the Constitution in anticipation of probable assaults on those principles then and now. We fought off the chains of British monarchy, we bled mightily to keep the union together, we built a mighty economic engine, we led world wars in pursuit of peace.

We are radically polarized today, with vastly different and often hyper-partisan opinions on the nature of the American Dream and how to achieve it. Too many politicians play to that polarization and outrage, and we need to do a better job of choosing our leaders, notwithstanding the gerrymandering that has our leaders picking their voters in too many states. We need to demand more of our news media, insisting they and their corporate owners not be cowed by the President’s impulses toward suppression and extortionate litigation.

Our country is patriotic but anxious, proud but pessimistic. But to accept today as the new normal would be a huge mistake. Our country is worth fighting for, and we should celebrate our 250^th birthday as a rededication to righting the ship of state. We should let ourselves enjoy the Boston Pops concert and fireworks. We should feel good about our country. Choose Hope – and act upon it.

Lowell Politics: July 5, 2026

The Lowell City Council met on June 30, 2026. Today I’ll comment on several issues they covered.

A joint motion by Mayor Erik Gitschier and Councilors Corey Robinson and Sean McDonough to “place the Lowell Fire Chief position back into civil service prior to filling this anticipated vacancy” was discussed at length before being defeated with four councilors in favor and seven against.

Two quick observations before getting into the substance of this issue: (1) several councilors spoke cryptically, as if they knew more than they were saying but withheld that information for some reason; and (2) this was another of the council’s recurring proxy fights about supporting or not supporting City Manager Tom Golden.

Back in 2015, the city council, at the request of then City Manager Kevin Murphy, voted to remove the position of fire chief from the civil service system. In its place, the city created a human resources application and selection process that, while fair and equitable, also gave the city manager more say in the selection of the next fire chief.

On Tuesday, the four councilors who voted for the motion – Robinson, McDonough, Sidney Liang, and Mayor Gitschier – argued that the civil service test and related criteria were appropriate measures of skill and suitability, that the city manager would still have some say in the selection, and the protections for the employee afforded by the civil service system were desirable.

At first, councilors who opposed the motion raised procedural issues: The annual civil service test had just been held last month before it was clear there would be an opening in Lowell so local candidates may not have competed. Would the city be forced to take someone from the list who was not from Lowell? If the person hired did not work out, wouldn’t the current system make it easier for the city manager to replace them if necessary? Changing the system would require the legislature to pass home rule legislation which, with the legislature out of session until January, might not be feasible or timely.

Councilor Dan Rourke then got to the heart of the matter by explaining why the system was changed back in 2015. As I understand the civil service process, to fill the office of fire chief, only those who hold the next lowest rank – deputy chief – are eligible to take the test, provided there is more than one deputy chief who signs up for the test. (I assume that if no deputy chiefs or if only one of them signed up for the test, those holding the next lowest rank – captain – would also be eligible.)

As Rourke explained it, the practice in Lowell prior to 2015 was that the deputy chiefs would discretely decide among themselves who would be chief, but then all would sign up to take the test, thereby blocking anyone else from competing. Then on the day of the test, only the deputy designated by their colleagues to be chief would appear for the test while the others did not show up. Since the civil service “multiple candidate” rule applied to registering to take the test, not actually taking it, the one deputy who did appear would get the highest score since theirs was the only score and the choice for the city’s next fire chief would already be made by the time it reached the city manger. Rourke added that this had happened “many times previously in Lowell” and that it allowed “a small group to decide who would be the next fire chief.”

When the roll call on the motion was taken, those who voted against moving the fire chief position into civil service were Councilors Sokhary Chau, John Descoteaux, Belinda Juran, Rita Mercier, Vesna Nuon, Dan Rourke and Kim Scott. As noted above, those voting for the motion were Mayor Gitschier and Councilors Liang, McDonough and Robinson.

****

A motion by Councilor John Descoteaux to take the steps necessary to increase the number of “all alcohol” package store licenses in the city generated an interesting discussion. Descoteaux explained he was recently in a convenience store where another patron was buying a six-pack of beer. The patron told Descoteaux he would have preferred hard liquor, but this store could only sell beer. Descoteaux framed his motion as a way to increase convenience for residents like the one he encountered as well as something that would boost the economy since selling liquor is more lucrative for merchants.

Some councilors spoke approvingly of this as a way of helping small businesses, but others asked how you could ensure that the new licenses went to first time holders and not to entities that already held a dozen or more liquor licenses. Councilor McDonough raised the issue of the geographic distribution of the licenses. In his neighborhood – downtown – there are no liquor stores within reasonable walking distance of most residences. Others echoed that concern, saying many Lowell package stores might be clustered together with the rest spread widely across the city.

Mayor Gitschier was firm in his opposition to any increase citing two reasons: He said every time he visits a school, there seems to be a package store across the street which he said was not a good mix. He also said that in a city plagued by substance abuse, making it easier to buy liquor will not help the social pathologies accompanying that issue.

In the end, the council voted unanimously to refer the motion to the council’s economic development subcommittee to more deeply explore all these concerns and perhaps craft strategies for addressing them. I believe the motion was also referred to the city’s License Commission for a report.

One thing nobody seemed to mention is the seismic shift that’s occurring in America with alcohol consumption. The overarching trend is towards drinking less, particularly among younger people. Some of the reasons for that are prioritizing health and wellness, economic pressures, and changing generational attitudes.

I saw evidence of this firsthand last weekend. A friend from out of town was visiting Boston so we met up at Legal Sea Food for lunch. When I flipped over the menu, I immediately noticed that there were as many choices in the NA (non-alcoholic) beer section as there were in the traditional beer area. (For the record, I ordered an iced tea but really do enjoy Guiness NA).

****

A motion by Councilor McDonough to modify the city ordinance that controls the cost of parking raised some interesting issues. Two years ago, after much study and deliberation, the council amended the parking rate ordinance to automatically increase fees by an amount equal to the increase in the Consumer Price Index. Because the cost of the garages continuously increases, so must the revenue coming into the system. By making the increases automatic and tied to an external measure (the CPI) councilors sought to avoid having to vote on increases each year.  McDonough’s Tuesday motion sought to undo that and require that “all parking rates . . . shall only increase by a majority vote of the city council.”

McDonough’s district includes downtown where many residents must pay for monthly parking in city garages either directly or through their condominium associations. He is the prime recipient of their ire at rate increases, but also for their distress at being deprived of the chance to have their opposition heard in an official setting. Perhaps the main reason the council made this change was to avoid the discomfort of voting for a fee increase at a council meeting packed with people pleading with you not to increase the fee. McDonough countered that by saying that even if the increase was ultimately imposed, if opponents at least had the chance to have their opposition heard they might be less upset than they are about automatic fees.

While McDonough’s point about preserving due process for residents when it comes to fee increases is valid, the unending need for new revenue for the parking fund is a reality. Another reality is that councilors want to stay as councilors and having to vote for repeated fee increases lessens the chance of that happening. Consequently, there could come a time when enough councilors abandoned their fiduciary duty to adequately fund the system in the face of short-term political pressure which would jeopardize city finances.

Which is not to say downtown residents have nothing to complain about. I’ve long thought they are being treated unfairly when it comes to the cost of parking. The city makes huge capital investments to construct parking garages downtown as an important component for economic development. Without the Hamilton Canal Parking Garage, it is doubtful that Draper would be locating its new facility in that district. Because the payoff of new downtown development benefits everyone in the city through higher tax revenues and more jobs, everyone in the city should contribute to the investments the city must make – like new parking garages – to yield that new growth.

However, repaying the bonds that financed the construction of the garages is solely the responsibility of the city’s relatively new parking enterprise fund which is funded solely by parking receipts. Additionally, while downtown residents are likely paying the full fee for their parking passes, others like businesses, students, and city employees often have discounted fees which shift more of the burden to residents.

Over the course of this 30-minute discussion it also became clear there is a disconnect between the parking department and the finance department on implementing the fee increase. This confusion was distressing to some councilors who openly wondered how the council can be sure that ordinances it passes to adjust fees are being consistently implemented. Consequently, the council referred this motion to its finance subcommittee for further investigation.

****

This week in my Seen & Heard Column, a wrote about the “Three Franco Poets from Lowell” event at UMass Lowell last week; reviewed a couple of exhibits I saw at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston (“Framing Nature: Gardens and Imagination” and “Art of the Americas, 1700-1800”); and commented on an Op-Ed about the Biden Family’s reentry into the public eye.

****

David Daniel, a prolific author and longtime contributor to richardhowe.com, passed away recently. Three of his close friends, Steve O’Connor, Jerry Bisantz and Jay Atkinson, remembered Dave in heartfelt essays which I combined into a single blog post which you should check out.