THE WALL STREET JOURNAL. Friday, February 28, 2020 |A
Angel
Games
Dreamers and Schemers
By Barry Siegel
(California, 256 pages, $29.95)BOOKSHELF| By John Buntin
T
he traveling salesman is an American archetype.
The real-estate agent, by contrast, is often overlooked.
This is curious. Real-estate agents have long exercised
tremendous influence over how American cities have grown.
And nowhere has this influence been greater than in Los
Angeles. In “Dreamers and Schemers: How an Improbable Bid
for the 1932 Olympics Transformed Los Angeles From Dusty
Outpost to Global Metropolis,” Barry Siegel tells the story of
one of history’s more significant real-estate agents, William
Garland. It’s the story of how Los Angeles came to be what it
is, and how Hollywood mass culture came to include the
sporting world.
Garland was born in 1866 in Maine to a family of preachers
and farmers. Instead of going to college, as his high-minded
mother insisted, he set out to become a businessman. He left
school early, moved to Boston and got a job as a clerk at a
crockery firm. Boredom and a bad cough drove him next to
Daytona Beach, Fla., where he worked as a stagecoach driver.
Then came six years in
Chicago, where he worked his
way up to the position of
receiving teller. This was
progress, but not the sort that
sufficed for an ambitious young
man. In the winter of 1890, he
arrived in Los Angeles with $
in his pocket. He was 24.
Four years later, Garland
formed his own real-estate firm
and set to work developing a
subdivision on Wilshire
Boulevard, at the time a remote
parcel of land miles away from
downtown and wholly lacking in
infrastructure. To this and all his other business
ventures, writes Mr. Siegel, Garland brought “a certain flair.
He had an infectious personality, abundant enthusiasm,
unflagging energy and a powerful handshake. On top of that,
he projected composed, eye-on-the-ball certitude.”
It was an effective combination. In quick succession,
Garland married a New York railroad heiress, survived a
troublesome lawsuit that accused the rising realtor of
conspiring against his clients, and co-founded the powerful
Los Angeles Realty Board. In early 1918, he and a few of his
newspaper-baron acquaintances espied a new way to promote
Los Angeles, not just to the country but the world. It came in
the form of the International Olympic Committee.
The IOC was the creation of Charles Pierre de Frédy,
baron de Coubertin. It was Coubertin who had revived the
Olympics, staging the first modern Games in Athens in 1896.
In the years that followed, he worked tirelessly to sustain
the fledgling Olympic movement. The bantam baron, a mere
5 feet 3 inches tall—formal, fussy and aristocratic—was not
an obvious friend for the open-faced, 6-foot-tall Garland.
Yet Garland soon won the baron over, and the IOC awarded
Los Angeles the 1932 Games. Garland envisioned a marketing
triumph. Instead, he got the Great Depression.
It was a difficult time to host an athletic pageant. A huge
homeless encampment had risen on a 5-acre site near the
Coliseum—which Garland had convinced taxpayers to fund a
decade earlier—a visible manifestation of the spreading
poverty. Yet Garland and the Olympic organizers were asking
voters to approve $1 million to support the Games. Worse, it
was not clear other countries, also hit hard by the Depression,
would participate. Sending athletes from Europe required
two weeks of travel each way plus a month in Los Angeles.Garland’s lieutenant came up with an innovative solution
to the cost of housing athletes, creating the first Olympic
Village—a makeshift complex of temporary bungalows where
athletes could stay for $2 a day. Still, by the summer of 1931
not a single country had accepted an invitation to the 1932
Olympics. When the organizing committee suggested
canceling the Games, Garland and Harry Chandler, the
publisher of the Los Angeles Times, backed the critics down.
With hyperbole that would have no doubt pleased Garland,
Mr. Siegel’s subtitle suggests that the Olympics somehow
created Los Angeles. The opposite is more nearly the case.
The Los Angeles Games assembled a huge audience and fused
sports with celebrity. The event also took a big step toward
the full participation of women, especially in track and field.
The 1932 Los Angeles Games were a triumph. Thirty-seven
countries sent athletes to Los Angeles. More than 1.5 million
tickets were sold, after Hollywood’s reigning couple, Mary
Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks, took to the radio to tout the
event. Athletes and international luminaries rubbed elbows
with celebrities such as Groucho Marx, Will Rogers and
ClarkGable.
Mr. Siegel, a Pulitzer Prize-winning feature writer for the
Los Angeles Times and now a professor of literary journalism
at the University of California, Irvine, skillfully portrays the
drama in the athletic contests. We meet the swaggering,
outrageously talented Mildred “Babe” Didrikson, champion
javelin thrower, sprinter, broad jumper and baseball thrower.
We watch the lanky blond Stanford grad Ben Eastman and
5-foot-6-inch Bill “Wee Willie” Carr battle for gold in the
400-meter race.
And then it was over. A few athletes, such as the 18-year-
old swimming sensation Eleanor Holm, went on to careers in
Hollywood. Some went back to their jobs. Others returned to
the dole. As for Garland, he went home to his mansion in
West Adams and to Casa Ladera, his rambling, three-story
house in Pebble Beach. In 1933, his son married Harry
Chandler’s daughter. Garland stayed involved in the Olympic
movement until World War II. He died in 1948, at the age of- But long before others did, Garland saw the world that
was coming into being—a world of sports celebrity, a world
where facilities like Los Angeles’s Coliseum were the center
of civic life. He helped create it.
Mr. Buntin, the author of “L.A. Noir: The Struggle for the
Soul of America’s Most Seductive City,” is the director of policy
and community safety for Nashville-Davidson County.The 1932 Olympics made Los Angeles the city
it is today and marked the beginning of the
long love affair between Hollywood and sports.How a Boy’s Blood Stopped an Outbreak
I
t isn’t every day that a
school physician’s work
gets published in a medi-
cal journal. But it happened
in 1934, and the story con-
tains a lesson for the corona-
virus epidemic.
A Pottstown, Pa., boy iden-
tified as C.Y. was exposed to
measles. The boy was quaran-
tined in the Hill School’s infir-
mary; he developed a severe
case of measles but recovered.
Yet he infected two other stu-
dents, who exposed others.
Fearing a wider outbreak,
the school doctor, J. Roswell
Gallagher, took serum from C.Y.
(as well as some from a public-
health lab) and administered
small amounts to 62 boys at
risk. Serum can be extracted
and prepared from a simple
blood draw. Only three of the
62 boys developed measles—all
mild cases. This was a remark-
able victory against a highly
contagious disease. The episode
was important enough to war-
rant publication the following
year in the American Journal of
Public Health. (Decades later,
Gallagher pioneered the field of
adolescent health. He died at 92
in 1995.)How did it work? The sim-
ple explanation is that patients
who recover from an infectious
disease often produce antibod-
ies that can protect against
later infections with the same
microbe. This immunity can be
transferred by giving serum to
those at risk of infection.
In the early 20th century,
physicians realized that they
could prevent certain infectious
diseases by taking serum from
recovered patients and admin-
istering doses to those at risk
of infection. This approach was
used to stem outbreaks of mea-sles, polio and mumps. Modern
medicine continues to use anti-
bodies from human serum to
prevent certain infections such
as rabies and hepatitis B.
This approach could help
contain a coronavirus pan-
demic. Patients who recover
from the virus could donate
their blood to make serum.
Doctors would test the serum
for the antibodies that kill the
coronavirus. Then this serum
could be given to those at
highest risk of infection—in-
cluding nurses and doctors,
particularly those who work in
emergency rooms. A vaccine is
in the works but may not be
ready for months. Serum could
be available within weeks.
Medicine has more than a
century of experience with
antibody therapies, and these
approaches are often highly
effective. Antibodies work
best in preventing infections,
especially those caused by vi-
ruses. This suggests a high
likelihood of success with
coronavirus.
As with all medical interven-tions, there is risk. Transfusing
serum could inadvertently
transmit other viruses. But
modern transfusion practices
are highly effective in screen-
ing for blood-borne pathogens
such as HIV and hepatitis. The
risk from serum administra-
tions should be much lower
than the risk from coronavirus,
which kills as many as 1 in 50
of those who fall ill.
As an epidemic threatens to
become a pandemic, public-
health authorities need to con-
sider all available options.
Physicians, scientists and drug
companies are racing to de-
velop diagnostic assays, drugs
and vaccines. Meanwhile, per-
haps one quick route to con-
tainment is to do what C.Y. did
for his classmates: protect the
vulnerable with the antibodies
in the blood of those fortunate
enough to have recovered.Dr. Casadevall is chairman
of molecular microbiology and
immunology at Johns Hopkins
Bloomberg School of Public
Health.By Arturo Casadevall
A school physician’s
approach to measles
in 1934 has lessons
for the coronavirus.OPINION
Coming in BOOKS this weekend
The Gospel of American oil • A short history of Christian
doubt • An intimate account of the Boston Massacre •
The charismatic Zionism of Theodor Herzl • New novels
by Lily King, Anne Enright & James McBride • & moreRome
When the
coronavirus
arrived in It-
aly, it also
arrived in
the heart of global Catholi-
cism. Yet throughout the
country the church’s response
has been underwhelming, and
the clergy are failing the
faithful amid this crisis.
The Northern Italian region
of Lombardy is the center of
the outbreak in Italy, with
most cases emerging outside
the regional capital, Milan. Of
more than 650 cases of the vi-
rus reported in the country by
Thursday evening, 305 are in
Lombardy alone. Authorities
are trying to slow the spread
of the disease, but it may be
too late.
If Italy’s public-health out-
look is precarious, so is its fi-
nancial situation. The country
has teetered near recession
for the past year, with gross
domestic product growing
only 0.2% in 2019. The fragile
Italian banking sector could
collapse amid a coronavirus-
induced slowdown, especially
as a heavily divided coalition
government struggles to
mount a swift and coherent
response. Even if the virus
doesn’t lead to mass death, it
could destroy countless liveli-
hoods in an economy already
suffering from nearly 10% un-
employment.
“We have to follow the
rules provided by the govern-
ing authorities of the Lom-
bardy region, since we’re first
and foremost Italian citizens,”
Italian Churches Go Into Quarantine
Father Carlo Faccendini, the
parish priest at the Basilica of
Sant’Ambrogio—Milan’s most
important church—told me.
All masses in the city have
been closed to the public to
prevent the spread of the dis-
ease. But Italian state broad-
caster Rai 3 will televise this
Sunday’s mass at the basilica,
where Archbishop Mario Del-
pini is expected to offer guid-
ance on how to pray for those
affected by the outbreak.
In this way, Milan has
struck a crucial balance.
Church leaders are restricting
public gatherings, but are also
maintaining a compassionate
public presence, showing how
faith is central to persevering
through the crisis. That ap-
proach would ideally be emu-
lated throughout Italy, but in-
stead leaders have lagged on
both the practical and spiri-
tual fronts.
Pope Francis appears not to
have prioritized the virus. On
Feb.23,asnewsofthecoro-
navirus in Italy began receiv-
ing major coverage, the pope
held a “peace summit” in Bari,
where he criticized the “popu-
list” leaders gaining power
throughout Europe. Whatever
one’s opinion of insurgent pol-
iticians, the comments offered
nothing to address the fears
of panicking Italians, who
were donning face masks and
emptying supermarkets. By
Wednesday, the pope prayed
for the disease’s victims and
the medical personnel treating
them, and Ash Wednesday cel-
ebrations were suspended or
restricted in Italy.Compare the pope’s re-
sponse to how Cardinal Fed-
erigo Borromeo of Milan han-
dled the black plague when it
struck his archdiocese in 1630.
“Be prepared to abandon this
mortal life,” he said in Ales-
sandro Manzoni’s classic “The
Betrothed” (1827). “Go to-
wards the plague with love,
like a prize, as if towards an-
other life, if a soul can be
saved for Jesus Christ.” (Al-
though the cardinal’s words
are from a work of historicalfiction, they reflect the reality
of the time.) He invited
priests to continue to provide
all the sacraments even at
great risk. Many clergymen
answered the call, remaining
in their churches and cele-
brating the Holy Mass amid
one of the most terrifying
plagues in history. Many died
as martyrs serving believers
who found solace in the
church.
No one is urging the clergy
to commit suicide-by-corona-
virus. But “during the most
serious time of this outbreak
the pope decided to comment
on the dangers of populism,”
the Italian Catholic conserva-
tive writer Francesco Giubilei
told me. “People of faith
around the world today needspiritual direction and guid-
ance on how to confront this
crisis.”
The coronavirus is less
harmful than the black plague,
which shows with even more
clarity how much the church’s
leadership role has changed.
Once a firm source of strength
against all adversity—with
men of the church willing to
die to keep the presence of Je-
sus Christ in the lives of be-
lievers—now churches across
Italy have suspended all reli-
gious activities except wed-
dings and funerals, which can
be attended only by close rel-
atives. Some confession
schedules have been rolled
back. Churches are obliged to
follow these orders, which
come from the president of
the Lombardy region, accord-
ing to a statement by the
Archdiocese of Milan.
From the pope to local
parish priests, the church to-
day is a far cry from Cardinal
Borromeo’s during the black
plague. The suspension of
most religious activities the
church is more cautious,
which isn’t necessarily a bad
development. But its absence
isn’t being compensated by a
strong spiritual presence,
which Italians desperately
need. The clergy may eventu-
ally develop a stronger spiri-
tual response to this out-
break, but the fortitude of the
17th-century church de-
scribed by Manzoni no longer
exists.Ms. Bocchi is a writer in
Rome.Most of the clergy
have failed to deliver
much-needed
spiritual leadership.HOUSES OF
WORSHIP
By Alessandra
Bocchi
Are House
Democrats
willing to
jeopardize na-
tional secu-
rity to keep
alive their
Trump-Rus-
sia collusion
narrative? On
Wednesday
they abruptly
canceled a markup on a bill to
reauthorize three critical sur-
veillance tools that are due to
expire March 15.
To listen to the liberal me-
dia, the bill has stalled over
concerns about “civil liberties.”
In truth it’s the latest casualty
of Democrats’ refusal to ac-
knowledge that the Federal Bu-
reau of Investigation abused
the Foreign Intelligence Sur-
veillance Court in its 2016
counterintelligence investiga-
tion of the Trump campaign.
Justice Department Inspec-
tor General Michael Horowitz
laid out that appalling abuse
in a 434-page December re-
port. He documented the
many ways the FBI had ma-
nipulated and duped the court
in its drive to obtain surveil-
lance warrants against former
Trump campaign adviser
Carter Page. Mr. Horowitz’s
findings cried out for reforms,
and they guaranteed that
Democrats Block FISA Reform
Congress’s reauthorization
would become a flashpoint.
The three powers at stake
in the legislation are different
from the FISA listening au-
thority the FBI used against
Mr. Page. They involve the
tracking of “lone wolf” terror-
ists, the use of “roving” wire-
taps on targets who frequently
change their phone numbers,
and the power to obtain busi-
ness records. The bill is none-
theless the first obvious vehi-
cle by which Congress can
broadly address problems the
Horowitz report highlighted
with the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act.
But Democrats would
rather ignore the report that
exposed their collusion narra-
tive as a political dirty trick
aided by a rogue FBI. Intelli-
gence Chairman Adam Schiff
in particular wants to deep-six
the report, since to acknowl-
edge it would be to admit that
his infamous 2018 “memo”
clearing the FBI of FISA abuse
was hogwash. Mr. Schiff is so
determined to ignore his fic-
tion and the FBI’s abuse, the
Intelligence Committee hasn’t
held a single hearing on the
biggest intelligence scandal in
decades.
Mr. Schiff and Judiciary
Chairman Jerrold Nadler were
in fact too busy with impeach-
ment even to hit the initial re-
authorization deadline of mid-
December. Instead, they
extended the law’s sunset by
three months and have only
recently jammed together a
reauthorization bill that ig-
nores even the most basic as-
pects of FISA reform.
Among those, Republicanswould like a requirement that
an outsider—or even a panel
of outsiders—be appointed to
critique government applica-
tions to the FISA court in po-
litically sensitive cases. (The
Democrats’ bill would leave it
to the court to decide whether
to appoint an outsider, a
power the court already has
and routinely fails to exer-
cise.) Republicans have also
floated limiting the govern-
ment’s ability to present un-
verified information to the
court, as well as imposing
penalties on government ac-
tors who willfully or recklessly
mislead the court. Democrats
have rejected even these obvi-
ous and modest changes.
The Schiff-Nadler plan was
to ram through the bill largely
on Democratic votes. But then
the party’s progressive wing,
led by California’s Zoe Lof-
gren, on Wednesday revolted
against even basic reauthori-
zation. The American Civil
Liberties Union and others
who sat silent through the
Page outrage now complainthat the three separate powers
at stake violate too many civil
liberties. Democratic leader-
ship may cave to some of their
demands. Leave it to Demo-
crats to potentially produce a
bill that does nothing to rein
in political abuses of surveil-
lance, even as it strips honest
intelligence officers of their
ability to fight terrorists.
Attorney General William
Barr is trying to rescue na-
tional security from this Dem-
ocratic posturing and inepti-
tude. In a lunch this week, he
assured Senate Republicans
that he will soon release a set
of administrative reforms to
FISA, which will address some
concerns. He pointed out that
the three expiring provisions
were enacted in the wake of
9/11 and remain crucial to pre-
venting further attacks on the
homeland. His plea is for Re-
publicans to grit their teeth,
sign on for a “clean” reautho-
rization of the three powers,
and kick the broader FISA-re-
form debate to the future.
(That assumes Democrats can
get their act together enough
to pass even a basic bill.)
That may be the wisest
course, but Republicans need
to tell the story of this week
far and wide. The American
public expects Congress to
authorize tools to guard
against terrorism and to en-
sure that corrupt actors don’t
abuse those tools for political
purposes. Democrats are
proving this week that they
can’t do either of those basic
jobs, because they are so in
thrall to their debunked collu-
sion history.
Write to [email protected].Schiff and Nadler
seem to care more
about their narrative
than national security.
POTOMAC
WATCH
By Kimberley
A. Strassel
Reps. Schiff and NadlerGETTY IMAGES