Catholic Journal
white and red plane beside clouds low angle photography

The Stranger on the Plane

A freshman wit, named John Bat Masterson, became friends with me and my roommate Peter in our sophomore year at the Cross. He was a very nervous and quirky fellow who quickly became the brunt of several nasty practical jokes from upper classmen. I guess that was why we took him under our wing. He once said that the reality of all originality was just undetected plagiarism. So, with my salute to old Bat, wherever he may be, my title was an adaptation of the old Hitchcock BXW film, Strangers on the Train, (1951) starring Robet Walker and Farley Granger. 

The film involved the convoluted plot where two strangers meet on a train. After an hour of sharing personal information, Walker’s character proposes a deal to solve both of their problems. He suggests a double murder. He would kill Granger’s wife who refuses to grant him a divorce so he can marry his girlfriend. In exchange for her murder, Granger would kill his domineering father. Walker deemed it the perfect crime since neither had a direct motive for killing his prospective victim. You do my murder, I’ll do yours. Criss cross, as he simply put it!

The title Strangers on the Plane is actually the name of a reality TV show, of which I had never heard. As for my play on these titles, there was no plots or melodrama to my meeting a 25-year-old college student from Northern Georgia on a recent flight to Florida. Just talk!

I have been sitting in the middle seat for virtually all my fights for over 57 years of marriage. Both my wives liked the window seats, so I get to meet a lot of different people. Most have had little interest in talking to anyone. However, our last flight involved an hour-long discussion that broached a curriculum of many subjects. It was only surpassed by my three-hour talk with the nurse with the poisonous titanium dentures, which damaged her life to the point of atheism and personal despair. This essay can be found under the title, The Parish Lector, written in 2017.

My new friend was named Adam, the same name as my father. Of Dutch abstraction, he was very open about his serious personal troubles, which wandered all over the emotional spectrum. But our long conversation involved more about personal interests and preferences. 

The first thing most people in this situation learn about me is that am a Catholic and proud of it. This is usually followed by my being a die-hard New Yorker and a Mets fan. Adam was not necessarily a religious believer though he said his personal views did not conflict with the general principles of Catholic belief.

Adam loved history almost as much as I do. So, I was not surprised he was a history major. Similarly, it did not take me long to gauge that good conversation was high on our list of personal pastimes. Emerson once said the best of life is conversation. I think it was Longfellow who also added that a single conversation across the table with a wise man is better than 10 years mere study of books. By my calculations, ours was probably worth a couple of weeks. 

I had told Adam that it was really intellectual history that appealed to me most. He asked me if I were familiar with the books of  Cormac McCarthy, especially his Blood Meridian. He pointed out that Gnostic thought is central to this book. I have made a personal study of the first important heresy in the Church. I believe that Gnosticism’s elitist outlook has been the essential trait in liberalism since the French revolution. I had bought the book a few years ago and had almost brought it on this trip but it remains in my stacks at home. But as soon as we return, I will attack it with great fervor.

We gravitated to a few of our favorite things, such as movies and books. He just loved Paul Newman films, like the Verdict, and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. He asked me about my favorite movie. I had to answer with both a comedy and a drama. What about Bob is the funniest film I have ever seen and The Eye of the Needle is #1 in my best drama class.

I countered with the films of David Mamet especially The Spanish Prisoner, which has more twists than a Dostoevsky or Christie novel. I also mentioned his little-known play and film, Oleana, which concerns a college professor’s dreadful run-in with a radical feminist. During their many heated exchanges, the professor, with a bright future in academia as well as a large mortgage, witnessed his future disintegrate within the flames of her ideological rants. He had let his emotions overtake his intellect as she methodically dismantled his career and maybe sent him to prison for assault.

Adam mentioned many books on conspiracies, especially about George H. W. Bush, the CIA and the assassination of JFK. I have read several such books about this one and many other historical conspiracies. While most may be difficult to prove, Kennedy’s assassination still raises many doubts about the standard version of the event. I believe no one can study history without encountering many types of valid conspiracies. The term conspiracy theory has been over-used, especially by people involved in real conspiracies. 

We probably could have gone on for another hour or two but the sudden impact of rubber hitting the tarmac signaled we had just landed. It fills me with joy when I can connect with someone more than 50 years my junior. Before disembarking, I told him I would pray that his personal problems continued to be manageable. 

It is enjoyable discussions, such as this, which fill me for nostalgia for my talk show days on WGNU radio. Its owner, Chuck Norman, called it The Party Line. I vividly remember my first appearance in the evening in 1984, when I talked mostly about food because I had not eaten dinner before driving across the Mississippi to Granite City, Illinois where our station was located for my first few years. 

It was not long before we were discussing abortion, race relations and all the salient topics of the day. During the course of my 22 years on the GNU, I did not have one personal belief that had not been challenged or mocked. I had to learn fast how to think on my seat.

This trait served me well in September of 2001. My morning time slot was first up after the dust had settled in New York City, the Tuesday morning when our world was rocked to its very core. Fortunately, I had ample time to think about what to say. Sadly, a past guest, conservative author, Barbara Olson had been on the plane that crashed into the Pentagon. 

One of the best things from my time behind the mike was that I got to meet so many interesting and different personalities. Among my most memorable were of two elderly women, named Ronnie and Diamond Lil. They both like to mother me a bit and I enjoyed every minute spent with them almost every week. Most of the frequent callers had their own handles or nicknames or were given names by other callers or even hosts. I thought this made our conversations more personal, almost like a radio family.

I will never forget The Great Kabudha, the Redman, the Prisoner of Love, the Roosevelt Man, and Mr. 101 whom I christened because of his arrogance. He once boasted his IQ was above average. Then there was a character, who called himself Black Jesus. I was uncomfortable calling him that, so he quickly became BJ. One afternoon, BJ called me after a long absence. So, I asked him: BJ where have you been? His answer: I been incarcerated!

Of all the above, most just wanted to chat about mundane topics or personal opinions, which compose the body of most of our conversations. Some of them wanted to make speeches or attack my views past and present. 

My rule of thumb, which I used in virtually all my classrooms as a teacher and adjunct history professor, was that I would tell them the major points of historical development or of any specific issue. They were free to disagree but they better have solid facts to back up their opinions. Facts counted more than opinions or ideology on my show.

Of the hostile ones, like Rosy, 101 and a third, who had a few different handles, such as Jim from Ferguson andGunboy, were my favorites because they were very intelligent and their ideas often made me go back to my drawing board to make certain my thoughts were all valid and plausible. In other words, this trio of critics made me a much better talk show host.

Jim was an obsessive proponent of abortion and often produced arguments which I had never encountered before. Gunboy, who also did not drive but traveled by bicycle, became special to me. He also said he did not believe in God. Privately, I started calling him my atheist! He seemed as if he suffered a lot of rejection in his life. I never could fathom his passion for keeping abortion legal. I profiled him in one of my first essays for the CJ, namely Militant Atheists on the March. (8/25/15)

After a few years, the station allowed me to book my own guests for the first hour of my two hour show. This is when my learning curve soared. I would check book reviews sections in the newspaper, call some of my favorite writers’ press agents or book promoters and get a cache of free books in the mail almost every week. By my count, I conducted over 200 essays, including conservative authors, such as Pat Buchanan (6), Ann Coulter (5), Gordon Liddy, and even Bill O’Reilly (15 minutes). Politicos, such as Phyliss Schlafly and congresswoman, Ann Wagner, also joined me.

The most disappointing one was E. Michael Jones, the publisher of Culture Wars Magazine. Jones was also the author of several voluminous books, including Libido Dominandi and Political Control and The Slaughter of Cities. With his academic background and many publications, I thought he would be a great interview. He answered most of my questions with one or two words, lending himself to a lot of dead air, the death knell for any radio program. I just could not get him to expound upon anything he had written. 

One of my best interviews was with R. Emmett Tyrell, the editor of the American Spectator, for one of his many books. Just before our time was up, he stopped me and said: I have to tell you this. I have done 200-300 interviews for this book* and you were the best interviewer I have had. I still treasure his high praise. I often jest that my must have been Why.

I think I learned a lot more by asking questions, rather than just chewing the fat. I asked short questions that gave them the lead to tell me and my listeners what their books or principles had to say. The focus was never about me but the authors, pollical people and their ideas. 

I have found that listening to not only to what your guest or caller say but also what I say is key to a being a good talk show host. Many callers have quoted me as saying such and such, often in error. I tell them I not only listen to them but I also know what I have said in case I get criticism such as this. 

My talk show stands as one of the special moments in my life where I felt the beating pulse of several dozen, maybe even hundreds of diverse people who want to share their thoughts with me and my listeners. When it was over, I looked at my more than two decades at WGNU radio as an advanced degree after my doctorate in history nearly 53 years ago. I think the radio had become my classroom in some sort of post-educator experience that taught me more about life than any of my professors.

On the radio, I quickly learned how wrong it was to interrupt other people, unless they say something over the line of civility. Unfortunately, my radio history of listening did not transition very well over my lifetime with my family, friends and peers. My only excuse is that my mind and mouth work so fast that I often know what one is about to say.

My extreme loss of hearing over the years has also made my listening more difficult. More recently, I think I have made huge strides in overcoming my alacrity to interrupt others. A wise man once said: one of the most sincere forms of respect is actually listening to what another has to say.

Every time I sit next to someone, like Adam on a plane or at any kind of social stetting, I feel as if I am back behind the mike, listening to my bumper music, such as Nobody Does it Better (Carly Simon) or the Theme from Rocky(Gonna Fly Now!) 

*It probably was his Boy Clinton: The Political Biography. (1992)

William Borst

WILLIAM A. BORST has taught at virtually all levels of education from elementary school through university, published commentaries in many local and national publications, and hosted a weekly talk show on WGNU radio for 22 years. Having recently served as editor of the Mindszenty Report, Dr. Borst is the author of two prominent books: Liberalism: Fatal Consequences (1999) and The Scorpion and the Frog: A Natural Conspiracy (2005). He holds a PhD in American History from St. Louis University.