Transcripts

text | pdf |

---

GARY EICHTEN: You're listening to Minnesota Public Radio. Partly cloudy sky. It's 5 degrees below 0. That's the same wind chill. Winds are calm, 5 below at KNOW FM 91.1, Minneapolis and Saint Paul. Sunny to partly sunny through the afternoon. It could hit 5 above. 20% chance for light snow tonight with a low from 7 below to 0. 20% chance for light snow tomorrow morning. High 10 above.

NORA RAHM: From NPR News in Washington, I'm Nora Rahm. President-elect George W. Bush this morning nominated John Ashcroft to be his attorney general. The former senator is from Missouri. He lost his re-election bid to Governor Mel Carnahan, who had died before the election. Carnahan's widow, Gene, was appointed to the seat.

Mr. Bush described Ashcroft as a person who believes in civil rights for all citizens. In accepting the nomination in Austin, Ashcroft said he will strive to be a guardian of liberty and equal justice.

JOHN ASHCROFT: The pursuit of liberty and equal justice for every citizen requires that we foster integrity in the nation's highest law enforcement office. President-elect Bush, you have my word that I will administer to the Department of Justice with integrity. I will advise your administration with integrity. And I will enforce the laws of the United States of America with integrity.

NORA RAHM: Mr. Bush is expected to make public, more of his choices this afternoon. New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman reportedly is in line to head the Environmental Protection Agency. The mayor of Camden, New Jersey, is facing prison time after being convicted on most counts in a corruption case. Milton Milan is in jail in Philadelphia pending sentencing. Dave Heller with member station WHYY reports from Philadelphia.

DAVE HELLER: Milan, who rose from the streets of Camden to become the city's first Latino mayor, lost his political career and his freedom yesterday when he was found guilty of federal corruption charges. US Attorney Robert Cleary says, though Milan was not convicted on all charges, the jury clearly believed the mayor put city hall up for sale.

ROBERT CLEARY: The evidence has shown that Milton Milan is a one-man crime spree, someone who sold his office, someone who sold out the very people he was elected to serve.

DAVE HELLER: Milan faces up to 11 years in prison. He's the third mayor of Camden, the Garden State's most impoverished city, to be convicted in the last 20 years. The state will go to court today to seek Milan's ouster, the first step toward determining his successor. For NPR News, I'm Dave Heller in Philadelphia.

NORA RAHM: A German court today sentenced three American teenagers to prison for the murders of two women. The youths, one aged 15 and two aged 18, had thrown rocks onto cars from a bridge above a highway. They caused several accidents, killing two people and injuring five others. The teenagers are the sons of US soldiers stationed in Germany. They received prison terms from seven to eight and a half years.

Soldiers in Turkey used tear gas to regain control of a prison in Istanbul today. 430 prisoners surrendered, ending a four-day siege. The inmates were the last to end a nationwide protest against a government plan to move them into prisons with smaller cells.

On Wall Street this hour, the Dow Jones Industrial average is up 87 points in active trading. The NASDAQ is up 138. This is NPR News.

SPEAKER 1: Support for NPR comes from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, making grants to improve health and health care for all Americans. And the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.

STEVEN JOHN: With news from Minnesota Public Radio, good afternoon. I'm Steven John. An investor group is acquiring Michael Foods of Saint Louis Park for about $600 million in cash, plus about $200 million in company debt. The group includes current management of the company and members of the Michael family. Michael Foods is one of the nation's largest egg producers and also produces milk, cheese, butter, bagels, and other products for grocery stores and food service customers.

The state of Wisconsin has filed suit against a superior oil refinery, claiming violations of environmental laws. Minnesota Public Radio's Bob Kelleher reports.

BOB KELLEHER: The suit alleges that Murphy Oil Company violated state pollution laws when it failed to get proper permits and failed to install some pollution control equipment about 10 years ago when the superior oil refinery was modified. Murphy officials deny any wrongdoing and say they worked closely with state and federal officials during the modification. The state lawsuit filed in Douglas County District Court may be on hold pending the outcome of a virtually identical federal lawsuit.

The EPA's case against Murphy goes to federal court in June. In Duluth, I'm Bob Kelleher, Minnesota Public Radio.

STEVEN JOHN: Ford Motor Company will close its Saint Paul plant for a week in January as Ford trims its North American production by 17% in the first quarter of next year. The Saint Paul plant is one of 16 Ford factories that will be shut down on a rotating schedule throughout January. The workers will get about 95% of their pay while idle.

Partly to mostly cloudy this afternoon. Statewide, high-single digits below 0 Northwest to single digits above 0 in the Southeast. For the Twin Cities, right around 5 above for the daytime high, 5 below expected tonight. Right now, it's warmed up to 18 below in Warroad. It's 8 below in St. Cloud and minus 5 in the Twin Cities. That's a news update from Minnesota Public Radio. I'm Steven John.

SPEAKER 2: Programming on Minnesota Public Radio is supported by Boston Scientific Scimed based in Minnesota since 1971. 3,000 employees dedicated to creating innovative technologies to treat heart disease.

GARY EICHTEN: Six minutes now past 12 o'clock.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Good afternoon. Welcome back to Midday on Minnesota Public Radio. I'm Gary Eichten. Glad you could join us. This hour of Midday, we're going to feature three of our Voices of Minnesota interviews, interviews with Minnesotans who have very interesting stories to tell. Today, we're going to hear from a woman who has played a key behind-the-scenes role at the Guthrie and a man who brought some Christmas cheer to a nation hungry for any kind of an uplift.

But we begin today with Dick Goebel, a man who has spent years helping the less fortunate among us. The New Year, rather, marks Mr. Goebel's last year with America's Second Harvest Food Bank. He spoke recently with Minnesota Public Radio's Dan Olson about his work and his philosophy of feeding the poor.

DAN OLSON: Dick Goebel, one of the founders of America's Second Harvest, the nation's largest food bank, is retiring. Goebel is a Lutheran minister, who, along with others, started an emergency food shelf and food bank 21 years ago. Their start-up money was a few hundred dollars that they raised from a charity basketball game with players from the Minnesota Vikings.

America's Second Harvest has grown to a nationwide network of 200 food banks and food programs. Goebel says welfare reform and a misguided food stamp program are part of the reason food shelf use continues to rise around the country.

DICK GOEBEL: I think people think because it's good economic times that there is really no longer an issue of hunger in Minnesota. And that's absolutely not true. In fact, we are finding an increase of families that are we now call as being food insecure, not having adequate access to food on a consistent basis. And we're talking about nutritional food. In

Minnesota, again, last year, 1 out of 18 families used the food shelf. A significant number of people, including families, are now using congregate eating programs or community kitchens or what I hate to call-- what some people still refer to as soup kitchens, but I refer to them as community kitchens now. And they take on the face no longer of just single men, but women, children, and families.

And it's really quite tragic when one thinks about it. In the midst of all of this plenty, there are still families so dependent.

DAN OLSON: What's your analysis of why this is happening?

DICK GOEBEL: Well, I think the realization that many people are better off today. But as we've made our shift from welfare to work and as we find families in transition, in reality, they are not better off when you look at what, in fact, they are getting to support their families. I think it's kind of a misperception that just because you move from welfare to work, you're going to be better off.

Because basically, families that are working, many of them are getting jobs that are not what we call livable wage jobs. And I'll give you some example of this, that right now, over 44% to 45% of our families that are using food shelves in Minnesota have one or more adults working part or multiple part-time jobs or full-time jobs.

And yet, when you ask them, What's your hourly wage? they're saying, well, anywhere from $6.50 to $7, even $8. And then look at the number of people that are in that household. They are still at poverty or below.

And the other reality is, in Minnesota, most low-income families are renters. And if you're not aware of it, it's a very tight market right now. And basically, low-income people need to spend anywhere from 50% to 60%, 70% of their disposable income for rent.

DAN OLSON: We have a food security program in this country called Food Stamps. Isn't that doing the job?

DICK GOEBEL: Well, some people are applauding the fact that there's been such a major drop in utilization of food stamps in the last two or three years. And yet, those of us who deal with it on a day-to-day basis realize that there is some issues that has caused this downswing in the utilization of food stamps.

I think for me, one of the most principal ones is the fact that food stamps have always historically been a safety net for anyone in this country, no matter what their circumstances, whether they were unemployed, they were in a crisis, whatever. Today, food stamps are being perceived more and more like a welfare program. And therefore, people are reluctant to utilize food stamps.

The other issue is the fact that the barriers that we put up for food stamps-- America's Second Harvest just completed a study. And they looked at all of the food stamp intake forms for all of the states, and they range from a simple two-page intake form in Indiana to a 32-page one in Minnesota. And if you get into the Minnesota one, even at one point, it will ask whether somebody in the household-- and presuming they're talking about a youth-- has a paper route, because that becomes a part of the assets.

And so the reality is you have all of this paperwork which has to be substantiated on a regular basis. So people who are supposed to be working literally have to find time in their work day in order to go and do their certification of their food stamps. Really, the least you can get, and that's primarily for seniors and so forth, is about $10.

Now, who would spend especially all of that energy and effort for $10 worth of food stamps? If we would raise the minimum, if we would cut down the barriers, if we would acknowledge the fact that we made a mistake when we cut off the immigrants and a whole number of other issues and recognize, again, it's a safety net, it's intended to sustain people at a point of crisis instead of using it, as I see it today, in very punitive way and a very restrictive way.

DAN OLSON: Is that why you think 32 pages are required to essentially discourage people from applying for food stamps? Or what else is happening?

DICK GOEBEL: Well, I think people feel like the fact that somehow or other they have to protect the United States government. And they have to hold the individual accountable. And in that way, those barriers are established.

And I think it's kind of tragic. When we think about it and what could be simplified and put very directly into use for the support of the family to allow them that foundation, it's just unreal. And as I think about food stamps today, I just recognize the fact that beyond that, we are not doing a very good job of outreach and telling people that there are food stamps and what they are and who they're intended for.

DAN OLSON: So what are you suggesting, that the food stamp program not be viewed as a safety net, that it be expanded, or that the food stamp program isn't working, that it isn't effective and that we need to create some other kind of food supply program for people who need better nutrition?

DICK GOEBEL: No, I'm not suggesting that at all, because I think food stamps are a wonderful way to shift income to low-income people and to assure that they are acquiring nutritional food in the process. And the problem that has occurred is that we have-- in our desire to make sure that low-income people buy what we think they should buy, that we now put all of these requirements on.

I mean, another thing that comes to mind is the fact that you cannot have more than a car that is valued more than $4,600. I mean, if you think about the car market today, what is a $4,600 or less car in terms of dependability and service and so forth? Now, these are people we want to go out and work. We provide all kinds of what I call takeaways in order to make sure that we don't give them too much.

Another thing we refer to as food stamps is a thrifty plan. It's just a terminology that we use. It's a thrifty plan. We don't want them to get too much. So we cut it down to an amount that is so minimal in terms of meal replacement that we can be assured that they're going to have to struggle and stretch a bit on all of this.

DAN OLSON: What do these sorts of food stamp program policies tell us, do you think, about the policy of our elected officials, about how we as taxpayers and citizens feel about people who need help?

DICK GOEBEL: I think it comes back to, for me, very often, it's the victim concept that we have that somehow or other, we need to make sure that we continue to punish. Because they are low income. Because we don't value them. We don't think they're worthy. We make a judgment call in all of this.

And I think the politicians, unfortunately, they only reflect the society that we are a part of. I mean, you're probably aware that I've been around for a few years. And as I think about the realities of at least the last 30 plus, almost 40 years of my involvement around the issue of hunger, I keep coming back to, where is compassion? Where is interest?

We consider giving people food an act of charity. And yet we could do far more with a reasonable food stamp program or a reallocation of wealth that would make life more realistic, more comfortable, more of an incentive for people to be what we want them to be-- productive citizens of our country.

DAN OLSON: I think taxpayers, perhaps rightly so, are concerned about fraud, are concerned about being taken advantage of, are concerned about a giveaway program, food stamps creating indolence, dependence, generations of folks living on the dole.

DICK GOEBEL: Well, I think that's that kind of perception that undermines what food stamps were intended to be. And I think that this is getting reinforced these days because of the shift from welfare to work. I mean, I have seen stories about food stamp recipients purchasing missiles with their sales of their food stamps.

So anybody knows that is so unrealistic that anybody could buy a missile. And I think the other thing that we have to put into all of this is what is the responsibility of the rest of society. I think as one recounts the abuse of food stamps, it more likely at times will be the retailer who is the one who is out there.

And I would be so candid as to say sometimes that, why is it unrealistic at times to take food stamps and use them as an alternative in order to get something else that is vitally needed within the family? You can't use food stamps to buy paper products or to buy soap or many other things that are very basic.

And again, we make a judgment call in terms of-- I don't hear it much today. But I can remember a number of years ago, 10, 20 years ago, when people were saying, why don't these low-income people use diapers and wash them? And the reality was that would be fine if they had the money to have a washer and dryer or if they had the money to go and do a washer and dryer.

So they were forced because of those deficiencies or lack of thereof to go out and get Pampers. Now, what is more expensive than going out to buy Pampers? I mean, I need to tell you from the food bank part of it, we could-- one of the highest items that we can make available to our families are Pampers and other kinds of paper products and things that are not purchasable by food stamps.

DAN OLSON: You're listening to a Voices of Minnesota conversation with Richard Goebel. I'm Dan Olson. Goebel is one of the founders of America's Second Harvest, the country's largest food bank system. Minnesota's Second Harvest headquarters are in a new warehouse in the Twin Cities' suburb of Maplewood.

Dick Goebel's office there is filled with mementos from his work. For years, Goebel was a Lutheran minister. The Wausau, Wisconsin, native graduated from a Lutheran seminary in Milwaukee. He was a pastor at churches in California, Wisconsin, and finally in Saint Paul.

DICK GOEBEL: For me, it's been the issue of what I have seen as I got involved with my whole interest and commitment to ministry that I recognized early on that when you are involved in ministry, that is more than simply a spiritual focus. When I read the scriptures and when I understand the charge, it's the total person.

And I cannot ignore anyone. And I need to take care of first things first and to simply-- if I were wearing my collar today and you were here and you were saying-- you came to me at Zion and said, I need food, my responsibility was not to try to evangelize you, to get you to sign on. But my responsibility was to make sure that you and your family got fed.

Coincidentally, in the future, when you were in a better point or were out of crisis, you might or might not. But by far, the majority of people that I've dealt with through the years, it's been around this issue or other related poverty issues.

I am where I am today because the last parish I served was in the North end of Saint Paul between McDonough Homes and Mount Airy Homes and Lower Rice Street. And it was very realistic at that point that-- people were not going to break down the doors to come into our church, but there was a lot of need in that community.

And so our approach to the community was to open up the doors of the facility to say, look, we're here to support this community. And so we got involved with clothing closets, food shelves, congregated eating programs, housing the youth service bureau, Ramsey Action Program, and a whole number of other issues. And that just led me into where I am today.

DAN OLSON: These are good economic times. Does that mean that people are feeling more generous? Are donations to America's Second Harvest specifically and as best you can tell to charities across the board up dramatically?

DICK GOEBEL: I think one has to say that there has been good support. When you think about support for an agency like our own, you really need to differentiate the various streams of funding that occur. And for us, what is critical is what kind of support do we get from individuals.

And we have a direct mail program that we have utilized and began early on very humbly in the early '80s until today that we generate pretty close to $1 million through our direct mail program. And you need to understand also, we have a very limited target. We're primarily looking at East Metro for that kind of support.

Because in America's Second Harvest, each of the food banks has what we call geographical service areas. So we cannot fundraise in Minneapolis and so forth because there is a Second Harvest food bank in Minneapolis. And we actually serve 3/4 of the state of Minnesota. So we have over 80 other sites that we have, drop sites or delivery points, where people come and pick up this product.

DAN OLSON: I think this is the impression a lot of us have. Dick Goebel, is that there are plenty of food banks across Minnesota. You point out 80 sites. And so the need is taken care of. Folks are being served

DICK GOEBEL: Not at all. I mean, if you want to talk about food banks, there's the Minnesota Food Bank Network. There are eight of us that cover Minnesota and North Dakota and Western Wisconsin. You want to talk about agencies that we have as members who we serve directly.

And that's what people need to understand, the difference between a food bank and a food shelf. A food bank is where we get large quantities of product. That's why you were impressed with our warehouse. I mean, we need to be able to receive semi loads of product. And then we redistribute them to our agencies. So we're the wholesaler. And we have these food shelves out there like franchises or the on-site feeding programs.

DAN OLSON: What's going on in corporate boardrooms? Are you feeling the effects of CEOs and investors saying, gee, What are we giving so much stuff away for? or we should target our giving a little bit differently and do something else? Is Second Harvest feeling any of that?

DICK GOEBEL: I think we are. I mean, I think one of the realities is we're going through a major shakedown in the food industry. And so it's a matter of who comes out and is in control. And if it's somebody who has been very sympathetic historically to America's Second Harvest or to charities and so forth, that will continue to happen.

We also see evidence, though, in other mergers and takeovers where there is a different corporate philosophy. And so where we might have had in a company that has now been taken over a good relationship, the philosophy or the corporate culture changes, and we lose it. So it's kind of we win some, we lose some, but we never give up trying in the sense of then trying to re-educate.

But there is a major, what I call, shift going on, not only in the corporate community, but in the philanthropic community. And I really have some long-term concerns about the philanthropic community.

DAN OLSON: What do you think the shift is?

DICK GOEBEL: Well, the shift is, number one, to have less dollars available for charities. Number two, to say now we want to be more focused. And therefore, what they effectively do, on the one hand, is probably good-- they target their money. But by targeting, they pull away a lot of historical support for a lot of agencies.

And it's my experience is any time you start targeting, the targets start getting to be the same in each of the philanthropic organizations. And therefore, the days of general support and a whole lot of other things that was there traditionally in the past is not there. In Twin Cities, unfortunately, we're seeing a lot of the corporate headquarters and so forth moving out of. And even where they are remaining, because they are taking over others, they are shifting some of the dollars out of the Twin Cities into the new communities if they are inclined toward philanthropic concerns.

DAN OLSON: Are you running into people, whether they be corporate types or just plain folks, who give you money saying things like, gosh, so hunger, it's still around, holy cow, we're getting tired of it, Dick, haven't we solved this yet?

DICK GOEBEL: I think that's probably true. The only, shall we say, bright spot for me is the only other-- or issue that's worse off is homelessness and affordable housing. And I think that's one of the recognitions that I keep emphasizing, although I am known as a food person. And that's been the bulk of-- I have spent as much other time as I can in the whole issue of housing.

Because I am firmly convinced that if we can provide affordable housing and livable wages, that would solve the major food issue in our country. And so I don't see giving groceries away as a way of answering what I call the major issues. I see hunger and the related hunger issues as a symptom, not, in fact, the major problem.

DAN OLSON: So should folks keep bringing the cans of soup and boxes of cereal and macaroni to the contribution tables? Or should they write the check instead? Or should they not do any of that and focus instead on a minimum wage increase and affordable housing?

DICK GOEBEL: I think that's the beauty of this issue. You can choose any and all of the above. I mean, I think people need to know where they are at, where their comfort level is. I mean, quite candidly, many people are committed to the hunger issue, but have a great deal of discomfort when you start talking about public policy because they have their perceptions and so forth.

So I would not want to take away from them the opportunity to them take their time and get involved or to get involved in a food drive. I think there is a lot of value in symbolically bringing that product to your church or your synagogue. And so it's not an either/or. It's a both/and.

And so I go back to, where are you and your own pilgrimage? Are you comfortable at this level with the charity side of it? Can you begin to look at the social justice side of it? And can you come to the point what I call our mature and look at all of it and say, how best can I utilize my time, my talents, my dollars in order to address the issue of hunger?

DAN OLSON: Are you running into people, whether they be corporate types or just plain folks, who give you money saying things like, gosh, so hunger, it's still around, holy cow, we're getting tired of it, Dick, haven't we solved this yet?

DICK GOEBEL: It's always ironic to me that this is an issue that most people do not have. I mean, I know those who are very judgmental and so forth, and I have become the brunt of many of their letters and phone calls.

DAN OLSON: Really, you get a fair amount of heat?

DICK GOEBEL: Right.

DAN OLSON: What are the folks saying?

DICK GOEBEL: Well, it's interesting. As I mentioned, we do a direct mail campaign. And in the early years of the direct mail campaign, we very seldom had anybody respond unless they gave. Right now, I can assure that in every direct mail piece mailing that we do, I will get a response. And it may be on the letter that I write will be all kinds of comments about, why are you feeding them and so forth?

And at one time, I got a phone call, and this was the most vivid in my mind. And thank God it's only been one phone call. And I knew the time of the day. It was like about 2:30 AM, where somebody called up and said, Goebel, don't you know the law of evolution? Those who are weak and cannot survive, we need to let them die.

And I never forgot that. It's always been kind of a haunting voice in the back of my head that anyone could feel that way about children, about seniors who literally-- and this person's voice conveyed all of his sincerity and conviction of what he said. And that coped with the letters that I now get and the responses.

I have a file which I call the angry letter file. And I simply keep them to just remind myself, even though we think hunger is a comfortable charity and issue, there are a lot of individuals who resent even that as a part of their responsibility for their community and those within their community.

DAN OLSON: Dick Goebel, thanks a lot for your time. A pleasure to talk to you.

DICK GOEBEL: My pleasure having a chance to talk to you.

DAN OLSON: Dick Goebel, one of the founders of America's Second Harvest, the nation's largest food bank system. We spoke at his office in Maplewood. Dan Olson, Minnesota Public Radio.

This is Midday on Minnesota Public Radio today, featuring some Voices of Minnesota interviews. And next up is an interview with a legendary figure at the Guthrie Theater, Annette Garceau. Ms. Garceau managed to avoid the spotlight lo these many years, but she's played a key role in the success of the Guthrie Theater as its longtime costume designer. A matter of fact, she was one of the pioneers joining sir Tyrone Guthrie when he opened the theater back in 1963. Minnesota Public Radio's Mary Stucky has that report.

MARY STUCKY: Annette Garceau came to the Guthrie Theater at its very beginning in 1963. Raised in London and trained as a dressmaker, Garceau fell in with a Bohemian crowd and joined the company of visionary theater director, Sir Tyrone Guthrie. With her work at the Guthrie Theater in Minneapolis, Annette Garceau put her mark on theatrical costume design in the United States.

We spoke in the living room of her Minneapolis' apartment, surrounded by mementos of her life in the theater. Garceau cuts an elegant figure with upswept hair and impeccable style and unflagging enthusiasm for life and work.

Was there anything in your childhood that might have predicted your interest in fashion or costume design for the theater?

ANNETTE GARCEAU: One day I thought I'd make a little ladies dress shop. And so I got this cardboard dress box, painted it up, and put a name on the top, Madame something or the other, and made little stands out of the strong matches that they had then to light the gas lamps. Because it was gas in those days. And I glued them together and made little dress forms with two little arms sticking out and made these little grown-up dresses and put them on these little stands and stood them in the little shop.

And I used to amuse myself doing things like that rather than doing really childish things. My early childhood was very mixed and disturbed in a way. My parents separated. And there were two or three children. And they went every which way.

My destiny was to become a dancer. So I was put on the stage very, very early in life and went touring all around England and Britain doing my little dances, all sorts of dances and so on. And so I was a little bit more sophisticated, having lived that life for a long time before I finally got back to my mother. So I think all those things must have influenced me quite a lot.

MARY STUCKY: At what age were you apprenticed to a fashion house in London?

ANNETTE GARCEAU: I left school quite early and went to an art school. But in between going to school, I apprenticed myself to a high-class dressmaker in the West End of London. The apprenticeship thing in those days was quite a good idea, I think, because you were there. You were watching everything being done. And you were the lowest thing on the totem pole, of course. Your job was to pick up pins from the floor. There was no waste in those days with a big magnet. And cleaned them up for the next day for the people to use and just watch what was going on.

The other thing apprentices did was to turn-- when the garments were finished, they'd turn them inside out, lay them on their little table, and go over them so carefully with their little scissors and cut all the little threads off and watch and see there was nothing really wrong inside and so on. So that was good training for careful work and neatness and all that sort of thing.

One day, though, when I was cutting off a thread in a sleeve, I did the unforgivable.

MARY STUCKY: Oh, no.

ANNETTE GARCEAU: I cut it. I cut the sleeve. [LAUGHS] And there was this terrible V-shaped cut that the fabric had just got in the way of my scissors. And I was so afraid, so afraid to confess to this. But of course, I had to confess.

And they said, well, we have no more material to make a new sleeve. You must go and find some more material. And they gave me some money and told me to go up to where the shops were and find it.

Well, I was just petrified about this. But I took the damaged sleeve with me. And the second store, the second shop that I went into had this particular silk. And I was able to buy 3/4 of a yard or whatever it was to make a new sleeve. [LAUGHS] So--

MARY STUCKY: You have always, as you've told me, been interested in the way in which social trends are reflected in fashion. Can you tell me what it is exactly that interests you about that? And what are some examples of that as well?

ANNETTE GARCEAU: Well, I think the greatest example of that is wars, what wars do. The first World War was when women first began to take up arms, as it were. And with all the men away fighting, the women had to go into the factories and do the jobs that the men couldn't do. That had to be reflected in their clothes.

I mean, in 1914, when the first World War broke out, women were still wearing long, flowing skirts right to the floor, almost, elaborate sleeves, and draperies and things like that. Well, then when they became working women, they had to get into more severe kind of clothes.

And the same thing happened with the second World War. The fashions then were very masculine from the '30s when they had, again, long, flowing bias-cut dresses. They had to go into more practical clothes. The skirts got shorter and more severe. The jackets were like man-made jackets with squared shoulders. And that's when the padded shoulders came in. And I can remember. I can see them now, suits that I made and getting the padding right for the squareness of the shoulder and everything.

The times do reflect what the fashions become. Another nice example of fashion and architecture is in the medieval periods, when there was this great passion for building churches and cathedrals and so on and the fabulous masonry that was produced and the sculpture on the cathedrals and churches and the tall spires and the elegance reaching up to the sky.

All of that was reflected in some of the women's fashions when that hennin came in, the tall hat with a long point with the drapery hanging from it. Many court. ladies and the rich people could indulge, of course, in that kind of thing. But again, it was a reflection of what was going on all around them.

MARY STUCKY: You're listening to a Voices of Minnesota conversation with Guthrie Theater costumier Annette Garceau. I'm Mary Stucky. For nearly 40 years, theater goers in the Twin Cities have enjoyed the costumes designed by Annette Garceau, who arrived here in 1963 with Sir Tyrone Guthrie to start what would become a major theatrical movement.

Garceau is full of enthusiasm for life, a stylish woman with a dazzling smile. But in her early years in London, she faced life as a single mother with no job security.

ANNETTE GARCEAU: During the war, there was a big panic about what work women would do if you had children who stayed at home with you. And I had my son then. And you were advised to send them somewhere safe. And a lot of people did that. I sent my son to a little boarding school right out in the country in Hertfordshire. And luckily, there wasn't any bombing or any trauma at all for him there. The only trauma was the parting and having sent this little boy away like that, which I think a lot of children were damaged because of that.

But because I didn't have the child to look after, I had to get a job. And they would scoop you up and put you to making munitions or something like that at the drop of a hat, which was something that I couldn't bear the thought of doing. I don't know how it came about. But I got myself a job in a very nice firm, dressmakers who made clothes for the general public.

Somewhere in my nest of papers, I've still got the Board of Trade instructions that were given out to all the dressmaking firms with all the restrictions that they had to comply with.

MARY STUCKY: Restrictions because of the war?

ANNETTE GARCEAU: Because of the war. You were allowed only so much yardage of fabric. You couldn't use any kind of metal for the fastenings, no hooks because that was metal, no snaps. Zips, well, zips had come into fashion then, but they were often made of plastic. But they weren't in general use.

So you had to devise ways of making new styles for these utility clothes, they were called, that looked quite smart and elegant and yet were conforming to all the regulations. But that was sort of war work in a way. And it was war work that suited me. And so I was fortunate that I was able to do that.

MARY STUCKY: So you're in a dressmaker's shop or in a house making clothing during the war. And then how did you make the shift to the theater?

ANNETTE GARCEAU: I knew a girl who was married to an actor. She wanted to learn more about making clothes and so on. So we went into partnership and used her apartment as our workplace, much to the annoyance of her husband, I may say, because we took over the big kitchen as our workroom. And he would come in and find fabric and things all over the place and not be very happy.

But it worked for us for a while. Although we were making evening clothes and street clothes for people, a lot of the actresses knew about us. And we would make a little, maybe a costume here and there for the theater and so on.

But that was just-- by the way, it wasn't until quite much later after that-- I had divorced my first husband. And I was living in a big, old Victorian house with a lot of mixture of all sorts of different people. A lot of artists and art students were there. And we used to mix and have coffee together in the mornings and look at each other's work. Because I used to do quite a bit of painting and drawing in those days.

I had just finished doing a set of clothes for a woman and her daughter who were going to America for the first time. At that point, I had no more work to do and was very worried about making do and looking after myself and being nervous about being on my own.

And this girl, this new girl that I'd never met before-- and I don't still to this day remember her name. She said, oh, I know someone whose works in theater. He's doing a show for the West End. And he's doing it in his own apartment. He doesn't have a workshop, but he's doing it in his own apartment.

I went to this place and met this Ray Diffen. So he said, well, we're doing a Hamlet. And Alec Guinness is the Hamlet. And it was being done in Shakespearean clothes. He said, yesterday, we fitted him with these trunk hose, little short trunks that wear over the tights. He said, and we've taken it here and we've done this and we've lengthened that and shortened this and so on. He said, can you take that over and finish it up? So I did and handed it back. And he said, oh, that was so quick. And he was very pleased and so on.

So I went. And we finished that play, and then we did another one. Then he said, well, we're going back to Stratford on Avon to begin the season again, please come with us. That's what I did and went to work at the Memorial Theater at Stratford on Avon until Guthrie took several of us over to Canada to open the Stratford festival there.

MARY STUCKY: Rather than opportunities to stay with something that's really been built or to go to Broadway-- I'm sure you had possibilities of doing that sort of thing-- what was it about Sir Tyrone Guthrie? What was it about the opportunity to do something with him that was new that really made you make that decision?

ANNETTE GARCEAU: By then, we'd become a kind of team. There was a group of us that worked so well together. We worked because we loved doing theater. And Guthrie is such an interesting man, his enthusiasm for quality theater and all of those things, which one admired and agreed with. We just all were on the same wavelength.

One of the reasons that Guthrie was so interested in doing regional theater was that he deplored the fact that theater seemed to mean New York, Broadway. And it sucked out a lot of the talent from all the various cities all around and brought it all to Broadway. And he believed that rather than that happening, why not have theaters right on the spot in your own home town, using the talent that is already there rather than taking it all away and putting it all in Broadway? And he did that, and he used a lot of local talent and found very good actors all around.

MARY STUCKY: Well, you did the same in your area of theatrical costume design. You taught and brought and developed that part of the theater. And many, many people who went on came out of your shop at the Guthrie.

ANNETTE GARCEAU: There wasn't any staff. There wasn't anyone. And so you had to go around. I went to the university who had the theater department and got some people through them. My whole thing about costuming is that it should be the finest quality you can make. It had to have a good sense of proportion into it. The workmanship had to be good. The period look had to be built into it. And all that had to be taught.

Some of the people they sent from the university didn't have this knowledge at all. They were taught the theory and so on, but they hadn't had the opportunity of actually being on the spot and doing the actual work, not with any high standard. I complained that it didn't seem to be any practical training in how to create a costume.

So they said, well, you teach them. So I had to take up that challenge. And so I did set up a little school in the theater. And I would have a class there, graduate students, teaching them a lot of practical things about how to build a costume.

MARY STUCKY: You're listening to a Voices of Minnesota conversation with Guthrie Theater costumier, Annette Garceau. I'm Mary Stucky. Annette Garceau is one of the American theater's most influential costume designers. She grew up in London and arrived in Minneapolis in 1963 with Sir Tyrone Guthrie, the founder of the theater in his name. And while Annette Garceau designed costumes for Broadway and Hollywood, she says her most rewarding work was here in Minneapolis, where her costumes were worn and appreciated night after night.

ANNETTE GARCEAU: In Guthrie's time, the stage was used as the Elizabethans used it with very little scenery. A suggestion here and there, like the Stratford stage, we had a permanent balcony built into it on poles. And then there were two little stairways for entrances and exits each side. And then props-- a table, a throne, or something like that-- would be brought in.

And Guthrie used banners for the wars and things like that. And bright banners would decorate the stage. And he loved flowers and ribbons on poles and things like that to decorate the stage, especially for the happy ending and the weddings, those kind of things.

And so the stage was not so busy with scenery in his day. And that's how he liked it. And so the costumes were the color. The costumes were more important. They created the interest on the stage. But today, it's a different point of view. There's a lot of scenery put on the stage, which, to me, it doesn't quite suit the stage as I have been brought up to see it.

MARY STUCKY: It must be a thrilling moment when an actor tries on a costume for the first time. What does a costume do for the acting, for the actor?

ANNETTE GARCEAU: Well, it's a very important part of his role. When he comes in for a first fitting, I asked him, now, tell me what you have to do in this costume. Some of them, even though it's quite an elaborate costume, have to be in a fight or roll on the ground or something. And you have to build in all that kind of possibility and make sure they're going to be comfortable and the costume will spring back into shape again.

It's wonderful for them when they first see it. They say, oh, I see, I've got this hanging sleeve. And when I make this gesture, it will show off. And I know what to do with that. And different little bits of the costume they realize that they can use in their role for them to get really comfortable in it. They have to be comfortable. If it's boned, you have to make sure there's no bone sticking into them. And if it's tight waisted, some of the actresses don't like being boned in. But you do it to keep within the style of the costume, but also within the comfort of the actor.

MARY STUCKY: You have told some wonderful stories about how much fun you've had coming up with costume ideas. And one of my favorites involves the plastic rings that link a six pack of soda pop. Do you mind telling that story? You have invented some things.

ANNETTE GARCEAU: Oh, well, it's rather silly one. I pulled off these rings. And I just wondered what would happen if I put them in the oven, in the heat. So I separated the rings and put them on a cookie tray and put them in a hot oven. They did. They sort of condensed and squished up into a sort of little lump. They were amusing. And I just put them away and forgot all about them.

Well, there came a time when we did a play called Mary Stuart. And it was the story of-- an imaginary story of Mary Stuart and Queen Elizabeth meeting and having conversations, a fact which never happened. They never did meet. They never did talk together.

So there were costumes for Mary Stuart and Queen Elizabeth. And I did the Elizabeth costumes. There were three of them, all very elaborate. They were one-- I enjoyed doing those. They were really wonderful. And Barbara Bryne played the Elizabeth. And there was all sorts of fabulous decoration. And there were these great ropes of rich pearls and all kinds of decorations on there.

Suddenly, I thought of these funny little things that I had. So I brought them into the theater. I showed the designer. And so she said, oh, let's use them. So I painted them with a bright pink nail varnish, which gave them a sort of lustrous-- the plastic showed through. And they were kind of lustrous. I sent them down to props and they drilled a couple of holes in them. And through those holes, we could put a thread. And so a big pearl on in the center and thread it and tie it off.

So you had this pink, globby something with this bright pearl in the middle. And I sewed those all over the front of the skirt. And it just made an extra decoration.

MARY STUCKY: I love the ingenuity and the sense of fun and pleasure in the work. I mean, how delightful.

ANNETTE GARCEAU: Well, theater is a marvelous place for using a whole lot of rubbish and building it into something quite romantic. Another thing we did, there was a wonderful production of the Caucasian Chalk Circle we did many, many years ago. And that is a story of a very poor village, didn't have any money or anything. And they had to get an army together.

So they had to dress up their army and all kinds of things. What we did for that was to ask the actors to save their soup cans. And we washed the soup cans. And in the scene shop, they took out the bottom part of the can and bashed them down, squashed them flat, drilled some holes in them. And then we put little leather hangers on those, sewed them onto a felt tabard, and overlapped them.

So they became armor. So you can use many, many different kinds of rubbish, as it were, and turn it into magic.

MARY STUCKY: Ms. Garceau, you are delightful. Thank you so much for talking with us.

ANNETTE GARCEAU: Well, thank you. It's been most enjoyable.

MARY STUCKY: Guthrie Theater costumier Annette Garceau in a Voices of Minnesota conversation at her home in Minneapolis. I'm Mary Stucky.

GARY EICHTEN: And finally today on Midday, the story of Minnesotan Carl Anderson. On Christmas eve, back in 1941, apprentice seaman Carl Anderson helped raise the spirits of a nation during some of the darkest days of World War II. Dan Olson has that story.

DAN OLSON: Before the war, friends who heard Carl Anderson sing said he should give up his teaching job and audition for the Metropolitan Opera.

[OPERA MUSIC]

The thought of a singing career had crossed Anderson's mind. But the young bachelor was caring for his ailing mother, a widow. And he told his friends he wouldn't put her through the ordeal of living in New York City.

CARL ANDERSON: I said, I can't do that. I got to keep a job. I have my mother living with me. And I got to have a steady job.

DAN OLSON: On Monday, December 8, 1941, the day after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, Anderson taught his morning classes, caught the radio address of President Roosevelt declaring war on Japan, and then headed for the Navy recruiting office. He was no longer caring for his mother, who had died.

CARL ANDERSON: I was a bachelor. My parents were dead. I didn't see any reason why I shouldn't go to war. And I'd been teaching all these years how great our democracy is. Here's a chance for me to prove I believed in it.

DAN OLSON: Anderson, then 28 years old, was sent to basic training with a bunch of 18- and 19-year-olds to the Naval training station at Great Lakes, Illinois.

BEN GRAUER: This is Ben Grauer, friends and servicemen everywhere with Christmas greetings from the makers of that delicious fog candy bar. And all of us here--

DAN OLSON: Not even the rigors of basic training dulled Anderson's yen to perform. When NBC invited recruits to audition for a nationwide Armed Forces Radio Christmas Eve broadcast, Anderson was selected and told to sing a carol.

BEN GRAUER: Here is Carl William Anderson and O. Little town of Bethlehem.

["O LITTLE TOWN OF BETHLEHEM" PLAYING]

CARL ANDERSON: (SINGING) O little town of Bethlehem

How still we see thee lie

Of course, I called my sisters-- they're home here-- and told them that I was singing over there. And they gathered at her house and heard me sing.

DAN OLSON: The Navy sent Anderson to weather forecasting and then navigation training school. He was assigned to duty on a tank and troop landing craft, a vessel longer than a football field with huge bow doors that opened like massive steel jaws to disgorge up to 30 tanks or as many as a thousand troops. Anderson assumed they'd be part of a huge convoy on their way across the Pacific, but they were alone, headed for Milne Bay on the island of New Guinea.

CARL ANDERSON: And about the second day that I'm out there, I find out that I'm the only one on the ship that knew how to navigate.

DAN OLSON: Measuring the sun by day and the stars at night. Anderson plotted the vessel's course. He says he couldn't sleep a wink on the night before they were expected to reach their destination. He was roused at 4:00 in the morning and told radar had detected land.

CARL ANDERSON: And I thought, now, well, I'm quite sure it's new Guinea, but I don't know if it's Milne Bay. And by God, it was Milne Bay. I hit it right on the nose.

DAN OLSON: The 87-year-old Anderson, sitting comfortably in a Big Easy chair in his South Minneapolis home, speeds past any hint of personal danger during World War II. He and his crewmates were part of one landing after another in many of the biggest Pacific battles of the war. At the end, Anderson and the tank landing transport steamed to Japan for the signing of the surrender.

CARL ANDERSON: And the reason we were up there was on the deck here, we had a Cadillac for MacArthur. [LAUGHS]

DAN OLSON: There had been shore leave and some downtime. But in four years of Navy duty, Anderson, like others serving in military or civilian jobs to support the war, had, for the most part, not had a day off. He made it home on Christmas Eve, 1945.

CARL ANDERSON: And I showed up. And my niece, she came to the door. And she said, uncle Carl, in a loud voice. And my sisters, they were in the kitchen. And they came running out there. And oh, that was some night.

DAN OLSON: Carl Anderson, remembering his Christmas Eve homecoming in 1945. Dan Olson, Minnesota Public Radio.

CARL ANDERSON: (SINGING) Yet in thy dark streets shineth up

The everlasting light

The hopes and fears of all the years

Are met in thee tonight

GARY EICHTEN: And that concludes our Midday program today. I hope you have a very, very nice holiday weekend. By the way, Mr. Olson is the producer of our Voices of Minnesota series. On Christmas Day, Monday, Tom Crann will be here with a full two hours of special holiday music that he's put together.

So make sure you tune in for that. And then we're going to be back on Tuesday, day after Christmas. Chris Gilbert will be joining us. We'll look back at what's been a wild and woolly year in politics, and then we'll return to Bosnia five years after the war. So that's coming up on Tuesday.

And we do hope you'll be able to join us. Kara Fiegenschuh has produced our Midday programs this week. We had assistance from Gabrielle Zuckerman and Randy Johnson. I'm Gary Eichten again. Have a great weekend and join us on Tuesday for our next Midday program.

Minnesota Public Radio is looking for the next generation of members and hope you'll become one of them. Just click and join online at minnesotapublicradio.org. Talk of the Nation Science Friday with IRA Flatow. Coming up after the news.

GRETA CUNNINGHAM: I'm Greta Cunningham. On the next All Things Considered, farmers and environmentalists are worried about yet another merger in the hog processing industry. It's All Things Considered, weekdays at 3:00 on Minnesota Public Radio.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

GARY EICHTEN: You're listening to Minnesota Public Radio. Partly cloudy sky, 2 degrees below 0. And that's the wind chill as well, 2 below at KNOW FM 91.1, Minneapolis and Saint Paul. Could hit 5 above yet today. Tonight, 20% chance for a light-- for a light snow with an overnight low of 0 to 7 below. Tomorrow, more light snow. High temperature tomorrow, 5 to 10 above.

NORA RAHM: From NPR News in Washington, I'm Nora Rahm. President-elect Bush this morning announced his choice for attorney general. It's former Senator John Ashcroft of Missouri. Mr. Bush said he's a man of deep convictions and strong principle. Ashcroft promised to administer the Department of Justice with integrity.

JOHN ASHCROFT: We will strive to be a guardian of liberty and equal justice for freedom, as President-elect Bush has noted, can flourish only in a culture defined by the rule of law, a rule of law that knows no class, that sees no color and bows to no creed.

NORA RAHM: Also today, Mr. Bush named Mitch Daniels of Eli Lilly and company his White House Budget director. The Associated Press is reporting today that President Clinton has decided to pardon Dan Rostenkowski, the former chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee served.