Dear LW:

You've taken a great first step in writing to Cary with your anxiety and concerns. Perhaps partly what you need to do as the next step is separate out the actual making of art with your conception (or misconceptions) of what an artist is. Artists get frustrated. Artists get tired. Artists feel like frauds at times and at times feel terribly insecure. In other words, they're just like ordinary people. Except they make art.

As for the question of whether you're a writer or painter, I'd say choose something and just do it for a year or two and see what happens. A year or two is nothing in the life of a serious artist, and what you learn in one medium will undoubtedly inform the other, if and when you turn back to it.

In the meantime, if these doubts persist, see a therapist. Ask around and find one who works with creative types. It's worked wonders for me and for other artist-types I know. And good luck.

Hmmm -- how bout a 5-0 lead in the bottom of the 7th, already up 3-2 in the World Series? Sounds pretty secure, right?

Ask the 2002 Giants how that one turned out.

From Foucault's History of Madness:

Family and its requirements became one of the essential criteria of reason, and it was above all in its name that confinement was demanded and obtained.

--with apologies for getting all theory-based, but this quote just seemed to pop out as I was reading the article. Why? Partially because I think we do tend to hold the family unit up as the norm, and anyone not normal is suspect.

Look, family and marriage is great, and for every male "genius" who got married and went into decline, there's probably at least another who didn't. Having said that, there's no question that solitude is not a convenience for anyone who would pursue art or philosophy seriously, it's a basic requirement. Rilke, another great loner, tried to convince his wife that married partners should be "guardians of each other's solitude." (They ended up separated and I think eventually divorced.)

If the author had stopped at just making that point, probably no one would disagree -- then again, he probably wouldn't have a book. Sounds like he's also taking on the beliefs of a whole culture (and trashing women to boot?), and that's always going to stir things up.

When I used to live in the bay area during his heyday, every year Barry Bonds used to go through a season of discontent, which often included a mysterious injury and wondering out loud about switching to the AL so he could spend time at DH. The backdrop to all this was contract posturing, and with Manny I have to assume it's the same, with a bit of Manny-being-Manny thrown in for the heck of it.

At the end of the season, the numbers were always there, as they will be this year for Manny. Granted, his non-performance-enhanced body might be breaking down faster and sooner than Bonds' did, but he's still an elite hitter, and those don't grow on trees. It will make sense for the Sox to keep him until it doesn't, and while that time is coming I don't see it this season. Who do you trade him to (or to whom do you trade him, if you want to get grammatical)? Where does he sign?

Can anyone seriously picture Ramirez on the Yankees, his locks clipped and jersey buttoned and tucked in? Me neither.

I've heard the idea floated of the Sox picking up Texiera, putting him at first and moving Youkilis to left. Seems like a downgrade at both positions.

@christian--

obviously, he predicted the winner + spread -- otherwise it wouldn't be much good in gambling terms.

there's a lengthy interview somewhere in the espn.com archives with a professional gambler who's made a fortune betting on NBA games over the past 10 years or so. His job, he said, was made a lot easier when the NBA started publishing the ref crew prior to the game. Doesn't that indicate a problem, Mr. Stern?

With all the prosperity that Stern's overseen for the past 30 years, this will be one of the stories that haunts his tenure -- along with the rampant over-expansion and uprooting of franchises like the Sonics with wink-wink deals for corrupt owners.

But I seriously doubt that even any of the milder reforms you suggest, King, will be implemented. Stern is too arrogant with his product and his power.

To the previous poster: you're right, the Sox just got worse. No one's going to be scared of pitching to Jason Bay in clutch situations. As for Manny, from a baseball perspective -- if that even matters to him -- he'll live to regret this. He'll miss the spotlight of the big rivalry with the Yankees, he'll flounder in the vast outfield of Chavez Ravine, and his numbers will suffer too. Bay seems like a fine player but odds are he'll struggle under the pressure of replacing Manny's numbers, an impossible task (yes, I'm aware they're pretty similar for this season).

So it's lose-lose all the way around.

Interesting perspective from King re. Sox veterans requesting the trade. It was just last week we were debating whether it was time for the Sox to cut ties. I guess we got our answer.