Yes, and fair enough as a general critique of a tendency in our culture, to first elevate people for no very good reason and then vindictively tear them down.

However, I have honest opinions about Mailer which I have held for a long time. I suspect most writers here have such opinions too, and that most of the people posting are not attempting to vilify a dead celebrity. (Some are, of course.) Those like myself simply resist automatic hagiography of the deceased, such as we saw in the disgraceful outpouring of sentiment about how wonderful Reagan was.

Have always had opinions about Anna Nicole Smith, too, but except for these posts, have never mentioned her in any forum. Mailer, by me, was at least interesting enough to disagree with.

I came back to this thread to correct a mistake in my last posting. When I quoted Auden's line (with a change), I had him writing "pardon" instead of "pardons." Bugs me to misquote a poet I really like. Would have to change the syntax of my sentence, but shouldn't have missed this.

Reading through other letters, I noticed the post from Nathforde. Two things: 1) It hardly seems accurate to characterize ALL the letters posted as attacking Mailer. It is true, I have reservations about his talent, and so am willing to suffer Nathforde's scorn, but many of these writers praise Mailer. 2) What is it exactly about dying that implies we should be less than honest regarding how we feel about the person who dies? Does the person suddenly become more virtuous, more talented? I would agree that it is chickenshit to pile on a person only after they die, when they cannot fight back. But I, and many others, have openly said what we thought while Mailer was alive. Why should we pretend now that we didn't think it? And incidentally, Nathforde, it is you who connects Mailer to Anna Nicole Smith. None of the rest of us suggested such a thing. In my opinion, of the two, Mailer was unquestionably the more gifted writer.

Writers have the same obligations to be decent humans as other people do. Time will not and should not, Auden to the contrary, "forgive [them] for writing well."

That said, as a writer who never met Mailer, my primary evaluation of him stems from his writing. I found The Naked and the Dead clumsy and dull, American Dream frighteningly unhinged, and Tough Guys Don't Dance preposterous. I read the self-promotion about his participation in the 1968 Washington protests, and while we agreed about the war, I wondered why I was reading about Mailer in the bathroom. After that I quit reading him because I felt he had little to offer.

Have always found it amusing that the people who love the sound of their own voices thought he was such a big talent. Just goes to show how far bluster will carry you among the insecure.

I admire a good deal of what he did, though not his macho posturing and his writing. I enjoyed his theatrical "pot-stirring" (as another poster called it).

Courage, however, has little to do with belligerence.

Family is good. It gives you a reason to hang around people with whom you have nothing in common.

There will never be blogs covering all possible situations in all possible universes. There would have to be more blogs than universes, and as many blogs in each universe as phenomena in that universe. Were you being hyperbolic?

You can add finite quantities as long as you wish but you will never reach infinite. A finite number of agencies, no matter how large, can never produce an infinite number of results.

Vagina is a stark and clinical word not so much from connotation as from sound. (The fact is no less familiar than the occurrence of the penis--almost everybody has at one or the other, so what's all the big whoop? Shouldn't we be used to this by now?)

I rather like vayjayjay, but the problem is that the word is too long. Nobody wants to say three syllables. People prefer words that fit comfortably in the mouth and are easy to say. May I suggest "vayjay," especially since it is difficult to see a source in the original for the extra j-sound?

Of course, courtesy suggests that you use whatever terminology the person you are speaking to prefers. Since it is women who have vaginas, I will follow whatever consensus they arrive at, if any. Otherwise I shall appeal to wit and courtesy.

In order to avoid the influence of Britney, Paris, and the rest, it is not necessary to engage in specific antiquated activities in an attempt to restore the theoretically more wholesome past.

Parents should simply ignore these sorts of people as irrelevant. Britney and Paris are boring to anyone not themselves consumed by ennui, and few young girls are consumed by ennui.

Turn off the frigging tv. Limit computer use. Let it be clear that Paris and her cohorts are the least of your concerns. Begin this as soon as your children are born.

As far as your kids are concerned, you are the experts, the gods, the powers, until you give them reason to think different. If you do not credit these media creations with importance, your children will not do so.

Don't bother to be angry and cry against this nonsense. It has only the power over you that you allow it to have. Simply shrug, admit there are silly people in the world, and go on with your entirely interesting and useful life.