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.

Delightful prose, but the correct spelling is plumb crazy. Plumb is a folk term, mostly southern, which means "completely." Nor is it typically hyphenated in combination. What you have written means someone who is wild about a certain small fruit.

And frankly, if you consider Judith Guliani more entertaining than Bill Clinton, you're plumb crazy.

I wrote for Max Brantley and The Arkansas Times for several years. He's a good man and he speaks truth. Pay attention to what he says. Huckabee is another moralizing fraud.

Thank you. Courtesy is never out of date, though it may on occasion be out of fashion. It requires intelligence, awareness, self-discipline, and a bit of objectivity about one's own importance. In my view, it is the foundation of civilization.

Thanks for the good review. Since the 1950s, when I was a young boy, and regardless of the doctrine of the times, I have understood that the immune system needs occasional challenge. Exposure to germs strengthens it, occasional mild sickness can help prevent worse.

For a good fictional parable on the subject, read The Naked Sun, in which the "spacers"--humans descended from space colonists--have eliminated all disease, but, when they come to Earth, must wear elaborate garments and filters because they no longer have immunities.

It may have been mentioned in the book, but in order for the sun to stimulate the production of vitamin D, there are certain oils that must be in and on the skin. If one bathes too often, those oils are washed away. Work up a sweat, then sunbathe. Let the sweat dry, and after a while, wash off.

Cleanliness, as your review points out, is practical. But in this as all things, a certain sensible moderation is to be sought. Don't be afraid to get dirty working, and don't be afraid to get clean. There is a wonderful vitalization that occurs after a shower, which cannot be wholly psychological. However, we do not need deodorants and whitening strips. Wash the hair each day with a simple shampoo (NOT a dandruff fighter--those shampoos cause the very condition they purport to fight). Bathe or shower. Brush and floss. By all means wash the hands regularly. But that's enough.

A healthy human body, cleaned with soap, will not emit offensive armpit odors. In general, if something is not natural, like the current fashion for ultrawhite teeth, it is probably harmful.

Sanitation IS partly spiritual. If you have a cleanliness of behavior, you will probably stay clean physically.

One thing the review (and apparently the book) did not comment on is the relation of dress styles to cleanliness. It is very uncomfortable to sweat in contemporary work clothing. In effect, we pushed cleanliness so far that now it is embodied in our very clothing. This is folly, since it tends to make us less active in order to preserve the status of our garments.

Instead of suits, why can't we wear comfortable clothes to work that we aren't afraid to get dirty?

Cleanliness and effort are a very satisfying cycle. It is satisfying to work hard, and satisfying to wash away the by-products of that effort.

Female genital mutilation is simply unacceptable. Cultural relativism, though generally benevolent, is not absolute. In order to form a workable culture that embraces and supports the whole species, we must be willing to abandon certain long-standing behaviors. There is no rationale to support such a barbaric practice as female genital mutilation, and this must be our approach to all future standards of human behavior.

All humans are citizens, and should have equal legal status. Women are human. They are equal to men. It's that simple. All humans should be able to pass among all other humans without fear. Cruelty is not permitted. Let's make this clear: The basic moral law is that one may not engage in any behavior which causes pain or harm to another. No philosophical or theological rationale whatsoever may be allowed for such behavior.

I don't think the assignment is difficult at all. It sounds like imaginative fun--see how much fun our brilliant limericist had with it--and what a good armature for learning it provides. Perhaps the assignment is not palatable for everyone, so perhaps some alternatives should be allowed.

But I wish there had been more homework like this when I was in school.