Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 260 Editor's Choice: 22
-
Time for a new 'fave pop intellectual'
[Read the article: Salon Interview: Camille Paglia]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dear Editor,
I just got done reading all 73 letters to the editor about this article and was surprised that you could pretty much lump them under two categories:
1-Republicans and conservatives that revel in her insightful analysis and breath o’ fresh air take on the political scene.
2-Regular salon readers who think that she’s a bloviating, self-important, pseudo intellectual gasbag and a phony.
Jeepers, this is a toughie but I’m going to have to go with number 2!
I first read Camille years ago when ‘Sexual Persona’ came out and I loved her. Her confident, tough talking, highly articulate writing style with all those historical and artistic references made me feel like a pig in shit. Then I did my homework and found out that she doesn’t hit the mark half as often as I had thought she did. In fact, I’ve come to the conclusion that Camille wields language, history and philosophy the way a flasher wields a raincoat; mildly shocking or amusing at first but an ultimately empty experience in the long run. Sure, she can make an incredibly prescient observation but then she has to go and hamstring her argument by following it up with one of her smug flippant remarks or pissy character assassinations (Chomsky, Franken, Woodward and Burns all take undeserved hit in this one). Then there’s the weird love hate fascination with Madonna and Hillary Clinton that has to come out in every article and every interview—and she thinks Chomsky has a ‘bilious pathology’?
For me the two most annoying things in this article were her remarks on Condi (“Every feminist…has a stake in Condi Rice’s success.”), and her absolutely inane assertion about religion (“Without religion, we’d have anarchy.”). I won’t say anything about the fist one because a number of readers have already spanked her on that one. But her comment that religion has done more good than bad is insupportable. Evidently she thinks atheism is good for her but can’t be handled by the masses. What drivel! Camille would to well to go to Norway or Sweden and see for herself that it doesn’t exactly look like Haymarket Square there.
In closing I’m going to side with many other readers and subscribers in saying that indeed, Camille’s 15 minutes are up.
P.S. 1- Isn’t ‘pop intellectual’ a bit of an oxymoron?
P. S. 2- Please bar the work ‘fave’ from being used in future salon features.
-
Cognitive Dissonance
[Read the article: Shame]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dear Editor,
An apology would be appropriate. Unfortunately it would also be impossible. The very imperial hubris and self-righteousness that Gary rightfully derides is the very thing that would block such a necessary gesture.
Many Americans are loath to admit several things:
1 -That they are highly propagandized—despite having the freest press in the world.
2 -That they are not morally superior to other nations.
3 -That maybe, just maybe, some nations cannot go directly from a feudal society to a highly functioning democracy.
4 –That they could be collectively responsible for a very heinous humanitarian crime.
The list is by no means exhaustive but to admit any of the above would mean that many Americans would essentially have to question what it means to be an ‘American’. George Bush Sr. once said that, “I will never apologize for America—no matter what the facts are.” This seems to be the prevailing wisdom of war supporters and it is a virulent pathology that one day will bite us very hard in the ass.
The Germans and the English are already familiar with this particularly absurd form of cognitive dissonance. After all they were both on top once and then fell—and fell hard; despite both countries feeling that they were divinely guided and would last forever.
Hubris indeed! Hard to believe that a country could be so naïve to fall for that old chestnut again.
To admit shame would require that we, as a nation, first look at ourselves very honestly and admit some ugly and truths about our way of life, the way we view ourselves and the way we view others. This would be wonderful but highly unlikely.
I recently had a conversation with a war supporter in which I trotted out the Lancet numbers on Iraqi casualties. The person ducked and evaded answering my queries about the huge number. I later realized that not wanting to discuss the deaths had nothing to do with not being able to answer my questions-- and everything to do with not wanting to even process the implications of such an accusation.
We as a nation are in a state of denial. Many American’s insist that we are a country founded on Christian principles; principles I might add that include forgiveness and humility as a central tenet of their religion. And yet is this very faction of the American populace that has championed this conflict and turned their face from the cold and ugly realities of this war. I guess I need to add another number to the above list:
5- That we an ironic people.
P.S. You must have said something right Gary. I've never see 19 letters in a row that were all in agreement!
-
To Robbins Mitchell:
[Read the article: Shame]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Jeepers Robbins, whoa, that's a knee slapper!
Just out of curiosity, does that ever really work? You know what I mean, calling someone a fag when they made an argument that you don't have the intellectual capacity to answer like an adult.
All comments are welcome of course, but if your going to be a moron, for god sake at least be clever!
-
To Robbins Mitchell:
[Read the article: Shame]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Jeepers Robbins, whoa, that's a knee slapper!
Just out of curiosity, does that ever really work? You know what I mean, calling someone a fag when they make an argument that you don't have the intellectual capacity to answer like an adult.
All comments are welcome of course, but if your going to be a moron, for god sake at least be clever!