Letters to the Editor
-
Change happens, I guess. It's time to accept Salon is not for us, and move on.
I thought Salon was a website for progressive liberals. Lord knows we need a place of our own... to get away from the corporate-sponsored commercial press.
CP is simply not a progressive liberal. She cares little for feminist causes. She is judgemental against gay men. She criticizes Clinton & Obama while praising Limbaugh & Drudge.
If Salon prefers to be some sort of libertarian, trashy, contrarian website, so be it. But don't expect the true blue progressives to stick around. I'll be checking out the Huffington Post, Crooks & Liars, MoveOn, and countless other sites.
-
So we're still the ones who don't get it...
... and the only thing any of her fans can tell us is that she's brilliant because the point of her work is to offend people and people get offended by her, ergo she's a genius. That and her fans are not only so much smarter than us, they're also more zen.
Well, I guess it's a better argument than "shut up". It's weird to see her own fans admit that there really is absolutely nothing to her whatsoever that a street-corner schizophrenic doesn't do equally as well, but, really, what else can they possibly say?
At the risk of damning with faint praise, I'll say this for the pro-CP camp: every single last one of them is at least as good a writer as she is.
-
Spurned
CP reminds me of a woman spurned, harboring resentment against those she desperately wanted to be embraced by, but was instead completely ignored. So she lashes out at them at every opportunity.
So junior high. Too bad Salon fell for it.
-
kinky
"her fans can tell us is that she's brilliant because the point of her work is to offend people and people get offended by her"
Seems rather masochistic to me. Maybe the love for CP is an S&M thing... or BDSM or whatever. Salon is headquartered in SF; I used to live there & experienced some funky sex... it's beginning to make sense why they dig CP so much.
-
the basic problem with Paglia
her schtick is old, folks. She's been doing this same song-and-dance for nearly 20 years. It was mildly fresh when she started...but the shuffle hasn't changed, while the world has..
All these folks who find Paglia so entertaining have probably had little exposure to her.
For someone like me..who was reading her stuff a long time ago, the act is old, and over.
The basic problem Paglia has always had is that when you really dissect her stuff, it begins to sound like the gabble of a pathologically self-obsessed, and narcissistically self-indulgent, idiot. And I use the word idiot very deliberately...in her chosen profession of literary criticism she can be genuinely insightful, if a bit kooky. But in just about anything else? She sounds like an idiot. A self-indulgent idiot. And, if you *really* enjoy that kind of thing, you might want to take a long, long look at yourself, because it's probably not normal to be inspired by such an obvious narcissicist...
Which is not to say that even in subjects outside her expertise, she cannot find a nugget of insight once in awhile. Of course she can. Even a blind pig finds a nice truffle now and then. But you *really* want to wade through the swamp of her self-regard, and her weird imaginings, to get to that nugget?
Not me. But then, as always, there's no accounting for taste. If nothing else, Paglia is an acquired taste. One I will gladly forego.
Jesus, Salon, you couldn't find anyone better than Paglia to fulfill the role of kinky cultural critic?
Sandra Tsing Loh would have been a FAR better choice. And she's MUCH funnier than Paglia will ever be. Anyone seen Loh's latest piece in "the Atlantic"? It's a classic of the kind. Loh is some kind of genius. Paglia, on the other hand...genius is not the word that comes to mind.
-
tiresome douchebag
No whoremoan therapy extant can fix this harradan, this bitter little harpie.
-
Emily
Thank you.
However, be aware that these wackos are never going to concede that she's thought provoking and that her ideas engender discussion — even after 500+ letters that prove just that. These anti-Paglia writers refuse to acknowledge that there is any position other than their own. They can't conceive that although she riles them, she might actually cause them to think, and evaluate their positions even when they don't agree with her. Margalis has probably done more writing in the past two days than in the past two weeks, but nevertheless... It just shows that if you move far enough to the left, or far enough to the right, you wind up in the same spot — one that seems to be against free speech, debate, and the liberal exchange of ideas. Sadly, they don't even recognize this. They're so encased in their fossilized points of view that the mere whisper of dissent is enough to get them screaming revolution.
Is that a guillotine I hear in the distance?
-
Spare Us
Phoney, passe, paglia. Spare us
Susan Bragg
-
Happy Camper = Head up Ass
Happy Camper doesn't seem to have the brain power to grasp that while the vast majority of us believe paglia to be a self promoting, redundant, useless hack our anger is primarily aimed at the decline of salon.com. The only thoughts that paglia has provoked these last few days are those that cause us to grieve the selling out of a once unique and important source of information on the web.
-
Please don't use me as an example
However, be aware that these wackos are never going to concede that she's thought provoking and that her ideas engender discussion — even after 500+ letters that prove just that.
GK addressed this very point in his screed on letters. He said it very well, so let me quote him:
First, writers are increasingly rewarded for provoking noise. The more responses you get, the more impact you have, the more money you make for your publication, and the more editors will reward you. But getting a lot of letters is not necessarily a good sign: It sometimes just means that you pushed an obvious button. It's easier to bitch than praise. Some of the best pieces -- the most thoroughly investigated, clearly argued, beautifully written -- generate very few letters
Eloquently put.
Look at this discussion here. It amounts to "Camille sucks." That is provoking thought? That is engendering discussion?
Yours is yet another tired retread of "well look how many are responding! Guess she must be on to something!"
Please don't put words in my mouth or make unfounded assumptions. I haven't done "more writing in the past two days than in the past two weeks" - how could you possibly know that? Furthermore the only thought Camille provoked in me is "how do I show everyone what a moron this gasbag is?"