Letters to the Editor
-
Ahh Camille
I always enjoy Camille's lengthy articles myself. Not that I agree with more than a word or two but, I don't feel intimidated by her positions or opinions. And the letters that follow are usually a spectacle to behold. Today was no exception. Ahh Camille - you puppetmaster you.
As usual though, I have to take exception to Ms. Paglia's embracing of the culture of Rush, Hannity, Fox Noise Channel, etc. I keep noting that she continues to propagate the myth of leftists as effete eggheads incapable of grasping the every-day indignities of life for those who didn't spend 12 years working on a master's thesis. Sorry ma'am but you simply must get out more. The truth is most of the values of the progressive movement are very Middle America. The conservative talking heads foamed at the mouths for months with regards to Terri Shiavo, Social Security reform and Hurricane Katrina but were unable to budge public opinion that something was terribly wrong with the plans that our leaders had for this country. You are starting to see that kind of movement on issues such as same-sex marriage, global warming and the economy as well. These are issues whose time has come and the conservatives are beginning to find themselves on the wrong side of the arguement much as they did with race, pollution, education, women's issues, etc.
Also, I disagree with her assessment of "liberals' hatred of Bush". Hatred is a pretty extreme term; in my case I'd have to go with "contempt". I know I don't hate Bush. For better or worse, Bush was our president on 9/11 - we hoped for better; he gave us worse. Looking back, even W. realized that the extraordinary events called upon our leadership to achieve greatness and, in his bumbling, sub-literate way, Bush seemed to be striving for it. However, his innate laziness and inability to grow as a human being and a world leader has been disastrous for this country. He tried to shoot for NFL league coach but was barely able to muster JV High School. I don't hate him; I resent the death that has resulted from his lack of the very attribute he claimed made him best suited to the job - Compassion.
Finally, I agree with her assessment of Ann Coulter. AC is a very intelligent woman. I've watched her shred her liberal opponents at times because of her quick wit. However, her reasoning is usually dependant upon fast-talking and throwing out barbs which confuse and trip up those who would debate her. Trying to debate Ann Coulter is like trying to catch a fly with your bare hand - you can do it but not all the time. The nastiness she exhibits; the mean-spirited comments that fly out of her mouth serve the dual purpose of throwing sand in the face of the other guys, while scoring easy points for those that revere her and the right wing position. Sure she's preaching to the choir but she's smart enough to know which side her bread is buttered on and the constant outrage on the left just keeps her pocketbook well padded.
By the way Camille, no disagreement here on the Scooter Libby trial - you're just completely wrong on that one.
-
Prof. Paglia doesn't seem to evolve at all
The French theorists Prof. Paglia routinely excoriates are starting to interest me for the first time. Perhaps they have something enduring to say if they enrage so consistently.
Prof. Paglia, meanwhile, with her reflexive, autistic rhetoric, seems to have become a parody of the ivory tower thinkers she loathes. She has become the Andrew Lloyd Webber of the essay (think Phantom, not Evita). I remember years ago being thrilled to see her name appear in Salon, knowing I would read an incisive, witty cultural critique of politics. But since then, hundreds of thousands have perished violently and the foundations of American democracy have been mocked and battered by men and ladies of the Right who Paglia continues to eroticize. Her maternal cooing at Bush and locker room towel slapping with the mentally ill Coulter and varicose Limbaugh are gruesome--like keeping snails and spiders as pets--and unworthy of a member of the academy.
Prof. Paglia speaks of spending years writing a book, but a few minutes reading a paper would have been a worthy investment too.
-
I don't get it.
So this essay/article/whatever is just... a collection of Paglia's opinions on current events? I wasn't really familiar with her work until her "I'm back" article at Salon recently, and after reading it, I was underwhelmed. I guess I just don't understand why I should care. Apparently a lot of people do, judging by the volume of letters, but as for me, I find her writing tiresome. I won't be reading it again.
-
Camille: A Mixed Bag, But Keep Her.
I've been a Salon subscriber for four years or so, and I'm happy the site is publishing Camille Paglia. She's a frustrating read, indeed, but she's not an idiot. She's colorful, provocative, witty, reckless and insightful all at once. I don't expect total consistency and absolute intellectual rigor from this kind of column -- this is clearly a place for wide-ranging prose reflections from a woman who thinks big and sees everything within her purview. The world is a complex, inconsistent place and there's room for this kind of commentary. If you want specific depth on contemporary political and legal issues you can read Glenn Greenwald without leaving this site. I read Greenwald daily (and have since he ran his own blog). But the role of cultural commentary and criticism is a bit broader, and Paglia's domain is there. She's a "public intellectual," like it or not, and I think that role remains important. Too many academics get so lost in the discourse of their own world that they're unable to say anything relevant about its relationship to the larger culture. So I say keep her. And as for the plugs for her own books, I think it's sensible that she would wish to make new readers aware of her other work (since this column appears rather infrequently).