jriggenbach

Israel is an example of "capitalism"? Is this some kind of joke? JR

Geez. Am I the only one who caught the ironic gleam in JR's eye when he invited us to a "tea party"? Oh puh-leez! Raucous and rollicking, that's more his style, for bad girls and boys. (If you aren't one yet, you will be by the end.) No philosophy allowed, and if you lot have to talk books, off to his library with you. Tony B) Actually, my preference is for an intellectual but spirited atmosphere, Bohemian basically, with much talk of philosophy, history, politics, and the arts. Classical music or jazz should be on in the background and there should be lots of dark beer and both red and white wine and plenty of foodstuffs - no watercress or cucumber sandwiches, but pretty much standard party stuff: veggies and dip, chips and salsa, cheese and crackers, fruit, shrimp with cocktail sauce, that sort of thing. Raucous and rollicking makes me nervous; it makes me think something is going to get knocked over and broken or that one of my books is going to have somebody's cabernet or somebody's schwarzbier spilled on it. JR

With Clinton we had Whitewater, Vince Foster, Gennifer Flowers, the one with the huge nose, and finally Monica. GWB had the "stolen election", his military career, and his alcohol/drug history. There's always something for the partisans of either losing party to latch onto and blow hot air over. One thing I'd like to add here, if there was anything to the birther story, Hillary Clinton's goons would have dug it out during the primary. Q.E.D. A voice of sanity! JR

My kids are grown, of course, but I always let them read or watch anything they wanted to - no exceptions. If I thought something was "age-inappropriate" for them, I offered them my advice on the matter. They didn't always take it. This is how young people learn. I am unable to detect that my advanced ideas did them any harm. But they turned out just like you, Jeff, they turned out just like you. --Brant didn't they? Not really, no. JR

Never read it. My antipathy to sports tends to mitigate against my reading novels or seeing movies that focus on that detestable subject. (There are a few exceptions to this general rule, but not many.) I read Malamud's second novel, The Assistant, when I was just out of college. While I was in college, I read some of the short stories in The Magic Barrel. Both of those reading experiences persuaded me that Malamud was a much better writer than frauds and mediocrities like Philip Roth and Saul Bellow, who were being touted along with him at the time as important authors. Nevertheless, I never got around to reading anything else by him. I did see the movie of The Natural with Robert Redford (in an effort to be sociable and please my mother), but I remember almost nothing about it. JR

I didn't come up with "Victor Manure," Adam. It was something my father used to say when I was a kid, and I doubt he came up with it either. I'm not sure if Xray is right that Mature himself came up with it, but he might well have. JR

My kids are grown, of course, but I always let them read or watch anything they wanted to - no exceptions. If I thought something was "age-inappropriate" for them, I offered them my advice on the matter. They didn't always take it. This is how young people learn. I am unable to detect that my advanced ideas did them any harm. JR

Over the last few years in the United States, I've gotten to know some extremely deluded people who believe: (1) that Barack Obama is significantly different from any other recent president; (2) that his policies and purposes are significantly different from those of any other recent president; (3) that he must be removed from office at all costs, to be replaced by someone preferable; (4) that this is possible (i.e., that there will be anyone significantly different running as a major party candidate in 2012); (5) that any hare-brained fantasy harbored by anyone else who opposes Barack Obama is reason for hope and will likely topple the evil Obama so that he may be replaced by someone significantly less evil (see points 3 and 4, above). It's rather like living in an open-air mental institution, in which, instead of every patient having a bed, every patient has a car and a computer. JR

The real tragedy of Phil's apparent departure from OL is, of course, the fact that he was right all along. I must say that I am shocked and deeply saddened to see the rampant context dropping that is going on around here with respect to this debacle. People seem to forget that Phil was fighting for his very life. He had been (as William Scherk so eloquently put it) "viciously attacked, denigrated, robbed of due respect, harried, hounded, unacknowledged for polite and respectful disagreement on intellectual matters, denied recognition for important points made, insulted, demeaned, snarked at, and belittled." What would you have him do? Under the circumstances, keeping the context firmly in mind, I submit that using the "c" word to address Ellen was the only action Phil could take that was both civil and benevolent. Sadly, JR

Oh? Is it sad that the U.S. government's unprovoked attack on the people of Iraq led to the deaths of innocent folks? JR

Nicole. Suzanne and I will be seeing her and Anthony in about 2-1/2 weeks out in California. JR

I was watching Demetrius and the Gladiators. Make of it what you will. With Victor Manure? JR

Suppose he supported his argument by quoting or referring to a moron who was a rightist? Let's say this rightist moron was equally "foul mouthed," i.e., given to using words that were regarded as crude and uncouth in the court of King William (the Conqueror) in the 11th Century because they were of Anglo-Saxon rather than French origin. Would that somehow be better? JR

I used to be known for my Beer Busts, ND, when I lived in San Francisco. For a few years in the '90s, my wife Suzanne and I hosted one every week. Later - from around 2000 to early in 2006 when we moved to Houston, we hosted one a month. The music was either jazz, with a heavy emphasis on piano - Dave Brubeck, George Shearing, Bill Evans, Erroll Garner, Thelonious Monk - or classical, with a heavy emphasis on the Baroque and Classical styles and more recent works in a compatible style - lots of chamber orchestras, lots of strings. Bach, Boyce, Mozart, Haydn, Mendelssohn's String Symphonies, Lady Radnor's Suite by Sir Hubert Parry, works for string orchestra by composers like Frank Bridge and Benjamin Britten. Occasionally I'd create a program of Celtic music and Bluegrass-style instrumentals. Occasionally, I'd fill the disc changer up with Tangerine Dream albums from the '70s and '80s. The beer was dark: mostly stouts and porters, now and then a dark lager, usually a bock. A few people around here have actually attended one or more of these: Ghs, Ellen, Phil. JR

(Note from MSK: This thread was peeled off from another here, and the part peeled off goes up to Post 42.) In a spirit of civility and benevolence, I'd like to invite all OLers to a tea party honoring Phil, who, as many of you know, has been my longs-suffering teacher for many years, putting up with the torments of an excruciatingly hot and uncomfortable place to teach me the rudiments of civility and benevolence. At this tea party, we will have a selection of herbal teas and little triangular watercress sandwiches with all the crusts cut off the edges of the bread. Stay tuned to this space for more details as they become available. Excitedly, JR

Jeff, And I am very sorry your vow was made within the context of this discussion (or whatever one can call this) because it definitely does not belong in the garbage. Michael Yes, I expect it does, Michael. JR

Just in case anyone missed my earlier declaration, I'd like to publicly renew my vow of dedication to the principles of civility and benevolence. JR

I consider myself second to none in my commitment to benevolence and civility. JR

There must be some mistake here, Daunce. There's nothing "individualistic" or "libertarian" about either Faux "News" or anything or anyone that is "conservative" - except, of course, in the tragically feverish imaginations of those who believe in the face of all evidence that they're going to see a free society (or even a significantly freer society) in their lifetimes. Please, don't feed their mind-ravaging fever, I beg of you! Concernedly, JR

Yes, of course. And I'll raise no objections as long as those conclusions are clearly labeled as personal opinions: "I found X powerfully moving." "It seemed to me to be masterfully accomplished." But make sweeping statements - "It is one of the masterpieces of American fiction." - and I may begin to raise an objection or two. Either it is one of the masterpieces of American fiction, or it isn't. This is a matter of fact, not a matter of opinion. There are standards for judging such matters, and they can be and have been spelled out. Has the maker of the sweeping statements read this material (the material that spells these standards out)? If not, has s/he analyzed the work in question so thoroughly on his or her own that s/he has ended up considering all the aspects discussed in the material in question? Or does s/he give evidence, by the naivete of many of her or his comments, that s/he is actually just inflating a personal opinion so that it sounds like an informed critical judgment? An uninformed personal opinion remains an uninformed personal opinion, no matter how puffed up with its own supposed importance it might become. The actual reason Phil insists so on this issue of exertise in literature is that he wants to deny that there is any such thing. If he acknowledged that there is such a thing as literary expertise, he might have to admit that his puffed up personal opinions are exactly that and nothing more. He might have to admit that he can't claim to be an expert on literary questions, just by virtue of his supposed "wide reading." Of course, to be "widely read" with regard to literature means a bit more than just having read a bunch of books. To be widely read in American literature, for example, one must have read all the major writers and most of the minor writers within that area of specialty, plus a representative sampling of the books and articles that identify and discuss the critical issues relevant to analyzing and evaluating the particular works of imaginative literature in that area of study. Before one makes sweeping public statements that imply expertise in this field, it also helps if one knows who the major and minor writers in American literature are and where one ought to look to find discussion of the relevant critical issues. JR

Jeff, I already imagined that was your view and this was one of the reasons I didn't address it directly. It wasn't relevant to my point. But since the confusion persists, now I will address it. My meaning for "credible" in the context of my opening post was "credible to the public." not "credible to Jeff." I was basically discussing public relations and propaganda, not personal standards of trustworthiness and expertise. Trump is a successful commercial real estate developer, best-selling author of several self-help books, and highly rated TV entertainer. The phrase, "You're fired," as stated by him has become a meme in our culture. When that level of achievement is compared by the public against the track record of your run-of-the-mill conspiracy theorist (or even a not run-of-the-mill conspiracy theorist like Orly Taitz), Trump is clearly more "credible." If you want to see a butt-load of credible people in my meaning, i.e., "credible to the public" (I don't know how many would qualify in your meaning, i.e., "credible to Jeff"), here is a long Wikipedia article: Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories Even Camille Paglia mentioned in that article as being on record with a view very, very close to my own. Hope that helps. Michael Camille Paglia is, of course, an ignorant fool. JR

A friend here in Houston called last night with his report on seeing the film. He's my age (he turned 64 in December; I followed suit in January), and he said everyone at the showing he attended was in our age group, like the sea of grey, white, and blue heads you see at symphony concerts these days. Also, he said they all seemed to have read the novel. It makes me wonder if, at least around here, it's mostly the already converted who are going to see the film. JR

Though Michael never directly replied to my request that he name one "credible person" who took the whole "birther" movement seriously, it has emerged from the thread that he probably meant Donald Trump. To which, I'm afraid, my response is: Donald Trump? He's a clown! JR

Yes, Phil, it is incredibly asinine that you should utterly fail to explain, anywhere in this pile of manure masquerading as a post, exactly how asking a question (namely, what "credible person" Michael might have had in mind) constitutes an oral disagreement, a verbal opposition, a contention, an altercation, a violent argument, a discussion involving differing points of view, or a debate. It's almost as asinine (and almost as intellectually primitive) as your apparent belief that there is some way to discern in a dictionary which of several listed definitions is "preferred." (Preferred? Preferred by whom? This is the kind of 6th grade misunderstanding of how to use a dictionary that I used to disabuse my 19-year-old students of when I was teaching English Composition in San Francisco in the '90s.) JR

Not by you anyway. As I've noted before, if you don't understand what you've read, you'll likely regard it as boring and be unable to name the ideas it formulates. JR