Posts
The book buying public’s wait is over with today’s release of Amber Frey’s new book, Witness for the Prosecution. Regan Books, that bastion of literary integrity is set to cash in on America’s addiction to salaciousness and titillation. Frey is set to join J.K. Rowling in the book reading preservation society.
I’m going to step way out on a limb here and predict that Frey’s book is sure to spend time on the bestsellers list. With titles like, “Oh My God! Lacy’s baby is due on my birthday!” and “Isn’t that a little twisted, Scott”, this work is just begging to find its place on my 2005 list of books to read.
I’m amazed by Frey. She’s obviously brighter and more talented than her stereotypical profile and persona would lead one to believe. Stupid me!! I’ve been researching, interviewing and losing sleep working a seasonal job trying to keep my project moving forward and I’m still a good week away from having my proposal remotely ready for a publisher. Frey on the other hand has talent to burn, juggling supporting herself as a massage therapist, being a mother, while sexually satisfying her sociopath boyfriend and still finding the time to crank out a book! I’m doing it all wrong, I guess.
Just today, I spent 10 hours today holed up doing some hard editing and rewriting on my own book that seems caught in some kind of purgatory of delays, self-critical procrastination and general blood and guts toil that comes with writing a book of any merit.
Please forgive me for sounding a little bitter about another hack that probably hasn’t written anything longer than 100 words since high school, yet lands a lucrative book deal and large advance. Can anyone say ghostwriter? Frey joins another princess of popular culture, porn star Jenna Jameson, bookending Regan's rush to embrace sex and murder as they ride to the top of America's cultural trash heap. Now that would be a book signing worth attending! Maybe the two could collaborate on a new book, How To Use Sex and Violence to Win Friends and Eliminate Enemies.
I’m curious to hear what her advance was. I’m sure it’s six figures and some change. Regan might not be held in high esteem by many in the writing community due to its pantheon of pseudographers (Gen. Tommy Franks, Sean Hannity, Jack Canfield, Jameson and now Frey), but it uses Barnum’s famous adage to its advantage.
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Monday, January 03, 2005
Bobos at the NY Times
David Brooks=mainstream columnist at major daily=hack
Another column in a growing pile of anti-intellectual drivel from conservatives and pseudo thinkers about the disaster in SE Asia, being passed off as journalism.
Brad Delong's blog pretty much says it all on Brook's latest pile of dung; Here it is:
Another column in a growing pile of anti-intellectual drivel from conservatives and pseudo thinkers about the disaster in SE Asia, being passed off as journalism.
Brad Delong's blog pretty much says it all on Brook's latest pile of dung; Here it is:
Sunday, January 02, 2005
Passing of a true patriot
I’ve not been spending a lot of time imbibing news other than from my trusted internet sources. I’m usually a reader of the local dailies and the NY Times on line, but for some reason, this past week has seen a variance from this routine. As a result, I missed the passing of an important American writer and patriot in the truest sense of the word. I’m somewhat surprised I didn’t catch this at some point while cruising the blogosphere.
Susan Sontag, writer, activist and one of America’s underappreciated thinkers passed away on December 28th.
A tireless advocate for human rights, Sontag spent considerable time traveling around the world advocating for the marginalized. During the 1990’s Sontag called attention to the escalating civil war in Yugoslavia and lobbied world leaders to intervene.
Susan, over at Suburban Guerrilla has a fitting tribute to an American intellectual and original thinker that I’ll miss hearing from as we navigate the minefield of a second Bush term and a coarsening culture rife with ideological booby traps.
Susan Sontag, writer, activist and one of America’s underappreciated thinkers passed away on December 28th.
A tireless advocate for human rights, Sontag spent considerable time traveling around the world advocating for the marginalized. During the 1990’s Sontag called attention to the escalating civil war in Yugoslavia and lobbied world leaders to intervene.
Susan, over at Suburban Guerrilla has a fitting tribute to an American intellectual and original thinker that I’ll miss hearing from as we navigate the minefield of a second Bush term and a coarsening culture rife with ideological booby traps.
Being angry
I found an article on anger by Kirsten Anderberg over at Infoshop. It was interesting to me as I’ve often been accused of being “too” angry, or had people say to me on more occasions than I care to be reminded of, “boy, you’re really angry about that, aren’t you?” Usually the context involved an issue where there was a perceived grievance concerning the lack of justice extended to myself or others.
Obviously, there are destructive forms of anger, particularly involving physical or emotional harm inflicted upon others. In Anderberg’s case, this isn’t the anger that she is writing about. The anger that Anderberg is addressing is the anger that comes from seeing justice and equality go wanting at the expense of lies and greed. She speaks about the kind of anger that comes from watching innocent people harmed by one’s government in the name of exporting democracy. While Anderberg mentions that the labeling of being “too" angry is often directed at women and people of color, as a white, privileged male, I too have had this charge hurled my way.
What I found most fascinating about the article and about her premise concerning anger, was the recognition that being labeled “too" angry is most often a tactic for marginalizing her as a thinking person and her critique or criticism of some form of wrongdoing or an immoral or unethical policy. Anderberg accurately represents how the term is used at times when she has been critical of the abuse and disempowerment that comes from being a woman. It also comes when a person refuses to acquiesce in a docile way to the status quo or middle-class paradigm of conducting our lives.
While her article is from the context and perspective of being a woman and the disempowerment that comes from our patriarchal society, the marginalization she speaks about isn’t limited only to women and minorities. Being a male and part of the working, or slave class can produce behavior that gets you labeled “too” angry. If you dare to speak out at meetings, or not act like a sheep in the workplace, that can get you labeled as “too” angry.
Daring to speak out against your government and its abuses will certainly get you labelled quickly. Refusing to put the flag in a position of superiority over people or other cultures can get you labeled pretty damn fast as being “too” angry. I’ve often thought it somewhat dysfunctional not to be angry when you look at all the abuses that are perpetrated in the name of family, faith and flag.
It’s interesting to look at who has been accused of being "too" angry historically. Malcolm X was considered “too" angry. Chicano activists, led by Cesar Chavez during the California Grape Strike were labeled “too” angry. Leaders of Native movements reclaiming land and demanding that treaties be honored have been labeled “too” angry. Feminists fighting for the right to control their own bodies are labeled as being “too” angry.
When I look at how the world operates, promoting the corporate interests of the powerful, at the expense of those who provide the labor necessary for their capital, I am amazed that there isn’t more anger. This is a testament to the level of mastery and manipulation that the powerful are able to enact upon the population in the forms of family, education, media and other tools of control. To see this level of injustice and not be angry enough to want to change things and demand justice is the true anti-social behavior, in my opinion.
Obviously, there are destructive forms of anger, particularly involving physical or emotional harm inflicted upon others. In Anderberg’s case, this isn’t the anger that she is writing about. The anger that Anderberg is addressing is the anger that comes from seeing justice and equality go wanting at the expense of lies and greed. She speaks about the kind of anger that comes from watching innocent people harmed by one’s government in the name of exporting democracy. While Anderberg mentions that the labeling of being “too" angry is often directed at women and people of color, as a white, privileged male, I too have had this charge hurled my way.
What I found most fascinating about the article and about her premise concerning anger, was the recognition that being labeled “too" angry is most often a tactic for marginalizing her as a thinking person and her critique or criticism of some form of wrongdoing or an immoral or unethical policy. Anderberg accurately represents how the term is used at times when she has been critical of the abuse and disempowerment that comes from being a woman. It also comes when a person refuses to acquiesce in a docile way to the status quo or middle-class paradigm of conducting our lives.
While her article is from the context and perspective of being a woman and the disempowerment that comes from our patriarchal society, the marginalization she speaks about isn’t limited only to women and minorities. Being a male and part of the working, or slave class can produce behavior that gets you labeled “too” angry. If you dare to speak out at meetings, or not act like a sheep in the workplace, that can get you labeled as “too” angry.
Daring to speak out against your government and its abuses will certainly get you labelled quickly. Refusing to put the flag in a position of superiority over people or other cultures can get you labeled pretty damn fast as being “too” angry. I’ve often thought it somewhat dysfunctional not to be angry when you look at all the abuses that are perpetrated in the name of family, faith and flag.
It’s interesting to look at who has been accused of being "too" angry historically. Malcolm X was considered “too" angry. Chicano activists, led by Cesar Chavez during the California Grape Strike were labeled “too” angry. Leaders of Native movements reclaiming land and demanding that treaties be honored have been labeled “too” angry. Feminists fighting for the right to control their own bodies are labeled as being “too” angry.
When I look at how the world operates, promoting the corporate interests of the powerful, at the expense of those who provide the labor necessary for their capital, I am amazed that there isn’t more anger. This is a testament to the level of mastery and manipulation that the powerful are able to enact upon the population in the forms of family, education, media and other tools of control. To see this level of injustice and not be angry enough to want to change things and demand justice is the true anti-social behavior, in my opinion.
Saturday, January 01, 2005
Compassion shortage
Two Norwegian 10 year olds sold their cherished toys and raised $450 to send to the victims of last weeks devastating tsunami.
“It is terrible, and especially because so many children are affected,” one of the children, Ebba Tangen, told the newspaper, Dagbladet.no. “So we are selling some of our toys so we can help out.”
Tangen and her friend from school, Jor Hjustad Tvedt (pictured), sold toys and cakes at a square in central Oslo. Together, the two raised 2,750 Norwegian crowns ($454.70) in four hours. They said they would give the money to the Red Cross and other aid organizations.
An interesting, but not terribly surprising flipside to this story has the major forces of the religious right remarkably tight-lipped concerning the solicitation of donations from their listeners to aid the victims in southeast Asia. Jerry Falwell, who recently spent much of a recent broadcast soliciting viewers to spend July on a cruise with him aboard the Queen Mary, has said nothing about aid to the affected countries to help alleviate their suffering. With cruises ranging from $2,995, and topping out at $7,995, this isn’t the austere life of Jesus we’re talking about here.
According to Bill Berkowitz of Working for Change, many websites of leading Christian conservative organizations are lacking in any mention of the tsunami and the victims left in its wake. As of this writing, the websites of Coral Ridge Ministries, the Family Research Council, as well as Concerned Women for America and the Christian Coalition all are strangely silent about aid to victims. I was unable to find any requests or appeals for assistance for victims of the tsunami. There were many appeals to viewers to “take back America”, resolutions for the culture war, as well as screeds against homosexuality.
As Berkowitz writes, “These powerful and well-funded political Christian fundamentalist organizations appear to be suffering from a compassion deficit. Organizations which are amazingly quick to organize to fight against same-sex marriage, a woman's right to choose, and embryonic stem cell research are missing in action when it comes to responding to the disaster in southern Asia. None of their web sites are actively soliciting aid for the victims of the earthquake/tsunami.”
Obviously, there are numerous faith-based groups, such as American Friends Service Committee and others that are directly involved in sending supplies, medical care, food, as well as clothing to the residents of this devastated area. What galls me however, is that many of these far-right religious organizations in our own country, claim Jesus as their guiding light, yet the only thing they have in common with the groups providing assistance is their governmental tax-exempt status. As Jesus taught in Matthew 25:31-46, “Whatever you do for the least of these (victims of the tsunami)…you do for me.”
On a related note, despite the inflated rhetoric that accompanied charges of America's stinginess by UN Director of Relief Jan Egeland, America and other industrialized countries are indeed stingy.
Oxfam, the international aid organization, released a report that indicts the wealthiest nations (including the U.S.) in the plight of the world's poorest people.
The Oxfam report, Paying the Price, reveals that aid budgets in the wealthiest countries are half of what they were in 1960. Added to stinginess of the rich, crushing levels of debt are preventing undeveloped nations from addressing many of the issues that contribute to poverty across the globe.
“It is terrible, and especially because so many children are affected,” one of the children, Ebba Tangen, told the newspaper, Dagbladet.no. “So we are selling some of our toys so we can help out.”
Tangen and her friend from school, Jor Hjustad Tvedt (pictured), sold toys and cakes at a square in central Oslo. Together, the two raised 2,750 Norwegian crowns ($454.70) in four hours. They said they would give the money to the Red Cross and other aid organizations.
An interesting, but not terribly surprising flipside to this story has the major forces of the religious right remarkably tight-lipped concerning the solicitation of donations from their listeners to aid the victims in southeast Asia. Jerry Falwell, who recently spent much of a recent broadcast soliciting viewers to spend July on a cruise with him aboard the Queen Mary, has said nothing about aid to the affected countries to help alleviate their suffering. With cruises ranging from $2,995, and topping out at $7,995, this isn’t the austere life of Jesus we’re talking about here.
According to Bill Berkowitz of Working for Change, many websites of leading Christian conservative organizations are lacking in any mention of the tsunami and the victims left in its wake. As of this writing, the websites of Coral Ridge Ministries, the Family Research Council, as well as Concerned Women for America and the Christian Coalition all are strangely silent about aid to victims. I was unable to find any requests or appeals for assistance for victims of the tsunami. There were many appeals to viewers to “take back America”, resolutions for the culture war, as well as screeds against homosexuality.
As Berkowitz writes, “These powerful and well-funded political Christian fundamentalist organizations appear to be suffering from a compassion deficit. Organizations which are amazingly quick to organize to fight against same-sex marriage, a woman's right to choose, and embryonic stem cell research are missing in action when it comes to responding to the disaster in southern Asia. None of their web sites are actively soliciting aid for the victims of the earthquake/tsunami.”
Obviously, there are numerous faith-based groups, such as American Friends Service Committee and others that are directly involved in sending supplies, medical care, food, as well as clothing to the residents of this devastated area. What galls me however, is that many of these far-right religious organizations in our own country, claim Jesus as their guiding light, yet the only thing they have in common with the groups providing assistance is their governmental tax-exempt status. As Jesus taught in Matthew 25:31-46, “Whatever you do for the least of these (victims of the tsunami)…you do for me.”
On a related note, despite the inflated rhetoric that accompanied charges of America's stinginess by UN Director of Relief Jan Egeland, America and other industrialized countries are indeed stingy.
Oxfam, the international aid organization, released a report that indicts the wealthiest nations (including the U.S.) in the plight of the world's poorest people.
The Oxfam report, Paying the Price, reveals that aid budgets in the wealthiest countries are half of what they were in 1960. Added to stinginess of the rich, crushing levels of debt are preventing undeveloped nations from addressing many of the issues that contribute to poverty across the globe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)