In our very first edition, we printed this article. We think it's time to reprint it. (And we thank C.I. for spotlighting it in full Friday.)
"Abortion: Why it matters still"
Karla (not her real name) speaks softly as she explains the abortion she had two years ago, when she was 17.
"I couldn't not have one," she says slowly. "Adoption wasn't even a possibility. And, I mean, at some point, they can look you up and ask you to explain why."
What Karla would have had to explain was that she and the grown child had a lot in common, namely a father. Karla was sexually abused from the ages of 14 to 16 by her biological father.
Her mother knew. But for the "good of the family," she wasn't any help to Karla."The good of the family seemed to just mean so that no one knew what he was doing to me. My mother was supporting it, she was looking the other way."
Karla's father/abuser had been in sales and often traveled as part of his job. In 1999, he lost his job due to alcoholism.
"Suddenly, he was around all the time. And maybe he was drunk the first time he forced himself on me, I don't really remember because I try not to. He'd been drinking, because I do remember his breath. But if he was drunk or not, I can't really say. I try not to dwell on it unless I'm with my therapist because otherwise it just destroys me and I'm left in this state where I just want to curl up in a ball or I'll go in the closet and shut the door and spend the rest of the day in there."
After the first rape, Karla's father/attacker apologized and begged her not to tell anyone. He said he was depressed over losing his job and angry at the world. He'd had to sell their nice house and move to a suburb where things were cheaper while he 'looked for work." ("He was drunk by ten most mornings, he wasn't out looking for a job," Karla says.) In his mind that excused what had happened.
"It was probably a month to six weeks later, my mother had gone out of town with her church group. I don't know, they were speaking about the importance of family in some way. After it had happened, I made a point not to say anything. I felt sorry for him, probably. But I also felt like maybe it was my fault which I've learned is a fairly common reaction. I don't remember being worried that she was going to be gone that weekend. I may have believed him when he promised it would never happen again."
But it did. And the same apologies/justifications flowed from his mouth. And the third time was three weeks later.
"At some point, early on, I told her. And she called me a liar. I was crying and I said, 'I'm not lying. I need your help. Why won't you believe me?' She ran and got him. Drug him into the room. There's no way she couldn't see the guilty look on his face. He wouldn't even look at me or at her. But she said, 'Your daughter is lying about you. You two need to straighten this out.'She grabbed her keys and left. Left me with the guy I had just told her was raping me. As soon as she was gone . . . He . . . he lost the guilty look. He just snapped and started screaming at me and slapping me and telling me I was ruining his life. My lip was bleeding and one of my eyes was swollen. I fell to the floor and he started kicking me and saying things like 'a prick tease like you had this coming!' While I was lying on the floor . . ."
For almost two years this went on. After a few months, her mother walked in on it.
"She screamed and yelled but mainly at me. The next day she said, 'I don't want to talk about it.' Instead, she'd greet me with things like 'You look trampy today' or 'You're not wearing any make up, don't you want to look pretty?' After a few months of that, she seemed to feel we now had some shared bond and started confessing that he'd cheated for years but at least now she knew where he was. All this time, I'd hoped that she would find out and put a stop to it. But when she found out, after she got done blaming me, she just decided it was no big deal."
In a new area, with no family other than her parents, Karla didn't feel she had any options. She also kept hoping her mother would start defending her. But that never happened.
"I think maybe it was losing the house and feeling that in moving, she was at risk of losing her friends. She always brought that up when I'd say, 'I can't go on like this.' 'Joanne will never understand!' she'd scream at me. That was a woman who was really big at her church."
Realizing her own mother had no intention of ever stopping the repeated rapes, Karla found herself trapped in the situation and the silence.
"You want to tell someone. But when your own mother first calls you a liar and then acts like it's no big deal but warns you'll bring shame to everyone including yourself, I don't know. I just . . .I don't know."
Eight months after the rapes began, her father/attacker finally got a job.
"It was a big come down for him. He'd been one of the big shots in sales and now he was a night watchman. Things were actually a little better for me because, planning my day just right, I could leave for school before he got home and then, if I was really lucky, he'd sleep until thirty minutes before he had to leave for work. I think it was the adjustment to working nights but for three months I was able to avoid him except on Sundays when my mother was gone to the church. I remember begging to go with her a few times but she'd just say it would embarrass her."
A month away from turning 17, Karla discovered she was pregnant.
"I didn't know how, but I knew I was having an abortion. I knew I wasn't going to have his child. I was in the bathroom, looking at the test stick, and I knew I wasn't going to have his baby. I waited until my mother got home and got her out into the backyard and told her. All she could say was 'I never knew my parents!' because she was raised in orphanage. I said, 'No, you don't get it, I'm not having this baby. And you're crazy if you think I'd ever want this baby to know its father!' Then she started screaming this religious crap at me and I was thinking, 'Oh now, you want to get religion?'"
Karla thought about turning to a classmate she'd become friends with "but ____ isn't a suburb, no matter what they call it. It's a run down, depressed town. My friend might have offered emotional support but she and her parents wouldn't have had the money to help."
When she was 8, her father and his only sibling, a sister, had gotten into a huge fight.
"I remember we were going to go to an Easter egg hunt and I was wearing this white dress and white shoes and had a white ribbon in my hair and my aunt was taking pictures one moment and then in some screaming match with him."
That was the last time she saw her aunt.
"I started searching on the net at school trying to find her and for two weeks I was e-mailing anyone with her name and praying that she hadn't gotten married because if she had . . . Her name is a common name so I probably e-mailed close to fifty women. Finally I get an e-mail back from one woman saying that yes, she's my aunt. I just typed back, 'I have to talk to you.' I knew I couldn't talk to her at home and I knew I'd be blubbering and crying when I did talk to her. But the only thing I could think of was that there was a pay phone at the Subway. People were walking in and out the entire time I was on the phone and I'm sure that they either thought someone had died or I was some sort of nutcase."
Her aunt wasn't surprised. Karla's father/rapist had also raped his younger sister years before.
"She flew out the next day, pulled me out of school and took care of everything. Then she took me back with her and we didn't even speak to them until after. He made this big stink about how he was going to charge her with kidnapping and she told him to go to hell. Which is what my mother told me in the letter she wrote me shortly after. That I was going to hell for having an abortion. Apparently she'll be walking through the gates of heaven alongside him, but I'll be in hell. Yeah. I heard from a few classmates that I was a drug addict who was sent to live with my aunt because they couldn't continue living with my drug use. I was disruptive to their happy home. It wasn't enough that he raped me over and over and she allowed it to happen, they had to spread lies about me as well?"
In college, she's been able to open to a few friends ("but I don't say, the rapist was my father").
Some of them ask her if she ever regrets her decision.
"I don't regret it. I don't regret it. I don't regret it at all. I don't understand people who think they can't take away anyone's option. I lived in a state with a parental notification law. I don't believe in those. My rapist was my father. My mother allowed it to happen. I'm supposed to go before a judge and plead my case? My aunt never married, she has the same last name as me. For the abortion, she was my mother as far as anyone knew. I don't, I don't, I don't think any woman needs to have to plead her case in a situation like mine or in any case where she feels she needs to have an abortion. It's not anyone else's damn business. It's only in the last year that I can even use the word 'incest' with my therapist. For the longest time it was too much to even say 'I was raped by my father.' No woman should have to explain. Whether they were raped or not. But to think that a kid's going to be able to set up an appointment with a judge and go in and dredge up all of this crap, it's just, I don't know, it's just so unreal to me. I question the morality of people who pass these kind of laws."
Karla has a story, every woman that chooses to have an abortion does. As "moderates" in the Democratic Party launch yet another attack on women's rights, people need to remember that reproductive rights are a battle we already fought and won. These men (and it's usually men) in the Democratic Party who want to "back off" from this issue have never faced a decision like Karla or any woman had to make. It's a privacy issue and whether a woman has been raped or not, she doesn't owe it to anyone to explain her decision to a judge, a Congressman or anyone.
It's her body, it's her choice and she should be allow to make it.
Instead of caving yet again, "moderates" should try to find enough of a spine to endorse a position that more than half of America supports. We're not sure whether they find it personally distasteful or if it's just another case of some poll showed them they might be able to persuade a few religious freaks to vote for them. It doesn't matter. The battle for reproductive rights was a long one and we won. And if moderates think they're going to take that right away or move away from supporting it, we can draw the battle lines all over again.
Reproductive rights are not "on the table." The party needs to realize that and find it's spine.
Sunday, July 03, 2005
Blog Spotlight: Mikey Likes It!'s "Recuriting Stories and a Question Asked Is a Question Answered"
We asked Mike to pick out an entry from his site (Mikey Likes It!) that he'd like share here in the spotlight so that people who might not have dropped by yet could read it and get an idea of what he was talking about and how he writes.
Mike: I had no idea what to pick and kept going over three different things. Finally I went to my mother and asked her. She said right away, without even pausing, that it should be this one.
She said it has news about Iraq, it has questions about sex and it has people sharing their recruiting stories so it sums my site up in one entry. Thanks, Ma.
Recruiting stories and a question asked is a question answered
Big thanks to everybody who e-mailed about the recruiter comments (and thanks to C.I. for highlighting them at The Common Ills). Barry wrote that he read acout some stuff in the newspaper but didn't really "connect with it because at 42 it's not anything I've had to wonder about happening to me." If it helped anyone that's gravy.
Antonio e-mailed to share his story:
They act like friends and then they turn on you and you're confused and everybody likes to be liked so it's just this game they're playing. So I say I want to go to college and be a lawyer and they are like so cool with that and shooting the breeze and finding out more and more. Then they start telling me that my grades aren't good enough for college and that my father can't afford to send me to college and let's hope I'll be happy working at a taco stand. And I'm mad and angry and the taco stand crack was really supposed to get to me because I'm Latino.
Jordan e-mailed that they do a thing with women that's a little different:
They told me that it was fun & exciting and the only place that I'd be able to move up, that everywhere else there would be this celing but that I could do anything in the army. They said as a young woman I could sign out after four weeks if I didn't like it because that was a special thing they had for women. But I was "tough" and probably wouldn't need it. They started bringing up my older brother who they don't know and isn't in the military and I think they were trying to figure out if there was competition there between me and him. I told them to fuck off and started walking away and they start talking really loud about how "She's scared. Yep, she's just afraid." I almost turned around to tell them off but as mad I was, it was obvious that they were trying to make me mad.
If you've got a story to share let me know.
I got an e-mail that kind of surprised me and I'm still not sure she's for real. I called Rebecca to ask her about it and whether I should answer it. She asked if it made me uncomfortable and I said no so she said answer it and maybe some other people will write in with other questions like that and or something else.
In case the gal who e-mailed was serious, I'll leave her unnamed so I don't embarrass her.
She wrote about Ruth's thing on NPR over at The Common Ills. (Which is great and you should read it.) She read this part of Ruth's entry and had a question:
Could any of that have effected chromosomes? I don't see why not. One of the first things fertility doctors, one of my sons is a fertility doctor, recommend to a couple attempting to have a baby with little success is that the man stop wearing briefs and switch to boxers to allow for "breathing." If something that simple can have an effect it seems clear that the toxic waste around us could as well. Or at least that seems clear to me.
She wanted to know about "breathing" and if it had anything to do with why all the guys on her campus are always grabbing their groins.
The question doesn't embarrass me but I did think it might be a joke.
So like it's summer and it's hot. And our parts hang out, guys. I don't want to be Dr. Ruth and use words like testicles but I don't want to offend anyone. I could be like Austin Powers and use words like twig and berries. Give me a second.
Okay, like our gear, men's gear, hangs outside the body. It's hot outside so it's hot down there. And like our package might be pressed against our skin or itching from the heat. And I bet if it's a hairy guy (I'm hairy except for my back) that we probably get even more uncomfortable than some dude who's got a little hair or 1 who shaves down there or something. If I'm wearing briefs, I'm going to have to make adjustments a lot because everything's packed in tight. But even if I'm wearing boxers, I still got pants on so I'm going to need make some adjustments. That's what we usually call it "an adjustment." And sometimes we can just grip our waistband and give that a tug. But sometimes we need to grab the package itself and make an adjustment. My Ma would holler at me like crazy if I did that in public but I do that sometimes. I don't stick my hands down my pants in public but I have seen dudes do that. To me that's going too far but I'll reach down and give it a grab over my jeans and stuff.
I hope that answers your question. Oops, I talked about me. You were asking about all guys and while that's all true for most guys there are also guys who like to cup their crotches to show off. So some guys you're seeing may be doing it for that reason. Sometimes a guy will do it to show off if he thinks he's got a big package or thinks someone's interested in it. Sometimes a guy does it because he thinks it makes him look tough.
If there's something I didn't think of, guys help me out because this gal might be serious.
Speaking of serious stuff, I want to put up something from C.I.'s site here because I think it's pretty important:
Dahr Jamail's "Iraqi Hospitals Ailing Under Occupation" is a report you should be aware of.
There are nine sections, it's 37 pages (pdf format) and page five tells you what you probably already feared. Surveying thirteen hospitals "in order to research how the healthcare system was faring under the US-led occupation:"
This report documents the desperate supply shortages facing hospitals, the disastorous effect that the lack of basic services like water and electricity have on hospitals and the disruption of medical services in Iraqi hospitals by US military forces.
This report further provides an overview of the situation afflicting the hospitals in Iraq in order to highlight the desperate need for the promised "rehabilitation" of the medical system. Case studies highlight several of the findings and demonstrate that Iraqis need to reconstruct and rehabilitate the healthcare system. Reconstruction efforts by US firms have patently failed, while Iraqi contractors are not allowed to do the work.
The current model in Iraq of a "free trade globalized system," limited in fact to American and a few other western contractors, has plainly not worked. Continuing to impose this flawed and failing system on Iraq will only worsen the current healthcare crisis.
Before the next Operation Happy Talk gets started (I realize that in one form or another, Operation Happy Talk is always ongoing), you should familarize yourself with Jamail's report. It notes what is needed from program changes to basic equipment. Though you won't be surprised to learn of our "broken promises" (can the Bully Boy make any other kind?), you may not be aware of how bad things are and how many promises we've broken (or how much tax payer money has been wasted) until you read the report.
If you got a question on something, ask. Obviously that means on just about anything. If I know something or have an opinion, I'll put it up here.
posted by Mikey Likes It! @ 9:34 PM
Mike: I had no idea what to pick and kept going over three different things. Finally I went to my mother and asked her. She said right away, without even pausing, that it should be this one.
She said it has news about Iraq, it has questions about sex and it has people sharing their recruiting stories so it sums my site up in one entry. Thanks, Ma.
Recruiting stories and a question asked is a question answered
Big thanks to everybody who e-mailed about the recruiter comments (and thanks to C.I. for highlighting them at The Common Ills). Barry wrote that he read acout some stuff in the newspaper but didn't really "connect with it because at 42 it's not anything I've had to wonder about happening to me." If it helped anyone that's gravy.
Antonio e-mailed to share his story:
They act like friends and then they turn on you and you're confused and everybody likes to be liked so it's just this game they're playing. So I say I want to go to college and be a lawyer and they are like so cool with that and shooting the breeze and finding out more and more. Then they start telling me that my grades aren't good enough for college and that my father can't afford to send me to college and let's hope I'll be happy working at a taco stand. And I'm mad and angry and the taco stand crack was really supposed to get to me because I'm Latino.
Jordan e-mailed that they do a thing with women that's a little different:
They told me that it was fun & exciting and the only place that I'd be able to move up, that everywhere else there would be this celing but that I could do anything in the army. They said as a young woman I could sign out after four weeks if I didn't like it because that was a special thing they had for women. But I was "tough" and probably wouldn't need it. They started bringing up my older brother who they don't know and isn't in the military and I think they were trying to figure out if there was competition there between me and him. I told them to fuck off and started walking away and they start talking really loud about how "She's scared. Yep, she's just afraid." I almost turned around to tell them off but as mad I was, it was obvious that they were trying to make me mad.
If you've got a story to share let me know.
I got an e-mail that kind of surprised me and I'm still not sure she's for real. I called Rebecca to ask her about it and whether I should answer it. She asked if it made me uncomfortable and I said no so she said answer it and maybe some other people will write in with other questions like that and or something else.
In case the gal who e-mailed was serious, I'll leave her unnamed so I don't embarrass her.
She wrote about Ruth's thing on NPR over at The Common Ills. (Which is great and you should read it.) She read this part of Ruth's entry and had a question:
Could any of that have effected chromosomes? I don't see why not. One of the first things fertility doctors, one of my sons is a fertility doctor, recommend to a couple attempting to have a baby with little success is that the man stop wearing briefs and switch to boxers to allow for "breathing." If something that simple can have an effect it seems clear that the toxic waste around us could as well. Or at least that seems clear to me.
She wanted to know about "breathing" and if it had anything to do with why all the guys on her campus are always grabbing their groins.
The question doesn't embarrass me but I did think it might be a joke.
So like it's summer and it's hot. And our parts hang out, guys. I don't want to be Dr. Ruth and use words like testicles but I don't want to offend anyone. I could be like Austin Powers and use words like twig and berries. Give me a second.
Okay, like our gear, men's gear, hangs outside the body. It's hot outside so it's hot down there. And like our package might be pressed against our skin or itching from the heat. And I bet if it's a hairy guy (I'm hairy except for my back) that we probably get even more uncomfortable than some dude who's got a little hair or 1 who shaves down there or something. If I'm wearing briefs, I'm going to have to make adjustments a lot because everything's packed in tight. But even if I'm wearing boxers, I still got pants on so I'm going to need make some adjustments. That's what we usually call it "an adjustment." And sometimes we can just grip our waistband and give that a tug. But sometimes we need to grab the package itself and make an adjustment. My Ma would holler at me like crazy if I did that in public but I do that sometimes. I don't stick my hands down my pants in public but I have seen dudes do that. To me that's going too far but I'll reach down and give it a grab over my jeans and stuff.
I hope that answers your question. Oops, I talked about me. You were asking about all guys and while that's all true for most guys there are also guys who like to cup their crotches to show off. So some guys you're seeing may be doing it for that reason. Sometimes a guy will do it to show off if he thinks he's got a big package or thinks someone's interested in it. Sometimes a guy does it because he thinks it makes him look tough.
If there's something I didn't think of, guys help me out because this gal might be serious.
Speaking of serious stuff, I want to put up something from C.I.'s site here because I think it's pretty important:
Dahr Jamail's "Iraqi Hospitals Ailing Under Occupation" is a report you should be aware of.
There are nine sections, it's 37 pages (pdf format) and page five tells you what you probably already feared. Surveying thirteen hospitals "in order to research how the healthcare system was faring under the US-led occupation:"
This report documents the desperate supply shortages facing hospitals, the disastorous effect that the lack of basic services like water and electricity have on hospitals and the disruption of medical services in Iraqi hospitals by US military forces.
This report further provides an overview of the situation afflicting the hospitals in Iraq in order to highlight the desperate need for the promised "rehabilitation" of the medical system. Case studies highlight several of the findings and demonstrate that Iraqis need to reconstruct and rehabilitate the healthcare system. Reconstruction efforts by US firms have patently failed, while Iraqi contractors are not allowed to do the work.
The current model in Iraq of a "free trade globalized system," limited in fact to American and a few other western contractors, has plainly not worked. Continuing to impose this flawed and failing system on Iraq will only worsen the current healthcare crisis.
Before the next Operation Happy Talk gets started (I realize that in one form or another, Operation Happy Talk is always ongoing), you should familarize yourself with Jamail's report. It notes what is needed from program changes to basic equipment. Though you won't be surprised to learn of our "broken promises" (can the Bully Boy make any other kind?), you may not be aware of how bad things are and how many promises we've broken (or how much tax payer money has been wasted) until you read the report.
If you got a question on something, ask. Obviously that means on just about anything. If I know something or have an opinion, I'll put it up here.
posted by Mikey Likes It! @ 9:34 PM
Blog Spotlight: Kat's Korner "I had an abortion"
Kat's entry needs no introduction. It's powerful enough to stand alone. Thank you, Kat, for allowing us to post it here.
I had an abortion
If you read the gina & krista round-robin this morning, you have a pretty good idea of what you can do. I know that they already stressed this but I want to say it here as well, it's not about money. If you're someone with all the dough in the world, donate to every organization they listed. If you're someone that has enough to spare to donate a little, please pick an organization to donate to. But if you don't have any money, that doesn't mean you sit on your ass.
There are petitions to sign, there are talking points to get out, there is the simple fact that you can share with people around you.
I talked about my abortion in the round-robin. Here I'll just say that I've had one and I support the right of any woman to have one. Why I had one is no one's damn business. I appreciate that other members were willing to share if they'd had one. The Common Ills is a great community and Krista and Gina do a great job with their round-robin.
Some of the women they quoted said they'd never really talked about their abortion before. I have. With friends, I will go into details. Though friends and friendly people come here, a lot of assholes do too. I don't want to work up a sob story or justify what I did. No woman should have to. So I will say loudly that I have had an abortion but it's no one else damn's business.
I support women who share their experiences and C.I. will post anyone's comments if she wants to share her story. More power to any woman who wants to.
For me, it's my business. I'm not ashamed of it. But I'm not going to go begging for the pro-life crowd's understanding. Or to prove to moderates that there are "reasons" to support choice.
If, after all this time, someone needs a "reason" then chances are they either live in a very limited world or they already made up their mind against choice.
My story is nothing compared to X (readers of the gina & krista round-robin know who I mean)and that was so brave of her to put it out there like that. If that were my story, I would share it in the privacy of the round-robin and still not note it here. Because where I'm coming from is it's none of your damn business.
I'm not ashamed of it, I'm not embarrassed by it. But I'm not going to put myself in a position of saying, "Like me, understand me, love me."
I made the decision I made and I stand by it.
And thank you to the women and men who've read the round-table and have e-mailed to thank me for sharing. No one wrote, "Kat, you need to put this up at your site." But I will put up at my site that not only do I support the right of pro-choice but I've used that right, I've excercised it.
X is thinking of sharing her story and it's a powerful story. I support her right to consider sharing and, if she does, I applaud her for sharing.
But no woman needs to share anything she doesn't want to.
I do not support parental consent laws because I do not believe that any woman makes the decision to have an abortion without giving it thought. Now maybe if she's strong armed into it by some guy, but if that happens, she hasn't made the choice, she's gone along with someone else's choices.
I have friends who've had an abortion and I'll certainly open up to them in great detail.
But for me it is a private experience and it's not one I'm going to put out there.
I will put out that I had an abortion, I do not regret it and abortion must remain legal.
If you're on the fence about where you stand on this issue, you need to figure out pretty quick because a battle is looming and it's going to be nasty.
We're going to need all the support we can get to keep abortion legal and safe.
Making it illegal will not end abortion.
Abortions are part of our nation's history. In earlier times they were legal and called "quickening." Then they became illegal. But they didn't go away.
They will not go away and the smart thing to do is to make them safe and legal.
A lot of the sharing of the experience has given ground to some middle of the roaders to start the talk of "They're painful and should be used sparingly" or some other bullshit that lets them position themselves as a moderate.
They are a medical right. It is not my business what medical rights you choose to excercise and it's honestly not your business which ones I choose to excercise.
I've never heard anyone dispute a man's right to get his penis augmentated. (For those who are unaware of it and thinking "I can get my dick bigger" -- wider not longer is the result of the procedure.) But when it comes to women's bodies and their medical decisions, everyone thinks they can weigh in.
You can't. A woman has to make the decision herself and she should be able to make the decision and have a safe and legal abortion.
Besides the round-robin, I'd recommend you read the entry C.I. did with people sharing their reactions to Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement. And if you're think, "Kat, short for Kaitlin, she's Irish! How can she support abortion?" I'd suggest you read Mike's post. He comes from a pro-choice, Irish-Catholic family. I do as well. Mike's mother is right, the media stereotype isn't reality.
And while I reserve the right not to discuss my medical procedure with anyone but friends that I'd share other medical matters with, I am more than fine with going on the record and saying I had an abortion and I don't regret it.
If you've never known a woman who's had an abortion, you do now. It is not something that happens to "other people." Whether you know it or not, there's probably a woman in your circle who's had an abortion. Any woman who is comfortable declaring "I've had an abortion" to her friends, should do so. If you want to go in details, that's your right. But I think we need to get beyond the idea that the only women who've had abortions are people you've never met. This effects many of us.
Maggie called me up when she read the round-robin this morning and said if I wrote about it here she wanted her feelings known. She's never had an abortion, but she's damn glad that if she ever finds herself in the position where she needs to consider all her options, it's a choice she has, a legal choice.
Because making it illegal won't make it go away. It will only lead to the return of back alley abortions, people making money on the side and women's lives being put at risk.
Safe and legal, the line is drawn and you need to figure out where you stand.
I had an abortion
If you read the gina & krista round-robin this morning, you have a pretty good idea of what you can do. I know that they already stressed this but I want to say it here as well, it's not about money. If you're someone with all the dough in the world, donate to every organization they listed. If you're someone that has enough to spare to donate a little, please pick an organization to donate to. But if you don't have any money, that doesn't mean you sit on your ass.
There are petitions to sign, there are talking points to get out, there is the simple fact that you can share with people around you.
I talked about my abortion in the round-robin. Here I'll just say that I've had one and I support the right of any woman to have one. Why I had one is no one's damn business. I appreciate that other members were willing to share if they'd had one. The Common Ills is a great community and Krista and Gina do a great job with their round-robin.
Some of the women they quoted said they'd never really talked about their abortion before. I have. With friends, I will go into details. Though friends and friendly people come here, a lot of assholes do too. I don't want to work up a sob story or justify what I did. No woman should have to. So I will say loudly that I have had an abortion but it's no one else damn's business.
I support women who share their experiences and C.I. will post anyone's comments if she wants to share her story. More power to any woman who wants to.
For me, it's my business. I'm not ashamed of it. But I'm not going to go begging for the pro-life crowd's understanding. Or to prove to moderates that there are "reasons" to support choice.
If, after all this time, someone needs a "reason" then chances are they either live in a very limited world or they already made up their mind against choice.
My story is nothing compared to X (readers of the gina & krista round-robin know who I mean)and that was so brave of her to put it out there like that. If that were my story, I would share it in the privacy of the round-robin and still not note it here. Because where I'm coming from is it's none of your damn business.
I'm not ashamed of it, I'm not embarrassed by it. But I'm not going to put myself in a position of saying, "Like me, understand me, love me."
I made the decision I made and I stand by it.
And thank you to the women and men who've read the round-table and have e-mailed to thank me for sharing. No one wrote, "Kat, you need to put this up at your site." But I will put up at my site that not only do I support the right of pro-choice but I've used that right, I've excercised it.
X is thinking of sharing her story and it's a powerful story. I support her right to consider sharing and, if she does, I applaud her for sharing.
But no woman needs to share anything she doesn't want to.
I do not support parental consent laws because I do not believe that any woman makes the decision to have an abortion without giving it thought. Now maybe if she's strong armed into it by some guy, but if that happens, she hasn't made the choice, she's gone along with someone else's choices.
I have friends who've had an abortion and I'll certainly open up to them in great detail.
But for me it is a private experience and it's not one I'm going to put out there.
I will put out that I had an abortion, I do not regret it and abortion must remain legal.
If you're on the fence about where you stand on this issue, you need to figure out pretty quick because a battle is looming and it's going to be nasty.
We're going to need all the support we can get to keep abortion legal and safe.
Making it illegal will not end abortion.
Abortions are part of our nation's history. In earlier times they were legal and called "quickening." Then they became illegal. But they didn't go away.
They will not go away and the smart thing to do is to make them safe and legal.
A lot of the sharing of the experience has given ground to some middle of the roaders to start the talk of "They're painful and should be used sparingly" or some other bullshit that lets them position themselves as a moderate.
They are a medical right. It is not my business what medical rights you choose to excercise and it's honestly not your business which ones I choose to excercise.
I've never heard anyone dispute a man's right to get his penis augmentated. (For those who are unaware of it and thinking "I can get my dick bigger" -- wider not longer is the result of the procedure.) But when it comes to women's bodies and their medical decisions, everyone thinks they can weigh in.
You can't. A woman has to make the decision herself and she should be able to make the decision and have a safe and legal abortion.
Besides the round-robin, I'd recommend you read the entry C.I. did with people sharing their reactions to Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement. And if you're think, "Kat, short for Kaitlin, she's Irish! How can she support abortion?" I'd suggest you read Mike's post. He comes from a pro-choice, Irish-Catholic family. I do as well. Mike's mother is right, the media stereotype isn't reality.
And while I reserve the right not to discuss my medical procedure with anyone but friends that I'd share other medical matters with, I am more than fine with going on the record and saying I had an abortion and I don't regret it.
If you've never known a woman who's had an abortion, you do now. It is not something that happens to "other people." Whether you know it or not, there's probably a woman in your circle who's had an abortion. Any woman who is comfortable declaring "I've had an abortion" to her friends, should do so. If you want to go in details, that's your right. But I think we need to get beyond the idea that the only women who've had abortions are people you've never met. This effects many of us.
Maggie called me up when she read the round-robin this morning and said if I wrote about it here she wanted her feelings known. She's never had an abortion, but she's damn glad that if she ever finds herself in the position where she needs to consider all her options, it's a choice she has, a legal choice.
Because making it illegal won't make it go away. It will only lead to the return of back alley abortions, people making money on the side and women's lives being put at risk.
Safe and legal, the line is drawn and you need to figure out where you stand.
Blgo Spotlight: A Winding Road "O'Connor Retires and We Progressives Ready Ourselves for the Challenge"
We're highlighting Folding Star's strong post at A Winding Road on O'Connor's announcement because we think there's a positive message (get ready to fight) and because we want we to be sure everyone grasps what's at stake.
O'Connor Retires and We Progressives Ready Ourselves for the Challenge
Like so many of you, I'm sure, the news of Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement from the Supreme Court hit me hard today and weighed heavy on my thinking all day long.
I was getting ready for work this morning when I turned on the computer and got online to do a check of the news. I can't ever leave for work without knowing what's been going on in the world.
The O'Connor news was the first thing I saw and it was like a bucket of cold water in the face. Though I knew that a retirement could still come at any time, I was relieved when the court's current term ended last Monday without any retirement announcements.
I was prepared for Rehnquist to step down, and could at least comfort myself with the knowledge that Bush replacing one far right conservative with another wouldn't change the balance of the court.
But this is what we've all feared for the past four and a half years. A retirement of a moderate or liberal Justice during Bush's time in office has the potential to drastically change the court and, through it, the country.
O'Connor was one of the moderate votes on the court, often the deciding vote on crucial cases. It's largely thanks to her 'swing' vote that a woman's right to choose has continued to be recognized under the laws of this country.
Moderates like O'Connor used to be the norm in the Republican party, though they're becoming few and far between these days.
While I respect O'Connor for the most part, her clearly biased decision in the Bush v. Gore case and her decision to retire at a time when she knows that the man choosing her replacement will likely pick someone who will do his or her best to undo all the work she's done leave me feeling dubious towards her. It's a shame that the first woman on the Supreme Court tainted her legacy towards the end by joining the extremists in a decision that was anything but moderate, as she did after the 2000 election.
And so, the thing I and so many of us feared has happened. Bush gets to replace a moderate Justice.
The Democrats in the Senate have GOT to stand firm on making sure that any extremist nominee is stopped in their tracks. We know Bush will nominate a Conservative, and that is his right. What we and the Senate Dems need to make sure of is that the nominee is someone who believes in the law and the Constitution of this country, someone who doesn't have an ideology set in stone which they use in their 'interpretation' of the law.
The best Justices have been those who, whether liberal or conservative in their personal political outlook, have been open minded and fair in their reading of the law and of our Constitution.
It's hard to imagine, especially after his recent Federal Court appointees, that Bush will willingly choose such a person. He's clearly going to go for someone in the Rehnquist/Scalia/Thomas mould if at all possible.
It's up to the Senate Democrats to make sure that such a nominee is shut down, just as Robert Bork was during Reagan's second term. It's their job to force Bush, if necessary, into nominating someone more in the mould of O'Connor herself.
And it's our job to make sure that Bush and the members of the Senate know that we will not stand for an extremist nominee to the Supreme Court.Make yourself heard, now if never before. Bush has promised to announce his nominee quickly and, should that nominee be in the William Pryor/Janice Rogers Brown/Priscilla Owen tradition of Judicial Extremism, then we need to make our objections heard just as quickly. We'll need to let the Democrats know that they must not back down this time.
The old Chinese curse is holding true for all of us these days- "May You Live in Interesting Times". But these times of interest are not the days of spectators and armchair quarterbacks. They're days of activism and of the common people, you and I, making our voices heard, making a difference in these times we're living in.
O'Connor Retires and We Progressives Ready Ourselves for the Challenge
Like so many of you, I'm sure, the news of Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement from the Supreme Court hit me hard today and weighed heavy on my thinking all day long.
I was getting ready for work this morning when I turned on the computer and got online to do a check of the news. I can't ever leave for work without knowing what's been going on in the world.
The O'Connor news was the first thing I saw and it was like a bucket of cold water in the face. Though I knew that a retirement could still come at any time, I was relieved when the court's current term ended last Monday without any retirement announcements.
I was prepared for Rehnquist to step down, and could at least comfort myself with the knowledge that Bush replacing one far right conservative with another wouldn't change the balance of the court.
But this is what we've all feared for the past four and a half years. A retirement of a moderate or liberal Justice during Bush's time in office has the potential to drastically change the court and, through it, the country.
O'Connor was one of the moderate votes on the court, often the deciding vote on crucial cases. It's largely thanks to her 'swing' vote that a woman's right to choose has continued to be recognized under the laws of this country.
Moderates like O'Connor used to be the norm in the Republican party, though they're becoming few and far between these days.
While I respect O'Connor for the most part, her clearly biased decision in the Bush v. Gore case and her decision to retire at a time when she knows that the man choosing her replacement will likely pick someone who will do his or her best to undo all the work she's done leave me feeling dubious towards her. It's a shame that the first woman on the Supreme Court tainted her legacy towards the end by joining the extremists in a decision that was anything but moderate, as she did after the 2000 election.
And so, the thing I and so many of us feared has happened. Bush gets to replace a moderate Justice.
The Democrats in the Senate have GOT to stand firm on making sure that any extremist nominee is stopped in their tracks. We know Bush will nominate a Conservative, and that is his right. What we and the Senate Dems need to make sure of is that the nominee is someone who believes in the law and the Constitution of this country, someone who doesn't have an ideology set in stone which they use in their 'interpretation' of the law.
The best Justices have been those who, whether liberal or conservative in their personal political outlook, have been open minded and fair in their reading of the law and of our Constitution.
It's hard to imagine, especially after his recent Federal Court appointees, that Bush will willingly choose such a person. He's clearly going to go for someone in the Rehnquist/Scalia/Thomas mould if at all possible.
It's up to the Senate Democrats to make sure that such a nominee is shut down, just as Robert Bork was during Reagan's second term. It's their job to force Bush, if necessary, into nominating someone more in the mould of O'Connor herself.
And it's our job to make sure that Bush and the members of the Senate know that we will not stand for an extremist nominee to the Supreme Court.Make yourself heard, now if never before. Bush has promised to announce his nominee quickly and, should that nominee be in the William Pryor/Janice Rogers Brown/Priscilla Owen tradition of Judicial Extremism, then we need to make our objections heard just as quickly. We'll need to let the Democrats know that they must not back down this time.
The old Chinese curse is holding true for all of us these days- "May You Live in Interesting Times". But these times of interest are not the days of spectators and armchair quarterbacks. They're days of activism and of the common people, you and I, making our voices heard, making a difference in these times we're living in.
Sunday, June 26, 2005
A note to our readers
So what's this summer issue talk? This edition was going to be the summer issue, right? Well as journalism majors, we're aware that once was a time when summer meant periodicals did a fiction issue. (Ms. still celebrates creative writing each summer. Others, such as Rolling Stone, have stopped doing so.)
So what you're looking at in this edition is our summer issue.
"Wait, wait, no Ava & C.I. TV review!"
Put down the billy clubs, do you think we're stupid?
Of course Ava & C.I. have a TV review this edition. They review The OC which is in keeping with a lighter, summery feel. To calm the panic that we knew would ensue were the review not in this edition and not noted quickly, we've even placed it right under this edition's editorial. You can't miss it.
We also have another "Five Books, Five Minutes." With the edition being about reading, it made sense to include that feature as well.
So what else you got?
We once again (thank you Maria and C.I.) reprint The Common Ills entry of important headlines from Democracy Now! this week, in Spanish and English.
And?
Our blog spotlight is an entry by C.I. about Dahr Jamail's little covered but highly important report on the state of the hospitals in Iraq.
Thanks to C.I. and Isaiah, we reprint two of Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts comics.
As a PSA, we reprint C.I.'s entry from yesterday on the lack of coverage of The World Tribunal on Iraq.
Oh, you're just the reprint royals, aren't you?
Well besides the editorial, Ava & C.I.'s TV review and "Five Books, Five Minutes" we also offer up six, count 'em six, original entries.
What's a summer edition without an advice column? And what's a better advice column than one written by the person least able to give sound advice?
We've got a poem (thanks to reader Janine who caught that we put the wrong title on that entry, we've corrected it).
We also offer short stories in a variety of formats. A horror/parable, a Sue Miller-type read, a Wally Lamb-type read (we truly dedicate that one to Bill Keller), and a Jackie Collins-type read.
Ty was especially curious about how they would be received and has checked the e-mails throught the early morning. Already some are asking is it meant to be for real or a parody?
That depends on you. It's your abstract art for the day, find your own answers and don't ask someone to tell you what you're supposed to expect or feel.
Thanks go to community member Dallas, Maria and Isaiah. (Dallas hunts down our links and we'll make you an honorary member Dallas.) For input and contributions to the writing of the original pieces that appear in this edition, we thank Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty of Thomas Friedman is a Great Man, Kat of Kat's Korner and C.I. of The Common Ills. All helped with each original piece (except for this note and except for the TV review which is the writing of Ava and C.I. only).
You gave your time and your ideas and we appreciate that and thank you for it.
We'll also say a thank you to our own Dona who was a stickler all week about "Have you read the five books yet?" and "Is there an idea you have? Can you get started it now and distribute it to the others so we can't get moving?" We had a lot more ideas than what you're reading in this edition. There were some short stories that we decided failed completely in the execution. They went in the trash heap. We won't claim that we had everything ready to be put in the final draft in our all night session. We didn't. Not just the editorial or Ava & C.I.'s review (which they again wrote on the fly, in twenty minutes while we were publishing pieces -- our apologies for taking so long to agree to the theme). (Ava and C.I. watched three different programs this week and took notes on all three since the theme was up in the air.)
But this was our strongest starting point ever. Dona says she feels like a "nag" and it's doubtful we'll ever be as together as we were for this edition. But we're proud of it and felt that instead of attempting to constantly find a way to "save" an idea that wasn't working, we actually were in the position to say, "No, it's not working" repeatedly (and those five other attempts at short stories may resurface in other forms later on).
Many's been the all nighter where we try and try to make something come to life. We've noted that here. And how C.I. is really good at finding the band-aid that pull the piece together, a quote from a book, a song lyric, throwing the middle paragraph up at the top. And we've all started to do the same. (Ava, who said she has to split right now to go help C.I. with an entry at The Common Ills, says to add that C.I. puts more care and thought into our entries than into ones at The Common Ills where the approach is much more in keeping with the Kat philosophy of "It is what it is.")
We have been thinking about where we're headed and what we want to say in the last months.
We think we're stronger now as a team (and that team includes all the people who assist and bounce ideas with us or add to pieces).
Our snap evaluation of this edition finds us pleased with it. There are many things we'd do differently on our theme edition on the sixties, but this one results in a higher grade.
We hope there's something here that makes you laugh or enrages you. We are The Third Estate Sunday Review, not The Timid Estate Sunday Review.
-- Jim, Dona, Jess, Ty and Ava
P.S. We welcome community member Mike to the blogging fold with Mikey Likes It! We weren't able to get together to speak with Mike due to his having a big family reunion this week but for anyone wondering, we'll be getting together with him next week.
So what you're looking at in this edition is our summer issue.
"Wait, wait, no Ava & C.I. TV review!"
Put down the billy clubs, do you think we're stupid?
Of course Ava & C.I. have a TV review this edition. They review The OC which is in keeping with a lighter, summery feel. To calm the panic that we knew would ensue were the review not in this edition and not noted quickly, we've even placed it right under this edition's editorial. You can't miss it.
We also have another "Five Books, Five Minutes." With the edition being about reading, it made sense to include that feature as well.
So what else you got?
We once again (thank you Maria and C.I.) reprint The Common Ills entry of important headlines from Democracy Now! this week, in Spanish and English.
And?
Our blog spotlight is an entry by C.I. about Dahr Jamail's little covered but highly important report on the state of the hospitals in Iraq.
Thanks to C.I. and Isaiah, we reprint two of Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts comics.
As a PSA, we reprint C.I.'s entry from yesterday on the lack of coverage of The World Tribunal on Iraq.
Oh, you're just the reprint royals, aren't you?
Well besides the editorial, Ava & C.I.'s TV review and "Five Books, Five Minutes" we also offer up six, count 'em six, original entries.
What's a summer edition without an advice column? And what's a better advice column than one written by the person least able to give sound advice?
We've got a poem (thanks to reader Janine who caught that we put the wrong title on that entry, we've corrected it).
We also offer short stories in a variety of formats. A horror/parable, a Sue Miller-type read, a Wally Lamb-type read (we truly dedicate that one to Bill Keller), and a Jackie Collins-type read.
Ty was especially curious about how they would be received and has checked the e-mails throught the early morning. Already some are asking is it meant to be for real or a parody?
That depends on you. It's your abstract art for the day, find your own answers and don't ask someone to tell you what you're supposed to expect or feel.
Thanks go to community member Dallas, Maria and Isaiah. (Dallas hunts down our links and we'll make you an honorary member Dallas.) For input and contributions to the writing of the original pieces that appear in this edition, we thank Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty of Thomas Friedman is a Great Man, Kat of Kat's Korner and C.I. of The Common Ills. All helped with each original piece (except for this note and except for the TV review which is the writing of Ava and C.I. only).
You gave your time and your ideas and we appreciate that and thank you for it.
We'll also say a thank you to our own Dona who was a stickler all week about "Have you read the five books yet?" and "Is there an idea you have? Can you get started it now and distribute it to the others so we can't get moving?" We had a lot more ideas than what you're reading in this edition. There were some short stories that we decided failed completely in the execution. They went in the trash heap. We won't claim that we had everything ready to be put in the final draft in our all night session. We didn't. Not just the editorial or Ava & C.I.'s review (which they again wrote on the fly, in twenty minutes while we were publishing pieces -- our apologies for taking so long to agree to the theme). (Ava and C.I. watched three different programs this week and took notes on all three since the theme was up in the air.)
But this was our strongest starting point ever. Dona says she feels like a "nag" and it's doubtful we'll ever be as together as we were for this edition. But we're proud of it and felt that instead of attempting to constantly find a way to "save" an idea that wasn't working, we actually were in the position to say, "No, it's not working" repeatedly (and those five other attempts at short stories may resurface in other forms later on).
Many's been the all nighter where we try and try to make something come to life. We've noted that here. And how C.I. is really good at finding the band-aid that pull the piece together, a quote from a book, a song lyric, throwing the middle paragraph up at the top. And we've all started to do the same. (Ava, who said she has to split right now to go help C.I. with an entry at The Common Ills, says to add that C.I. puts more care and thought into our entries than into ones at The Common Ills where the approach is much more in keeping with the Kat philosophy of "It is what it is.")
We have been thinking about where we're headed and what we want to say in the last months.
We think we're stronger now as a team (and that team includes all the people who assist and bounce ideas with us or add to pieces).
Our snap evaluation of this edition finds us pleased with it. There are many things we'd do differently on our theme edition on the sixties, but this one results in a higher grade.
We hope there's something here that makes you laugh or enrages you. We are The Third Estate Sunday Review, not The Timid Estate Sunday Review.
-- Jim, Dona, Jess, Ty and Ava
P.S. We welcome community member Mike to the blogging fold with Mikey Likes It! We weren't able to get together to speak with Mike due to his having a big family reunion this week but for anyone wondering, we'll be getting together with him next week.
Editorial: Mainstream Press Do Your Homework on the pre-invasion bombings
It's so depressing at The New York Timid. We were going to hand out grades re: coverage of the Downing Street Memo this week. Instead we had to schedule parent-teacher conferences. Mrs. Keller swears she can get little Billy Keller to "buckle down and apply himself." We wait to be persuaded.
Via BuzzFlash, we do however find Tim Harper's "Is this Bush's 'smoking gun'? War opponents seek U.S. inquiry into U.K. memos Documents show" (Toronto Star):
Writing in the Los Angeles Times this week, Smith argued that the real news in the July 23 memo was that the United States was engaged in an illegal air war against Iraq in the summer of 2002.
Smith pointed to the part of the memo quoting Geoffrey Hoon, Britain's defence secretary at the time, saying the U.S. had already begun "spikes of activity" over Baghdad, long before Washington argued its case before the United Nations.
The United States had begun intensified aerial bombing of Baghdad in May 2002, continuing through August of that year, in a bid to trigger a retaliation that would justify a full-out invasion.
When that did not happen, the U.S. responded by ratcheting up the bombing in September 2002, continuing until the invasion formally began on March 19, 2003.
Based on the memos he obtained, Smith argued that Bush and Blair really began an air war six weeks before the U.S. Congress approved military action.
It's a good point, a strong one. And we say that not only because we've harped on it here as has C.I. over at The Common Ills. Last Sunday, when we wrote our editorial "Editorial: 'Illegal' bombing raids? When will the domestic press note this?" we were thinking (wrongly) that it was now time for The New York Timid to seriously begin addressing the topic.
The bombings raise serious questions that go to the issue of was intelligence "fixed." To quote from that editorial:
As C.I. wrote, you can't have it both ways. You can't claim "Saddam has WMDs! We're all at risk!" and increase the bombings. If you really believe the WMD lie (we all know it was a lie now, right?) you don't attempt to start a war before you're ready. You don't put your country at risk. If you really believe there's a risk, to invite an attack when you're unprepared, a WMD attack, may border on derelicition of duty for the one who wanted the whole nation (military and civilian) to call him "commander-in-chief." (Note to Diane Sawyer, unless you enlisted, he wasn't YOUR commander-in-chief, nor was he the Dixie Chicks' "commnader-in-chief.")
The bombings are not a side issue, that are part and package of the big picture. But the attention has focused elsewhere instead as people debated. Was intelligence fixed? The debate needs to factor in the increased bombings.
It's time the press dealt with that. All the parents (even little Judy Millers' parents) seemed nice, concerned and genuine and their promises that they would see it to that their children applied themselves. We really want to believe that's possible because this issue goes to the heart of our democracy. If we can't discuss this openly and honestly, one wonders why the First Amendment ever carried any weight to begin with?
It's past time to include the pre-invasion bombings into the dialogue. Mainstream press, do your homework or don't bother showing up for class.
Via BuzzFlash, we do however find Tim Harper's "Is this Bush's 'smoking gun'? War opponents seek U.S. inquiry into U.K. memos Documents show" (Toronto Star):
Writing in the Los Angeles Times this week, Smith argued that the real news in the July 23 memo was that the United States was engaged in an illegal air war against Iraq in the summer of 2002.
Smith pointed to the part of the memo quoting Geoffrey Hoon, Britain's defence secretary at the time, saying the U.S. had already begun "spikes of activity" over Baghdad, long before Washington argued its case before the United Nations.
The United States had begun intensified aerial bombing of Baghdad in May 2002, continuing through August of that year, in a bid to trigger a retaliation that would justify a full-out invasion.
When that did not happen, the U.S. responded by ratcheting up the bombing in September 2002, continuing until the invasion formally began on March 19, 2003.
Based on the memos he obtained, Smith argued that Bush and Blair really began an air war six weeks before the U.S. Congress approved military action.
It's a good point, a strong one. And we say that not only because we've harped on it here as has C.I. over at The Common Ills. Last Sunday, when we wrote our editorial "Editorial: 'Illegal' bombing raids? When will the domestic press note this?" we were thinking (wrongly) that it was now time for The New York Timid to seriously begin addressing the topic.
The bombings raise serious questions that go to the issue of was intelligence "fixed." To quote from that editorial:
As C.I. wrote, you can't have it both ways. You can't claim "Saddam has WMDs! We're all at risk!" and increase the bombings. If you really believe the WMD lie (we all know it was a lie now, right?) you don't attempt to start a war before you're ready. You don't put your country at risk. If you really believe there's a risk, to invite an attack when you're unprepared, a WMD attack, may border on derelicition of duty for the one who wanted the whole nation (military and civilian) to call him "commander-in-chief." (Note to Diane Sawyer, unless you enlisted, he wasn't YOUR commander-in-chief, nor was he the Dixie Chicks' "commnader-in-chief.")
The bombings are not a side issue, that are part and package of the big picture. But the attention has focused elsewhere instead as people debated. Was intelligence fixed? The debate needs to factor in the increased bombings.
It's time the press dealt with that. All the parents (even little Judy Millers' parents) seemed nice, concerned and genuine and their promises that they would see it to that their children applied themselves. We really want to believe that's possible because this issue goes to the heart of our democracy. If we can't discuss this openly and honestly, one wonders why the First Amendment ever carried any weight to begin with?
It's past time to include the pre-invasion bombings into the dialogue. Mainstream press, do your homework or don't bother showing up for class.
TV Review OC: The arm pit of body wash operettas
The OC covers a region of California often overlooked but desperate not to be ignored. If the character Alex in Fatal Attraction were a county, she would be Orange County. Home to right-wing politics, Magic Mountain and Knott's Berry Farm, it's an alternate escape valve in the land of ultimate escape. While "California Dreamin'" conjures images of milk & honey overflowing, Orange County has largely existed to fuel and feed an anti-liberty, anti-freedom movement. Think of it as the fixer-upper within California, a fixer-upper that's been falling apart for years. While there is drearier, Bakersfield for example, it's hard to think of an area that's more clearly staked out the ground in opposition to all that California conjures up.
So The OC wants to rebrand the area (truly, prior to the show, we never heard an actual person use the term "OC," though "arm pit of California" was quite popular) and turn it into a land of sun and surf and sex. No big surprise this comes by way of Murdoch and one of his many (too many -- can we get some deregulation?) subsidiaries. So right away you know, it's all hogwash.
We'll call it body wash but note that it's severely diluted. The OC makes the One Tree Hill gang look like swingers. Two young women (Marissa and Alex) held hands and touched fingers and that passed for the height of sexy. It was all very Claudette Colbert and Clark Gable and far from the pie humping hijinks of American Pie. As we noted before, these teen dramas exist not for teens, but for the tiny preadolescent (apparently still present in some adults). Which is why sex is but a plot device that comes knocking once a season. Ask not for whom the teen pregnancy scare tolls, it tolls for thee.
The cast? What can we tell you, it's another high school populated with adults. There's Benjamin McKenzie who'll be 27 in September posing as a high school student with a bad jones for Velma from Scooby Doo. He plays Ryan whose half brother Seth is played by Adam Brody who'll be 26 in December. Seth has the hots for Summer (though he'll never do anything about it). Summer is played by Rachel Bilson and will be 24 in August. Ryan likes holding hands with Lindsay -- played by Shannon Lucio who'll be 25 in August. At 20, Mischa Barton may be the baby in the cast, but she doesn't really pass for a high school student. None of them do.
Possibly to hide from the audience the fact that, although playing "high schooler" Ryan, he's basically three years from thirty, McKenzie cultivates an interesting look. We're seeing it as a hommage to Velma from Scooby Doo. Though we've heard the endless Mary Ann and Ginger debates, we kind of thought the verdict of who the hottie was on Scooby Doo had been long ago settled? Always ready to fight a losing battle, which is so in keeping with the lead character of this show, McKenzie builds the case for Velma as "stylish" with his hommage to her haircut. (We're hoping a future "dramatic twist" involves Ryan getting glasses so he can really nail the look!)
But even something like stealing a simple haicut gets overdone on this show: it's so fussed over that it negates the simplicity of the hair cut. All the Bed Head products in the world will not allow the bangs to retain their careful curl (we're guessing a steam curling wand) in the California heat and still look so beauty parlor fresh. It's kind of like the tousled, pixie haircut we saw on TV this week. The one that caused us to note, "Patty Duke looks really good these days! And the hair, it's like she's saluting Twiggy or early Golide Hawn." Then as Patty moved down a street singing, words came up on the screen and we discovered we were watching not Patty, but a kid named Jesse McCartney. For a Patty Duke, he looks really good.
He is so The OC. An underdeveloped boy lusting after women. The Cookies told us "Girls Grow Up Faster Than Boys Do" and goodness if this show didn't take the message to heart. Which explains Adam Brody who looks like a regular kid. We could note, of course, that TV offers many regular kids who are male. Females who go above size three are the ones rendered invisible.
In a variation on a Dawson's Creek (when Joey sketched Jack nude), Brody sketches Rachel Bilson (Summer) who's all dressed up as a cartoon superhero in bondage gear that resembles Halle Berry's Catwoman costume plus dog collar. He drops to his knees in front of her, he moves her legs around, his face is in her crotch and . . . This is bodywash, people, nothing's happening here but the eternal tease out.
Summer: Don't give me any junk in the trunk.
Seth: Just the gifts God gave you.
God's gift to Adam Brody, apparently, was photo copying a young Tom Hanks. We aren't sure the world's spent many collective nights awake drooling over that prospect.
But these are the sort of philosophical questions you find yourself debating while watching a "drama" that makes Waiting for Godot look like the summer action blockbuster. Nothing ever happens. In fact, in the scene in question, worse than nothing happens. How bad is the prolonged and continuous tease? At one point Bilson moves moves towards the bed (and ends up half over it, doggie-style), and Brody's response is to whine, from behind her, "You just moved out of the light."
Not concerned with sexual passion (apparently with a Republican in the White House, sexuality has become bad form), the show wants to ooze angst. (Not drip, mind you, no one sweats on a body wash operetta.)
As you watch and wait for something to happen, anything, you're treated to variations on a single theme: "Parents Just Don't Understand." D.J. Jazzy Jeff and Will Smith should have patented that because they could be raking in big bling-bling from each episode of The OC alone.
In this episode, a closing in on forty older sister doesn't understand why her teenage sister can't enjoy spending time with their diffident father. The father in question didn't think Ryan was good enough to be with his daughter. Proving that the generation gap spans the . . . well, generations. Meanwhile a grown woman in her forties boasts of how proud her father will be (while asking questions like, "Happen to have a bong handy?").
Peter Gallagher would be the one being asked about the bong. Gallagher who originally came to fame while weeping and wringing the hands over the fact that he had have to his chest waxed for a film. As if to punish the world, Gallagher long ago decided that no one would ever again take wax or even scissors to the hairs sprouting from his body -- which explains the freakish eye brows. As brave stands go, it's hardly on par with Barbra Streisand's refusal to get a nose job but such are the times.
Gallagher's character can't seem to decide what or who he wants. (Possibly those bushy brows obstuct his view?) On the one hand, he's married to a "conservative" (his term) woman who comes from a wealthy family. On the other hand, he's engaged in flirtatious moments (words only, remember this is a body wash operetta) with a woman from his past who's a radical which, on Fox, means she sprinkles pot into her conversations and emerges from the alleged underground looking like Curly Sue.
This episode's centerpiece, it's showcase showdown if you will, is the overly long, overly slow, overly dull dinner scene which we like to think of as, "Good eats, could you please pass the angst?"
The line up includes Ryan (McKenzie) who's dating teenage Lindsay (Lucio) who happens to be the daughter of Caleb who also fathered Kirsten, who's married to Sandy (Gallagher) and is middle-aged. The scene takes place in a supposedly, well off, well to do dining room. (Remember that.) Kirsten plays with her wine glass and takes the occassional swig for dramatic effect. Caleb pokes around at the food and swallows some. Ryan and Lindsey exchange uncomfortable glances. But best in show for this dog clearly goes to the dialogue.
Here's a sample:
The scene begins in silence. Kirsten waves around her wine glass. Caleb eats a little.
No words.
Caleb: This is the best meal you ever cooked Kiki.
Kirsten: It's fondu dad, cheesepot. Not so difficult.
Long pause. (It's not fondu. Read on.)
Kirsten: Did you know that Lindsay plays the oboe?
All eyes go to Lindsay who sighs weakly.
Lindsay: Not well.
Caleb: Do you now? Do you play any Brahms?
More weak sighs from Lindsay.
Lindsay: Try.
Another lengthy pause.
Kirsten: Did you know that dad has boxed seats at the Hollywood bowl? Have you ever been?
Lindsay: Uh no, I hear it's amazing.
Caleb: The tickets are yours.
Lindsay: Great. Ryan what do you think?
The writers no doubt felt they were layering on the angst. Somewhere around the fourth layer, we lost interest in the meandering scene. We did, however, wake up for the slow-mo heart attack Caleb has after he and Ryan exchange what are supposed to be strong words. (It's very hard to take anyone seriously with that Velma haircut.)
It's all so phoney. From the long pauses, the exchanged glances, right down to the "fondu." You know, the "cheese pot?" There's no fondu on the table. There's a variety of vegetables. There's a ceramic bowl that holds cheese cubes (which are eaten as cubes, not melted). And don't get us started on the fact that this wants-so-hard-to-be-high-class-tasteful room features a couch by the dining table in the dining room.
What's really the point of this show? Apparently, not content to just push Velma as a trendsetter, the show also wants to hawk merchandise. We're not referring to the lame music played throughout. Granted anything's an improvement over the show's theme song, sung in adenoidal tones, consisting of the following lyrics: "California/ Here we come/ Right back where we started from/ California . . ." Apparently someone wanted to combine The Monkees theme ("Here we come, walking/ Down your street . . .") with Maxine Nightengale's disco classic "Right Back Where We Started From." And that "merger" works about as well as anything else in the Bully Boy economy. (Translation, not at all.)
No, we're referring to things like "The O.C. Insider Club" which, for just $24,95, allows you access to such features as "exclusive fashion tips." Or maybe you'd prefer to skip the club and go straight to the product's products? In which case, we're sure that at $32.95 they're a bargain, you can purchase "I 'Heart' The O.C." "boyshorts." And, in the interest of doing our part to inform and educate the public, we'll note the disclosure that comes with all OC undergarments:
Please note: boxers may not be returned for exchange or refund due to state regulations.
The show as an overly long commercial for other products is hardly suprising when one realizes that the show's creator has -- not one, but two -- parents who did time in the land of Hasbro Toys. Think we're being too harsh? The OC finished its second season last month. The DVD set of the second season comes out August 23rd. Whether or not it's the cash cow some are hoping, it's obvious that what's on screen is far less important than the "accessories" and ancillary rights.
How bad is the show? Curly Sue, refugee from the radical underground, is totally unconvincing despite the fact that's played by the usually watchable Kim Delaney. Did CSI Miami sap the life out of her performances? (Rhetorical question but we'd understand if it did.) Delaney's character isn't called Curly Sue (except by us), she's called Rebecca. And she's spent decades (two decades and two years, in fact) in the underdground. Which is apparently not unlike a nunnery since she tells Gallagher she hasn't had sex with anyone since him.
As two who regularly wonder if someday the Bully Boy will go completely to war on the American public and we'll be forced to go underground ourselves, the lack of sex life in the underground struck us as really sad. Then we remembered, this is The OC and no one has sex on this show.
Not old lovers Rebecca and Sandy, not Sandy and Kirsten (who is his wife), not the teen brigade. When, at the hospital and wanting to see Caleb, Lindsay dismisses the staff's "family only" orders with a cry of "I am his daughter!" We're not sure if they were surprised that such an old man would have such a young daughter, or if it was just the shock that anyone had sex in Orange County in the last twenty years.
What's the point of this show? We think is was provided in an early opening scene:
Seth: So, then, you're saying that I'm complaining that I have nothing to complain about?
Ryan: This is what I'm saying.
We'd agree and note that compared to this episode, One Tree Hill is postively crawling with drama. Possibly The OC is attempting to capture a "California laid back vibe." There's laid back and there's comatose. If you're confused as to which we think the show is, we'll note that Peter Gallagher really, really deserves this show and that one of his biggest money maker to date was While You Were Sleeping which found him on the sidelines for the bulk of the movie in a coma.
(He was never more convincing onscreen.)
So The OC wants to rebrand the area (truly, prior to the show, we never heard an actual person use the term "OC," though "arm pit of California" was quite popular) and turn it into a land of sun and surf and sex. No big surprise this comes by way of Murdoch and one of his many (too many -- can we get some deregulation?) subsidiaries. So right away you know, it's all hogwash.
We'll call it body wash but note that it's severely diluted. The OC makes the One Tree Hill gang look like swingers. Two young women (Marissa and Alex) held hands and touched fingers and that passed for the height of sexy. It was all very Claudette Colbert and Clark Gable and far from the pie humping hijinks of American Pie. As we noted before, these teen dramas exist not for teens, but for the tiny preadolescent (apparently still present in some adults). Which is why sex is but a plot device that comes knocking once a season. Ask not for whom the teen pregnancy scare tolls, it tolls for thee.
The cast? What can we tell you, it's another high school populated with adults. There's Benjamin McKenzie who'll be 27 in September posing as a high school student with a bad jones for Velma from Scooby Doo. He plays Ryan whose half brother Seth is played by Adam Brody who'll be 26 in December. Seth has the hots for Summer (though he'll never do anything about it). Summer is played by Rachel Bilson and will be 24 in August. Ryan likes holding hands with Lindsay -- played by Shannon Lucio who'll be 25 in August. At 20, Mischa Barton may be the baby in the cast, but she doesn't really pass for a high school student. None of them do.
Possibly to hide from the audience the fact that, although playing "high schooler" Ryan, he's basically three years from thirty, McKenzie cultivates an interesting look. We're seeing it as a hommage to Velma from Scooby Doo. Though we've heard the endless Mary Ann and Ginger debates, we kind of thought the verdict of who the hottie was on Scooby Doo had been long ago settled? Always ready to fight a losing battle, which is so in keeping with the lead character of this show, McKenzie builds the case for Velma as "stylish" with his hommage to her haircut. (We're hoping a future "dramatic twist" involves Ryan getting glasses so he can really nail the look!)
But even something like stealing a simple haicut gets overdone on this show: it's so fussed over that it negates the simplicity of the hair cut. All the Bed Head products in the world will not allow the bangs to retain their careful curl (we're guessing a steam curling wand) in the California heat and still look so beauty parlor fresh. It's kind of like the tousled, pixie haircut we saw on TV this week. The one that caused us to note, "Patty Duke looks really good these days! And the hair, it's like she's saluting Twiggy or early Golide Hawn." Then as Patty moved down a street singing, words came up on the screen and we discovered we were watching not Patty, but a kid named Jesse McCartney. For a Patty Duke, he looks really good.
He is so The OC. An underdeveloped boy lusting after women. The Cookies told us "Girls Grow Up Faster Than Boys Do" and goodness if this show didn't take the message to heart. Which explains Adam Brody who looks like a regular kid. We could note, of course, that TV offers many regular kids who are male. Females who go above size three are the ones rendered invisible.
In a variation on a Dawson's Creek (when Joey sketched Jack nude), Brody sketches Rachel Bilson (Summer) who's all dressed up as a cartoon superhero in bondage gear that resembles Halle Berry's Catwoman costume plus dog collar. He drops to his knees in front of her, he moves her legs around, his face is in her crotch and . . . This is bodywash, people, nothing's happening here but the eternal tease out.
Summer: Don't give me any junk in the trunk.
Seth: Just the gifts God gave you.
God's gift to Adam Brody, apparently, was photo copying a young Tom Hanks. We aren't sure the world's spent many collective nights awake drooling over that prospect.
But these are the sort of philosophical questions you find yourself debating while watching a "drama" that makes Waiting for Godot look like the summer action blockbuster. Nothing ever happens. In fact, in the scene in question, worse than nothing happens. How bad is the prolonged and continuous tease? At one point Bilson moves moves towards the bed (and ends up half over it, doggie-style), and Brody's response is to whine, from behind her, "You just moved out of the light."
Not concerned with sexual passion (apparently with a Republican in the White House, sexuality has become bad form), the show wants to ooze angst. (Not drip, mind you, no one sweats on a body wash operetta.)
As you watch and wait for something to happen, anything, you're treated to variations on a single theme: "Parents Just Don't Understand." D.J. Jazzy Jeff and Will Smith should have patented that because they could be raking in big bling-bling from each episode of The OC alone.
In this episode, a closing in on forty older sister doesn't understand why her teenage sister can't enjoy spending time with their diffident father. The father in question didn't think Ryan was good enough to be with his daughter. Proving that the generation gap spans the . . . well, generations. Meanwhile a grown woman in her forties boasts of how proud her father will be (while asking questions like, "Happen to have a bong handy?").
Peter Gallagher would be the one being asked about the bong. Gallagher who originally came to fame while weeping and wringing the hands over the fact that he had have to his chest waxed for a film. As if to punish the world, Gallagher long ago decided that no one would ever again take wax or even scissors to the hairs sprouting from his body -- which explains the freakish eye brows. As brave stands go, it's hardly on par with Barbra Streisand's refusal to get a nose job but such are the times.
Gallagher's character can't seem to decide what or who he wants. (Possibly those bushy brows obstuct his view?) On the one hand, he's married to a "conservative" (his term) woman who comes from a wealthy family. On the other hand, he's engaged in flirtatious moments (words only, remember this is a body wash operetta) with a woman from his past who's a radical which, on Fox, means she sprinkles pot into her conversations and emerges from the alleged underground looking like Curly Sue.
This episode's centerpiece, it's showcase showdown if you will, is the overly long, overly slow, overly dull dinner scene which we like to think of as, "Good eats, could you please pass the angst?"
The line up includes Ryan (McKenzie) who's dating teenage Lindsay (Lucio) who happens to be the daughter of Caleb who also fathered Kirsten, who's married to Sandy (Gallagher) and is middle-aged. The scene takes place in a supposedly, well off, well to do dining room. (Remember that.) Kirsten plays with her wine glass and takes the occassional swig for dramatic effect. Caleb pokes around at the food and swallows some. Ryan and Lindsey exchange uncomfortable glances. But best in show for this dog clearly goes to the dialogue.
Here's a sample:
The scene begins in silence. Kirsten waves around her wine glass. Caleb eats a little.
No words.
Caleb: This is the best meal you ever cooked Kiki.
Kirsten: It's fondu dad, cheesepot. Not so difficult.
Long pause. (It's not fondu. Read on.)
Kirsten: Did you know that Lindsay plays the oboe?
All eyes go to Lindsay who sighs weakly.
Lindsay: Not well.
Caleb: Do you now? Do you play any Brahms?
More weak sighs from Lindsay.
Lindsay: Try.
Another lengthy pause.
Kirsten: Did you know that dad has boxed seats at the Hollywood bowl? Have you ever been?
Lindsay: Uh no, I hear it's amazing.
Caleb: The tickets are yours.
Lindsay: Great. Ryan what do you think?
The writers no doubt felt they were layering on the angst. Somewhere around the fourth layer, we lost interest in the meandering scene. We did, however, wake up for the slow-mo heart attack Caleb has after he and Ryan exchange what are supposed to be strong words. (It's very hard to take anyone seriously with that Velma haircut.)
It's all so phoney. From the long pauses, the exchanged glances, right down to the "fondu." You know, the "cheese pot?" There's no fondu on the table. There's a variety of vegetables. There's a ceramic bowl that holds cheese cubes (which are eaten as cubes, not melted). And don't get us started on the fact that this wants-so-hard-to-be-high-class-tasteful room features a couch by the dining table in the dining room.
What's really the point of this show? Apparently, not content to just push Velma as a trendsetter, the show also wants to hawk merchandise. We're not referring to the lame music played throughout. Granted anything's an improvement over the show's theme song, sung in adenoidal tones, consisting of the following lyrics: "California/ Here we come/ Right back where we started from/ California . . ." Apparently someone wanted to combine The Monkees theme ("Here we come, walking/ Down your street . . .") with Maxine Nightengale's disco classic "Right Back Where We Started From." And that "merger" works about as well as anything else in the Bully Boy economy. (Translation, not at all.)
No, we're referring to things like "The O.C. Insider Club" which, for just $24,95, allows you access to such features as "exclusive fashion tips." Or maybe you'd prefer to skip the club and go straight to the product's products? In which case, we're sure that at $32.95 they're a bargain, you can purchase "I 'Heart' The O.C." "boyshorts." And, in the interest of doing our part to inform and educate the public, we'll note the disclosure that comes with all OC undergarments:
Please note: boxers may not be returned for exchange or refund due to state regulations.
The show as an overly long commercial for other products is hardly suprising when one realizes that the show's creator has -- not one, but two -- parents who did time in the land of Hasbro Toys. Think we're being too harsh? The OC finished its second season last month. The DVD set of the second season comes out August 23rd. Whether or not it's the cash cow some are hoping, it's obvious that what's on screen is far less important than the "accessories" and ancillary rights.
How bad is the show? Curly Sue, refugee from the radical underground, is totally unconvincing despite the fact that's played by the usually watchable Kim Delaney. Did CSI Miami sap the life out of her performances? (Rhetorical question but we'd understand if it did.) Delaney's character isn't called Curly Sue (except by us), she's called Rebecca. And she's spent decades (two decades and two years, in fact) in the underdground. Which is apparently not unlike a nunnery since she tells Gallagher she hasn't had sex with anyone since him.
As two who regularly wonder if someday the Bully Boy will go completely to war on the American public and we'll be forced to go underground ourselves, the lack of sex life in the underground struck us as really sad. Then we remembered, this is The OC and no one has sex on this show.
Not old lovers Rebecca and Sandy, not Sandy and Kirsten (who is his wife), not the teen brigade. When, at the hospital and wanting to see Caleb, Lindsay dismisses the staff's "family only" orders with a cry of "I am his daughter!" We're not sure if they were surprised that such an old man would have such a young daughter, or if it was just the shock that anyone had sex in Orange County in the last twenty years.
What's the point of this show? We think is was provided in an early opening scene:
Seth: So, then, you're saying that I'm complaining that I have nothing to complain about?
Ryan: This is what I'm saying.
We'd agree and note that compared to this episode, One Tree Hill is postively crawling with drama. Possibly The OC is attempting to capture a "California laid back vibe." There's laid back and there's comatose. If you're confused as to which we think the show is, we'll note that Peter Gallagher really, really deserves this show and that one of his biggest money maker to date was While You Were Sleeping which found him on the sidelines for the bulk of the movie in a coma.
(He was never more convincing onscreen.)
Five Books, Five Minutes
It's that time again, "Five Books, Five Minutes." And summer, supposedly a more laid back season, is the perfect time to pick a book. So visit your libraries and read! (That's an order.)
Participating in this discussion are Ty, Jess, Dona, Jim and Ava of The Third Estate Sunday Review, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty of Thomas Friedman is a Great Man, Kat of Kat's Korner and C.I. of The Common Ills.
First up was Dona's pick.
Tillie Olsen's Silences
Jim: Amazing book.
Dona: I'd heard of it in that "you should read" kind of way. Ava, Jim and I had a three hour discussion on it this week.
Ava: It's history, it's criticism, it's a resource, it's a review. It's just, as Jim noted, amazing.
Betty: I think if you're interested in writing as a reader or as a writer, you'll come away inspired by this book.
Excerpt page 31:
Twenty years went by on the writing of Ship of Fools, while Katherine Ann Porter, who needed only two, was "trying to get to that table, to that typewriter, away from my jobs of teaching and trooping this country and of keeping house." "Your subconscious needed that time to grow the layers of peral," she was told. Perhaps, perhaps, but I doubt it. Subterranean forces can make you wait, but they are very finicky about the kind of waiting it has to be. Before they will feed the creator back, they must be fed, passionately fed, what needs to be worked on. "We hold up our desire as one places a magnet over a composite dust from which the particle of iron will suddenly jump up," says Paul Valery. A receptive waiting, that means, not demands which prevent "an undistracted center of being." And when the response comes, availability to work must be immediate. If not used at once, all may vanish as a dream, worse, future creation be endangered -- for only the removal and development of the material frees the forces of further work.
Next up was Jim & Kat's choice of U2: The Rolling Stone Files (editor Elysa Gardner).
[No link. It's out of print. Check your local libraries.]
Kat: We'd all enjoyed reading the collection of real time criticism and commentary on the Velvet Underground last week that Jim and I were thinking of what else we could read.
Jim: And though I may be the only one in the world still listening to it, I really enjoy U2's How to Build an Atomic Bomb.
Jess: It was interesting to pick up on early points, some true and some not, that would become regular points repeated over and over by critics. Jon Parles was particularly dense and his early thoughs have become accepted fact for the group.
Kat: Though they may be apt to Bono the person, they aren't describing the group, in my opinion.
Ty: What stood out to me was the ass kissing post The Joshua Tree. I'm not talking about the album reviews here, but the feature stories that tried to sell you on the fact that U2 was still the biggest thing of the moment. There was an article by Anthony DeCurtis on the Zooropa tour when U2 had even ran out fumes --
Kat: The crash of Pop would be just around the corner.
Ty: Yeah and the article's from August of 1993 and U2's supposed to be the most talked about, most happening thing in the music world to read DeCurtis. But correct me on this if I'm wrong, isn't this when Pearl Jam and Nirvana are the big news?
Kat: Right.
Ty: Because Kurt Cobain died in 1994. This is August 1993 that the article's published. And U2's the biggest thing in the music world?
C.I.: Not only has Nevermind already been a number one album, but one month after this article, September, 1993, In Utero will be released. U2 was not the biggest thing in the music world at that point. I enjoyed how DeCurtis rushed to assure you that the Zoo tour had been retooled. If anyone missed it, in March 2003, the Rolling Stone poll found critics, not readers, voting U2 the "honor" of worst tour for the Zoo TV tour. But yeah, the feature's become one long butt smooch for artists at a certain level and DeCurtis isn't known for his keen observations or tough questions.
Jim: I agree with Jess about the themes. Because Rolling Stone's early articles are laying out everything that people now think about the band, whether it really applies to them or not. I enjoyed the book, but I wasn't crazy about.
Rebecca: Because, although it wasn't as stilted as much of the music writing these days, it still was a far cry from the let if fly, let it hang out reporting we read in the Velvet Underground collection.
Kat: And it's interesting because the reviews today are so dispassionate, I'm referring to reviews in general and not in this collection, but when they do a feature story, the same writers turn it up to extreme kiss up, piling on hyperbole and praise that acts don't deserve. There was a schism between the album reviews and the features in this collection. That's what I took away from the book. If I'd chosen differently, I would have chosen Madonna: The Rolling Stone Files because that would have made for a more interesting read simply because most writers felt they could be passionate about Madonna.
Excerpt p. 194 (Bono speaking, from Alan Light's Bono: The Rolling Stone Inteview, "Behind The Fly" March 4, 2003):
Larry asked him [Bill Clinton], "Why would you want to be president?" and he said: "Well, you know, I don't know if the president of the United States can be the one person to turn it all around, but I know one thing: No one else can." What's interesting about him is that he seems very accessible and wants new ideas and wants to be challenged. We told him that we weren't going to endorse him, that wasn't what we did. And if he got in, that we'd be on his back for the next four years anyway, 'cause there is an uneasy relationship between us and politicians. But he knew that. He got that. That's when I realized he's pretty cool.
Jess: Oh how the Bono has fallen. Which brings us to our next book.
Bono: In Conversation with Michka Assayas
Rebecca: He truly is his worst enemy. The cover photo has him looking hot and sexy, then he opens his mouth and with each word, "I feel I'm slipping away."
Ty: It's like he thinks he's seen as stupid. Like he thinks he has to prove to the world that he's not just a rock & roller getting drunk and getting busted. But does anyone see him that way?
Jess: No, but I don't think anyone will like what they see here. He's played with manipulation throughout the post Joshua Tree career but he's really bragging on it here and it comes off as so crafted that a lot of people may have some dreams die.
C.I.: For instance, Live Aid?
Jess: Right. Where people think, "Oh that moment is so inspired. How marvelous that it just happened." I wasn't watching Live Aid, I'm too young. But I've heard about it and heard about it. My folks did watch and do remember. When I told them about Bono's discussing how he was onstage calculating what he could do for maximum effect, they were really disappointed.
C.I.: I'll give him points for his honesty. I think the book will be an important document, not unlike the interviews where John Lennon goes to town on the Beatles myth. From his foreword, he sees the book, the interviews, as therapy.
Kat: Doubt they worked for him. I'm sorry, he's disgusting now. The band and not Bono was always what I focused on because he's always been irritating to me. But sitting next to Bob Geldof while they shower Bully Boy with praise, I mean, what was that excerpt we did? How he'd be tough on Clinton the next four years because that's what he does? Is Bono, the social justice poster boy, unconcerned about Guantanamo? Is he so in to "save the children from AIDS" that he'll smooch any ass just to get funding? And let me say this on that, pediatric AIDS is the least controversial of any AIDS cause. I give him no points for taking that up.
C.I.: I get your point and it's worth noting. But it's his cause and I'll give him credit for having one. But yes, it is disgusting that he knows no shame currently. Jim pointed out that he still listens to the latest album. Most people don't. They're sick of U2 because Bono's so disappointed them. He should have been a brave voice during a period like this. Instead he's settled on being the Audrey Hepburn, ever smiling, ever gracious. That was Audrey Hepburn and it fit her. Bono's made his name claiming to be the rude voice speaking the truth and those days are long gone.
Dona: He's really become a joke. I don't know anyone besides Jim that bought the new album.
C.I.: I have it. I bought it the first week when it was on sale and I bought the one with no extras because I wasn't going to fork over too much money due to Bono as Repube Friend. I do like it, but it's been some time since I've listened. I think it was after he made one of his many "Bully Boy is okay" statements that I thought, "No, not in my home."
Kat: The album's solid. And I've never seen people run so from a solid album. U2 needs an angry album immediately that deals with the concerns of its core audience. That means pointing the finger at Bully Boy, not licking his boots.
Jim: What disappointing passage are we going with for the excerpt? When he speaks of his current coziness with politicians and notes that "as you get older, your idea of good guys and bad guys changes?"
Dona: How about the time he wastes discussing his weight loss and announcing that he's out of his "fat Elvis" period? Bono, meet Oprah.
Ava: I loved the fact that he saw no contradiction in decrying abusive economic systems that have harmed Africa, while he's setting up his own predatory practices.
Ty: We're going with his latest business venture because it perfectly captures the death of the artist and the emergence of the Bono today.
Excerpt from page 280-281, which is an excerpt of Robert A. Gurth's article for the Wall Street Journal:
Bono, lead singer for rock band U2 and antipoverty activist, is starting a new gig; media and entertainment investing. The 44-year-old rock star is joining Elevation Partners, a new Silicon Valley fund set up earlier this year by veteran technology investor Roger McNamee and John Riccitiello, who in April left his post as president of videogame maker Electronic Arts Inc. for Elevation. The participation of Bono should sharply raise the profile of Elevation, which people famaliar with the fund say initially will raise $1 billion for buyouts and investments in media and entertainment companies, seeking to profit from turmoil in those sectors. Elevation is expected to look for investment opportunities in media and entertainment companies disrupted by the advent of the Internet and other digital technologies.
Kat: And to think, it was Madonna who got dubbed with the "Material Girl" and "no heart" tags.
Ty picked The Portable Dorothy Paker.
Ty: We were going to try our hands at short stories this edition and I knew Parker wrote short stories. I knew she was famous for being funny. And I knew that she left her estate to a man she'd never met but found inspiring, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and that the NAACP gets proceeds from the sale of her writings. For all those reasons, I felt like she was a writer whose work I should know.
Dona: I think we all agreed this was something everyone should pick up. But we all had our own favorite parts.
Betty: I liked the verse and I'm the only one picking that as my favorite part. I really enjoyed "Lines on Reading Too Many Poets."
Ty: "Big Blonde" was my favorite of the short stories.
Jess: And my pick was "The Phone Call." C.I. enjoyed her criticism as did Jim and Ava.
Rebecca: Which is why that's the excerpt. We all split on our favorite part with everyone voting for one poem or one story but Ava, Jim and C.I. were a voting block with one review.
Excerpt page 518 (from Parker's Constant Reader reviews, this one entitled "Far from Well"):
"'That's a very good idea, Piglet,' said Pooh. 'We'll practise it now as we go along. But it's no good going home to practise it, because it's a special Outdoor Song which Has To Be Sung In The Snow.'
"'Are you sure?' asked Piglet anxiously.
'"Well, you'll see, Piglet, when you listen. Because this is how it begins. The more it snows, tiddely-pom --'
"'Tiddely what?' said Piglet." (He took, as you might say, the very words out of your correspondent's mouth.)
"'Pom,' said Pooh. 'I put that in to make it more hummy.'"
And it is that word "hummy," my darlings, that marks the first place in The House at Pooh Corner at which Tonstant Weader Fwowed up.
Jess: Our final book was C.I.'s suggestion.
Absolute Trust in the Goodness of the Earth by Alice Walker
Betty: I love Alice's writing. Poetry wise, I really only knew Revolutionary Petunias. I really loved this collection.
Rebecca: There's an attitude of poetry, "old," "musty." Alice Walker always manages to connect with her poetry and this was no exception.
Jess: And we need to move beyond obvious thoughts and obvious responses which goes to metaphors and expanding our thought processes. Which goes to a recent column by Patricia J. Williams in The Nation.
C.I.: That no link will be provided to because it's only available online to subscribers. The column is entitled "Just a Theory" and look in your library for the issue with the Watergate/Mark Felt cover.
Jess: We've all talked about how if time permitted, we'd take a week or two off, get away and just go into retreat mode, to quieten the world and listen and think.
Jim: But the world doesn't stop for us.
Rebecca: And let me underline "talked." Talked. Before the community at The Common Ills thinks C.I.'s about to take a week or two off from posting.
Jess: Right, pipe dream. But the thing is we get so caught up in responding to whatever the Bully Boy is doing that we often are left with no time to formulate, let alone to reclaim our humanity.
Betty: And Alice's poetry is all about reclaiming ourselves. I especially enjoyed "Dead Men Love War" and the "They sit/ Astride/ The icy bones/ Of/ Their/ Slaughtered horses/ Grinning."
Kat: And in this period where so many have asked, "Who's writing about the world around us?" this is an important book to read. Bono's not writing lyrics about the world around us. Alice Walker is writing poetry about the world around us.
Excerpt, from page 123, Alice Walker's poem "Why the Way You Have in Mind (Yours and Mine) Is Obsolete" (in full):
The brain
Though encased
In separate
Heads
Is
One brain.
Dropping a bomb
On
One head
Or one million
Is perceived
By all the rest
(Of brain, if not of heads)
To be a
Threat
Not
Definitely not
So Smart
It is
An end.
Ava: C.I. wants to add something before we get to our closing paragraphs.
C.I.: Right, I typed in asking Dallas to find something on Bono commenting on pediatric AIDS, thank you for that Dallas. Kat's making a point, earlier, about the way organization he cofounded is promoted, and promoted by Bono. But I know someone's going to have a problem with the remarks and I want something in here to back it up before someone says, "Oh, that's Kat's take." So Dallas found this from Christianity Today, Cathleen Falsani's "Bono's American Prayer." Here's how Bono promotes the organization and its goals
"It brings out the best in the church, like you see today in response to these children suffering HIV," Bono told pastors, parents, and children gathered at New York's John F. Kennedy Airport a few weeks before Christmas as part of an airlift of 80,000 gift boxes to HIV-infected children in Africa, organized by Franklin Graham's Operation Christmas Child. "But if we're honest, it has also brought the worst out of the church. Judgmentalism, a kind of sense that people who have AIDS, well, they got it because they deserve it. Well, from my studies of the Scriptures, I don't see a hierarchy to sin. I don't see sexual immorality registering higher up on the list than institutional greed (or greed of any kind, actually), problems we suffer from in the West.
"This is a defining moment for us: For the church; for our values; for the culture that we live in."
Kat: And that is how he promotes it. Peadiatric AIDS because it's "safe." No worrying about some moralizer saying "They got it because they had sinful sex!" It's safe, it's noncontroversial.
There was a time, in the days of Ryan White, where it had more controversy. These days it really doesn't. And I don't think that the crisis in Africa should be seen as children with AIDS when the epidemic spans all age groups. But it's cuddly and warm and Bono wants to hug it.
I miss the bravery I once I thought I saw in the man.
Which will do it for our "Five Books, Five Minutes." Hopefully, you found something here that interested in you and, if not, maybe thought of something that you'd like to check out of your own library. A few of you have e-mailed suggestions for books to read. Feel free to do so but in terms of reading five books in a week, which is what we've been doing, the decision is really going to come from those of us participating. If one of us says, "There's no way I'm reading ____" then we drop it from our proposed list. Ellie e-mailed again last week to note that she's repeatedly asked that we include James Joyce's Ulysses and that we're ignoring her. We read her suggestion the first time. As Ty said, "It ain't happening."
Participating in this discussion are Ty, Jess, Dona, Jim and Ava of The Third Estate Sunday Review, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty of Thomas Friedman is a Great Man, Kat of Kat's Korner and C.I. of The Common Ills.
First up was Dona's pick.
Tillie Olsen's Silences
Jim: Amazing book.
Dona: I'd heard of it in that "you should read" kind of way. Ava, Jim and I had a three hour discussion on it this week.
Ava: It's history, it's criticism, it's a resource, it's a review. It's just, as Jim noted, amazing.
Betty: I think if you're interested in writing as a reader or as a writer, you'll come away inspired by this book.
Excerpt page 31:
Twenty years went by on the writing of Ship of Fools, while Katherine Ann Porter, who needed only two, was "trying to get to that table, to that typewriter, away from my jobs of teaching and trooping this country and of keeping house." "Your subconscious needed that time to grow the layers of peral," she was told. Perhaps, perhaps, but I doubt it. Subterranean forces can make you wait, but they are very finicky about the kind of waiting it has to be. Before they will feed the creator back, they must be fed, passionately fed, what needs to be worked on. "We hold up our desire as one places a magnet over a composite dust from which the particle of iron will suddenly jump up," says Paul Valery. A receptive waiting, that means, not demands which prevent "an undistracted center of being." And when the response comes, availability to work must be immediate. If not used at once, all may vanish as a dream, worse, future creation be endangered -- for only the removal and development of the material frees the forces of further work.
Next up was Jim & Kat's choice of U2: The Rolling Stone Files (editor Elysa Gardner).
[No link. It's out of print. Check your local libraries.]
Kat: We'd all enjoyed reading the collection of real time criticism and commentary on the Velvet Underground last week that Jim and I were thinking of what else we could read.
Jim: And though I may be the only one in the world still listening to it, I really enjoy U2's How to Build an Atomic Bomb.
Jess: It was interesting to pick up on early points, some true and some not, that would become regular points repeated over and over by critics. Jon Parles was particularly dense and his early thoughs have become accepted fact for the group.
Kat: Though they may be apt to Bono the person, they aren't describing the group, in my opinion.
Ty: What stood out to me was the ass kissing post The Joshua Tree. I'm not talking about the album reviews here, but the feature stories that tried to sell you on the fact that U2 was still the biggest thing of the moment. There was an article by Anthony DeCurtis on the Zooropa tour when U2 had even ran out fumes --
Kat: The crash of Pop would be just around the corner.
Ty: Yeah and the article's from August of 1993 and U2's supposed to be the most talked about, most happening thing in the music world to read DeCurtis. But correct me on this if I'm wrong, isn't this when Pearl Jam and Nirvana are the big news?
Kat: Right.
Ty: Because Kurt Cobain died in 1994. This is August 1993 that the article's published. And U2's the biggest thing in the music world?
C.I.: Not only has Nevermind already been a number one album, but one month after this article, September, 1993, In Utero will be released. U2 was not the biggest thing in the music world at that point. I enjoyed how DeCurtis rushed to assure you that the Zoo tour had been retooled. If anyone missed it, in March 2003, the Rolling Stone poll found critics, not readers, voting U2 the "honor" of worst tour for the Zoo TV tour. But yeah, the feature's become one long butt smooch for artists at a certain level and DeCurtis isn't known for his keen observations or tough questions.
Jim: I agree with Jess about the themes. Because Rolling Stone's early articles are laying out everything that people now think about the band, whether it really applies to them or not. I enjoyed the book, but I wasn't crazy about.
Rebecca: Because, although it wasn't as stilted as much of the music writing these days, it still was a far cry from the let if fly, let it hang out reporting we read in the Velvet Underground collection.
Kat: And it's interesting because the reviews today are so dispassionate, I'm referring to reviews in general and not in this collection, but when they do a feature story, the same writers turn it up to extreme kiss up, piling on hyperbole and praise that acts don't deserve. There was a schism between the album reviews and the features in this collection. That's what I took away from the book. If I'd chosen differently, I would have chosen Madonna: The Rolling Stone Files because that would have made for a more interesting read simply because most writers felt they could be passionate about Madonna.
Excerpt p. 194 (Bono speaking, from Alan Light's Bono: The Rolling Stone Inteview, "Behind The Fly" March 4, 2003):
Larry asked him [Bill Clinton], "Why would you want to be president?" and he said: "Well, you know, I don't know if the president of the United States can be the one person to turn it all around, but I know one thing: No one else can." What's interesting about him is that he seems very accessible and wants new ideas and wants to be challenged. We told him that we weren't going to endorse him, that wasn't what we did. And if he got in, that we'd be on his back for the next four years anyway, 'cause there is an uneasy relationship between us and politicians. But he knew that. He got that. That's when I realized he's pretty cool.
Jess: Oh how the Bono has fallen. Which brings us to our next book.
Bono: In Conversation with Michka Assayas
Rebecca: He truly is his worst enemy. The cover photo has him looking hot and sexy, then he opens his mouth and with each word, "I feel I'm slipping away."
Ty: It's like he thinks he's seen as stupid. Like he thinks he has to prove to the world that he's not just a rock & roller getting drunk and getting busted. But does anyone see him that way?
Jess: No, but I don't think anyone will like what they see here. He's played with manipulation throughout the post Joshua Tree career but he's really bragging on it here and it comes off as so crafted that a lot of people may have some dreams die.
C.I.: For instance, Live Aid?
Jess: Right. Where people think, "Oh that moment is so inspired. How marvelous that it just happened." I wasn't watching Live Aid, I'm too young. But I've heard about it and heard about it. My folks did watch and do remember. When I told them about Bono's discussing how he was onstage calculating what he could do for maximum effect, they were really disappointed.
C.I.: I'll give him points for his honesty. I think the book will be an important document, not unlike the interviews where John Lennon goes to town on the Beatles myth. From his foreword, he sees the book, the interviews, as therapy.
Kat: Doubt they worked for him. I'm sorry, he's disgusting now. The band and not Bono was always what I focused on because he's always been irritating to me. But sitting next to Bob Geldof while they shower Bully Boy with praise, I mean, what was that excerpt we did? How he'd be tough on Clinton the next four years because that's what he does? Is Bono, the social justice poster boy, unconcerned about Guantanamo? Is he so in to "save the children from AIDS" that he'll smooch any ass just to get funding? And let me say this on that, pediatric AIDS is the least controversial of any AIDS cause. I give him no points for taking that up.
C.I.: I get your point and it's worth noting. But it's his cause and I'll give him credit for having one. But yes, it is disgusting that he knows no shame currently. Jim pointed out that he still listens to the latest album. Most people don't. They're sick of U2 because Bono's so disappointed them. He should have been a brave voice during a period like this. Instead he's settled on being the Audrey Hepburn, ever smiling, ever gracious. That was Audrey Hepburn and it fit her. Bono's made his name claiming to be the rude voice speaking the truth and those days are long gone.
Dona: He's really become a joke. I don't know anyone besides Jim that bought the new album.
C.I.: I have it. I bought it the first week when it was on sale and I bought the one with no extras because I wasn't going to fork over too much money due to Bono as Repube Friend. I do like it, but it's been some time since I've listened. I think it was after he made one of his many "Bully Boy is okay" statements that I thought, "No, not in my home."
Kat: The album's solid. And I've never seen people run so from a solid album. U2 needs an angry album immediately that deals with the concerns of its core audience. That means pointing the finger at Bully Boy, not licking his boots.
Jim: What disappointing passage are we going with for the excerpt? When he speaks of his current coziness with politicians and notes that "as you get older, your idea of good guys and bad guys changes?"
Dona: How about the time he wastes discussing his weight loss and announcing that he's out of his "fat Elvis" period? Bono, meet Oprah.
Ava: I loved the fact that he saw no contradiction in decrying abusive economic systems that have harmed Africa, while he's setting up his own predatory practices.
Ty: We're going with his latest business venture because it perfectly captures the death of the artist and the emergence of the Bono today.
Excerpt from page 280-281, which is an excerpt of Robert A. Gurth's article for the Wall Street Journal:
Bono, lead singer for rock band U2 and antipoverty activist, is starting a new gig; media and entertainment investing. The 44-year-old rock star is joining Elevation Partners, a new Silicon Valley fund set up earlier this year by veteran technology investor Roger McNamee and John Riccitiello, who in April left his post as president of videogame maker Electronic Arts Inc. for Elevation. The participation of Bono should sharply raise the profile of Elevation, which people famaliar with the fund say initially will raise $1 billion for buyouts and investments in media and entertainment companies, seeking to profit from turmoil in those sectors. Elevation is expected to look for investment opportunities in media and entertainment companies disrupted by the advent of the Internet and other digital technologies.
Kat: And to think, it was Madonna who got dubbed with the "Material Girl" and "no heart" tags.
Ty picked The Portable Dorothy Paker.
Ty: We were going to try our hands at short stories this edition and I knew Parker wrote short stories. I knew she was famous for being funny. And I knew that she left her estate to a man she'd never met but found inspiring, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and that the NAACP gets proceeds from the sale of her writings. For all those reasons, I felt like she was a writer whose work I should know.
Dona: I think we all agreed this was something everyone should pick up. But we all had our own favorite parts.
Betty: I liked the verse and I'm the only one picking that as my favorite part. I really enjoyed "Lines on Reading Too Many Poets."
Ty: "Big Blonde" was my favorite of the short stories.
Jess: And my pick was "The Phone Call." C.I. enjoyed her criticism as did Jim and Ava.
Rebecca: Which is why that's the excerpt. We all split on our favorite part with everyone voting for one poem or one story but Ava, Jim and C.I. were a voting block with one review.
Excerpt page 518 (from Parker's Constant Reader reviews, this one entitled "Far from Well"):
"'That's a very good idea, Piglet,' said Pooh. 'We'll practise it now as we go along. But it's no good going home to practise it, because it's a special Outdoor Song which Has To Be Sung In The Snow.'
"'Are you sure?' asked Piglet anxiously.
'"Well, you'll see, Piglet, when you listen. Because this is how it begins. The more it snows, tiddely-pom --'
"'Tiddely what?' said Piglet." (He took, as you might say, the very words out of your correspondent's mouth.)
"'Pom,' said Pooh. 'I put that in to make it more hummy.'"
And it is that word "hummy," my darlings, that marks the first place in The House at Pooh Corner at which Tonstant Weader Fwowed up.
Jess: Our final book was C.I.'s suggestion.
Absolute Trust in the Goodness of the Earth by Alice Walker
Betty: I love Alice's writing. Poetry wise, I really only knew Revolutionary Petunias. I really loved this collection.
Rebecca: There's an attitude of poetry, "old," "musty." Alice Walker always manages to connect with her poetry and this was no exception.
Jess: And we need to move beyond obvious thoughts and obvious responses which goes to metaphors and expanding our thought processes. Which goes to a recent column by Patricia J. Williams in The Nation.
C.I.: That no link will be provided to because it's only available online to subscribers. The column is entitled "Just a Theory" and look in your library for the issue with the Watergate/Mark Felt cover.
Jess: We've all talked about how if time permitted, we'd take a week or two off, get away and just go into retreat mode, to quieten the world and listen and think.
Jim: But the world doesn't stop for us.
Rebecca: And let me underline "talked." Talked. Before the community at The Common Ills thinks C.I.'s about to take a week or two off from posting.
Jess: Right, pipe dream. But the thing is we get so caught up in responding to whatever the Bully Boy is doing that we often are left with no time to formulate, let alone to reclaim our humanity.
Betty: And Alice's poetry is all about reclaiming ourselves. I especially enjoyed "Dead Men Love War" and the "They sit/ Astride/ The icy bones/ Of/ Their/ Slaughtered horses/ Grinning."
Kat: And in this period where so many have asked, "Who's writing about the world around us?" this is an important book to read. Bono's not writing lyrics about the world around us. Alice Walker is writing poetry about the world around us.
Excerpt, from page 123, Alice Walker's poem "Why the Way You Have in Mind (Yours and Mine) Is Obsolete" (in full):
The brain
Though encased
In separate
Heads
Is
One brain.
Dropping a bomb
On
One head
Or one million
Is perceived
By all the rest
(Of brain, if not of heads)
To be a
Threat
Not
Definitely not
So Smart
It is
An end.
Ava: C.I. wants to add something before we get to our closing paragraphs.
C.I.: Right, I typed in asking Dallas to find something on Bono commenting on pediatric AIDS, thank you for that Dallas. Kat's making a point, earlier, about the way organization he cofounded is promoted, and promoted by Bono. But I know someone's going to have a problem with the remarks and I want something in here to back it up before someone says, "Oh, that's Kat's take." So Dallas found this from Christianity Today, Cathleen Falsani's "Bono's American Prayer." Here's how Bono promotes the organization and its goals
"It brings out the best in the church, like you see today in response to these children suffering HIV," Bono told pastors, parents, and children gathered at New York's John F. Kennedy Airport a few weeks before Christmas as part of an airlift of 80,000 gift boxes to HIV-infected children in Africa, organized by Franklin Graham's Operation Christmas Child. "But if we're honest, it has also brought the worst out of the church. Judgmentalism, a kind of sense that people who have AIDS, well, they got it because they deserve it. Well, from my studies of the Scriptures, I don't see a hierarchy to sin. I don't see sexual immorality registering higher up on the list than institutional greed (or greed of any kind, actually), problems we suffer from in the West.
"This is a defining moment for us: For the church; for our values; for the culture that we live in."
Kat: And that is how he promotes it. Peadiatric AIDS because it's "safe." No worrying about some moralizer saying "They got it because they had sinful sex!" It's safe, it's noncontroversial.
There was a time, in the days of Ryan White, where it had more controversy. These days it really doesn't. And I don't think that the crisis in Africa should be seen as children with AIDS when the epidemic spans all age groups. But it's cuddly and warm and Bono wants to hug it.
I miss the bravery I once I thought I saw in the man.
Which will do it for our "Five Books, Five Minutes." Hopefully, you found something here that interested in you and, if not, maybe thought of something that you'd like to check out of your own library. A few of you have e-mailed suggestions for books to read. Feel free to do so but in terms of reading five books in a week, which is what we've been doing, the decision is really going to come from those of us participating. If one of us says, "There's no way I'm reading ____" then we drop it from our proposed list. Ellie e-mailed again last week to note that she's repeatedly asked that we include James Joyce's Ulysses and that we're ignoring her. We read her suggestion the first time. As Ty said, "It ain't happening."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
