Slate has a heartfelt obit of Mister Rogers. The author calls him "a puzzling figure"--he's only puzzling in the context of the bizarre perversion of reality that TV constantly pumps out. As the obit mentions, he really seems to have lived his entire life in the same kind, patient, positive manner we all know from the show--no secret addictions, no dark side exposed in the tabloids. The inside and the outside were the same; he was an integrated man, and a wise one, too.



Kate just made the observation that Mr. Rogers seemed to "feel" first, then slowly put words to the feelings, with tremendous frankness. That seems like a very fine way to be alive. And look at the life he left behind! I'd be proud to have done that--wouldn't you?

Read this article…

Ananova reports that J.K. Rowling will make a cameo on The Simpsons. Here's a funny Saddam vs. W debate from The Guardian. And here's an older piece on Iraq by ex-Python Terry Jones, always amusing.



Media Bistro is running an interesting interview with Onion stalwart Maria Schneider. What a talented writer she is--the voice of Herbert Kornfield, Jean Teasdale, among others. I wish they'd print a byline box, or something; team-writing is great, but shared credit so often means somebody gets screwed. Sean Kelly's still annoyed about the 1964 High School Yearbook, and I can understand why.



The Schneider interview ends on a bit of a sour note, unfortunately. In response to the question "What would you say to a college kid whose dream job is to work at The Onion?" she says (and I've edited a bit here):"...the huge amount of parody news that has come up in reaction to The Onion—I guess this sounds bitchy, but I don't really think they have a reason to exist. Sorry, I know that sounds awful...When I hear about The Onion having imitators, I just think, "Why? Do us one better. Think of something else that we haven't thought of."



I hear that, but...



What's behind the growth of The Onion--apart from its tremendous quality--is the internet. If there was no internet, it's almost certain that the scale of their success (which is still nowhere near the level of success of National Lampoon in its heyday, either in money earned or cultural impact) would be much smaller; they'd probably still be in Madison, for one thing. Maybe they'd be a cult thing like George Meyer's Army Man was. My point is that The Onion's current preeminence comes from a lot of factors, not just funniness. The growth of parody news comes from its timeliness, its universality, its inexhaustible source, and from its ability to be encapsulated in a 250-word article that can be read on a website or sent in an email. That's why the Onion does it, and that why all their imitators do it, too.



Nobody owns a form of comedy. The Onion innovated within an old form; their breakthrough was to apply collegiate relativism to the form of the parody newspaper. "Why is an earthquake in China automatically more important than me eating ten Ho Hos? And what if I throw up?" While distributing appropriate props, it's important to remember that a lot of what they do is simply extremely well-crafted college humor--"Clinton Dispatches Vowels," for example. While they do what they do very well, they have a very limited scope. At what point is it okay to say to them, "Okay, you've done parody news--now move on." Isn't it equally valid to ask them, "You guys are successful, talented, secure--now, do yourselves one better."



Why am I wasting your valuable time talking about this? Because this kind of "our way is the good way and everything else is shit" attitude is rampant in comedy. While it's an understandable by-product of the team-writing process, it meanly impedes creativity and is woefully small-minded. All of us would do well to remember that the comic Muse is fickle, and that should temper our criticisms.



A friend of mine once said, "Comedy writers need to be more like jazz musicians. If somebody plays in a way you don't like, you don't criticize--you say, 'He's just trying to hear his horn.'" Those imitators that irritate Maria Schneider--and sure, some of them are awful--may contain the seeds of the next Onion. And even if they don't, we're all chasing the same Muse, and should respect each other's quest for it--if not the manner in which we chase!

Read this article…

Eagle-eye Schwarz sends this, from today's Times:

"With large antiwar demonstrations expected again this weekend, Mr. Bush is also aware that the longer inspections go on, the greater the risk of declining public support. The work of the weapons inspectors has created a burgeoning perception that inspections backed by the threat of force can lead more effectively to Iraq's disarmament, while also containing the threat he poses to the West."



/Don't see it? Jon will help: "As you'll notice, "he" apparently refers to George Bush."



Also, Michael Moore's book, "Stupid White Men," won Book of the Year in Britain last night. Here's the BBC coverage. Dig the caption: "Moore's book was originally shelved by US publishers." Sound familiar? Barry's going to start its 22nd week on the list next Sunday--go rejected books, go!

Read this article…

When Jon forwarded me this article from The New York Times, I didn't know whether to laugh or to cry. Throughout the 90s, a hell of a lot of people who should've become doctors and lawyers and middle management drones became wildly derivative, smug and pampered sitcom staffers instead. A shake-out is probably a good thing for everybody. (Just make sure it's over before I need to put a kid through college, okay?)

Read this article…

Who needs a writing tutor, when you have Strong Bad writing your papers?

Read this article…

After ten years of being a temp, I love watching office drones get pancaked by a football player. Doesn't make me want to buy those sneakers, but I won't tell them if you won't.

Read this article…

One of J.K. Rowling's favorite charities, Comic Relief, is behind a HP spoof that's broadcasting on March 14. It's called "Harry Potter and the Chamberpot of Azerbaijan," and you can find out more about it here. French and Saunders are behind the program, which boasts an all-star cast--I won't be able to see it over here until they put it on BBC America, so I'd love to hear what people think of it.



And, since we're on the subject, Barry Trotter has just started its 21st week on the London Sunday Times bestseller list. Not at all bad for a self-published book. Quick, buy one before they run out of trees.

Read this article…

In These Times, the leftist paper, recently interviewed Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.; here's some of what he said:

"I myself feel that our country, for whose Constitution I fought in a just war, might as well have been invaded by Martians and body snatchers.



"Sometimes I wish it had been. What has happened, though, is that it has been taken over by means of the sleaziest, low comedy, Keystone Cops-style coup d'etat imaginable. And those now in charge of the federal government are uppercrust C students who know no history or geography, plus not so closeted white supremacists, aka 'Christians,' and plus, most frighteningly, psychopathic personalities, or 'PPs'.



"To say somebody is a PP is to make a perfectly respectable medical diagnosis, like saying he or she has appendicitis or athlete's foot. The classic medical text on PPs is 'The Mask of Sanity' by Dr. Hervey Cleckley. Read it! PPs are presentable, they know full well the suffering their actions may cause others, but they do not care. They cannot care because they are nuts. They have a screw loose!



"And what syndrome better describes so many executives at Enron and WorldCom and on and on, who have enriched themselves while ruining their employees and investors and country, and who still feel as pure as the driven snow, no matter what anybody may say to or about them?



"And so many of these heartless PPs now hold big jobs in our federal government, as though they were leaders instead of sick."



The full text of the interview, which is critical and amusing in Vonnegut's abstract/concrete way, is at the In These Times website here.

Read this article…

On Pythonline.com, I found this excerpt from John Cleese's speech upon becoming the Rector of St. Andrews. Sharp, funny writing, and you can hear him delivering it. In other Python news, there's a Beatles Anthology-type book in the works; I'm currently pressing my English contacts for more information...

Read this article…

Here's the link to the story below, about a new reality TV show...

Read this article…

Normally I wouldn't favor doing this to a "grade school teacher and aspiring actress," but my God Read this article…

Here's a really sensible commentary explaining European "anti-Americanism" from The New York Observer.

Read this article…

Those of you familiar with my documentary addiction won't be surprised to hear that this evening I watched a fascinating show on PBS. It was an episode of "The Secrets of the Dead" dealing with the great fire during the Roman Emperor Nero's reign. They discussed Tacitus' belief that Nero himself was behind it (unlikely--even though it did make his ambitious building plans possible); whether it was an accident (very possible); or even if the Christians that Nero blamed were responsible (also possible). This last is doubtless the most interesting portion--if you buy the theory, it casts the fire (which destroyed 5/7ths of the city) as a grand act of religious terrorism. The site is here.

Read this article…

The following is a transcript of Senator Robert Byrd's speech in the Senate, 2/12/03. I thought it was so articulate and thoughtful--undeniable, really--that I had to post it.



"To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human experiences.



On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war. Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent--ominously, dreadfully silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing. We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our own uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only on the editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion of the prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war.



And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple attempt to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point in the recent history of the world. This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of preemption--the idea that the United States or any other nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be threatening in the future--is a radical new twist on the traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of international law and the UN Charter. And it is being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be on our--or some other nation's--hit list.



High level Administration figures recently refused to take nuclear weapons off of the table when discussing a possible attack against Iraq. What could be more destabilizing and unwise than this type of uncertainty, particularly in a world where globalism has tied the vital economic and security interests of many nations so closely together?



There are huge cracks emerging in our time-honored alliances, and U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to damaging worldwide speculation. Anti-Americanism based on mistrust, misinformation, suspicion, and alarming rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the once solid alliance against global terrorism which existed after September 11.



Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with little guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family members are being called to active military duty, with no idea of the duration of their stay or what horrors they may face. Communities are being left with less than adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are also short-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. Fuel prices are rising and may soon spike higher.



This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must be judged on its record. I believe that that record is dismal. In that scant two years, this Administration has squandered a large projected surplus of some $5.6 trillion over the next decade and taken us to projected deficits as far as the eye can see. This Administration's domestic policy has put many of our states in dire financial condition, under funding scores of essential programs for our people. This Administration has fostered policies which have slowed economic growth. This Administration has ignored urgent matters such as the crisis in health care for our elderly. This Administration has been slow to provide adequate funding for homeland security. This Administration has been reluctant to better protect our long

>and porous borders.



In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin Laden. In fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his forces and urging them to kill. This Administration has split traditional alliances, possibly crippling, for all time, International order-keeping entities like the United Nations and NATO. This Administration has called into question the traditional worldwide perception of the United States as well-intentioned, peacekeeper. This Administration has turned the patient art of diplomacy into threats, labeling, and name calling of the sort that reflects quite poorly on the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, and which will have consequences for years to come. Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil, denigrating powerful European allies as irrelevant--these types of crude insensitivities can do our great nation no good. We may have massive military might, but we cannot fight a global war on terrorism alone. We need the cooperation and friendship of our time-honored allies as well as the newer found friends whom we can attract with our wealth. Our awesome military machine will do us little good if we suffer another devastating attack on our homeland which severely damages our economy. Our military manpower is already stretched thin and we will need the augmenting support of those nations who can supply troop strength, not just sign letters cheering us on.



The war in Afghanistan has cost us $37 billion so far, yet there is evidence that terrorism may already be starting to regain its hold in that region. We have not found bin Laden, and unless we secure the peace in Afghanistan, the dark dens of terrorism may yet again flourish in that remote and devastated land. Pakistan as well is at risk of destabilizing forces. This Administration has not finished the first war against terrorism and yet it is eager to embark on another conflict with perils much greater than those in Afghanistan. Is our attention span that short? Have we not learned that after winning the war one must always secure the peace?



And yet we hear little about the aftermath of war in Iraq. In the absence of plans, speculation abroad is rife. Will we seize Iraq's oil fields, becoming an occupying power which controls the price and supply of that nation's oil for the foreseeable future? To whom do we propose to hand the reigns of power after Saddam Hussein? Will our war inflame the Muslim world resulting in devastating attacks on Israel? Will Israel retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal? Will the Jordanian and Saudi Arabian governments be toppled by radicals, bolstered by Iran which has much closer ties to terrorism than Iraq? Could a disruption of the world's oil supply lead to a world-wide recession? Has our senselessly bellicose language and our callous disregard of the interests and opinions of other nations increased the global race to join the nuclear club and made proliferation an even more lucrative practice for nations which need the income?



In only the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant Administration has initiated policies which may reap disastrous consequences for years. One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage attacks of September 11. One can appreciate the frustration of having only a shadow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy on which it is nearly impossible to exact retribution. But to turn one's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely destabilizing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is currently witnessing is inexcusable from any Administration charged with the awesome power and responsibility of guiding the destiny of the greatest superpower on the planet. Frankly many of the pronouncements made by this Administration are outrageous. There is no other word.



Yet this chamber is hauntingly silent. On what is possibly the eve of horrific infliction of death and destruction on the population of the nation of Iraq--a population, I might add, of which over 50% is under age 15--thousands of our own citizens to face unimagined horrors of chemical and biological warfare--this chamber is silent. On the eve of what could possibly be a vicious terrorist attack in retaliation for our attack on Iraq, it is business as usual in the United States Senate.



We are truly "sleepwalking through history." In my heart of hearts I pray that this great nation and its good and trusting citizens are not in for a rudest of awakenings. To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a last resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment of any President who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a nation which is over 50% children is "in the highest moral traditions of our country". This war is not necessary at this time. Pressure appears to be having a good result in Iraq. Our mistake was to put ourselves in a corner so quickly. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box of our own making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time."



For my money, this is the most cogent and thoughtful examination of the issues we're facing that I've encountered. I've sent a letter of support to Senator Byrd and you can too by going to his website here.

Read this article…

Friend Goodrow reports:

Saturday, February 15, 2003, 4:20pm



"Glamericans for Peace" have their signs trimmed with fur. One of them reads: "Botox Not Bombs!" They are outside the NYP Library, 42nd and 5th, together with a thousand or so other people, all preparing to walk to 51st St. & 1st Ave. for the demonstration. There's an entire samba contingent, with very big puppets. There is a woman who says, "I had to bring my 14 year old son, because what is going on is outrageous." A lovely girl has a patch on her backpack that says, "Whorehouse of Representatives." I had no button or sign, and saw a guy with a peace symbol button on his hat. I asked him where he got it, meaning where could I get one. He said, "I got it out of the closet. It's from 1968." There was a contingent from the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, and they all were still moving.



Anyone who tells you that there were fewer than a quarter million people in New York for that rally is either lying or simply uninformed; and for a news organization, being uninformed is one technique of lying.



Eve Shopsin and I went up there together. I was supposed to meet people at the Library's north lion, but never found them. Eve and I walked east on 42nd St, and the sidewalks were crowded with signs and songs.



The police department had made a big, dumb mistake by getting an injunction banning a march past the UN and up to Central Park. They had assigned 1st Ave. between 51st and 60th as the place to hold a rally, and in the end, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and Lexington Avenues were choked with people and cops from 42d up to at least 63d.



Evie and I only made it to 2nd & 54th. The police were letting no one go the next block east to 1st, but they were not letting us got north either. Both sides of the avenue were jammed with people, and of course we spilled into the street, At 54th we were stuck, and there the police did one of their little shows, with horses herding the crowds and sassy teenagers (and oldsters) getting arrested. I got a chance to bend down and say to a horse's ass: "Good afternoon, officer." There was an amazing Police General Staff on hand, including a 4-star General, two bird Colonels, a major, several captains and lieutenants. The lesser officers pushed us onto the sidewalk, then kept pushing.



I'm such a shy, even-tempered, mild-mannered guy, y'know? But I almost lost it a couple times. They brought in one of those plastic webs, about three feet high, and they were shoving us and moving the web along. A rather nasty cop had his baton across my back, and was pushing me steadily, but I had my legs in opposition because there was really no place for me to go. Then he wapped my back with full length of the stick, both hands. It hurt. I turned my head and yelled at him, "You cocksucker!" Instead of arresting me, he used my lack of balance to push me further into the crowd. Then he seemed to lose interest.



My second thrilling brush with destiny was moments later. One of the Colonels, a big fat, red-faced guy, started to plunge into the crowd to grab somebody. He was furious and redder every second. He cried, "That sonofabitch is going!" as he charged. But we got in his way. I actually put my hands on his rather available stomach to hold him back, at which point my little mind whispered, "You off to jail, Jack!" But, perhaps sensing what a stupid figure he was cutting, he strutted off and to confer with other brass.



There is always a jerk around to ruin a nice day. As I was holding back the cop with the club, a guy in front of me yelled at him, "Don't do that to him! He's an old man!" And the jerk who yelled that had a gray beard. When I mentioned it to Evie later, she said, "Yeah, I heard that. That was terrible."



The cops were taking a lot of shit, of course, from excitable young folks and loudmouthed older ones. They were in a ridiculous position. All because of that ridiculous injunction.



We left, and tried to go down 3rd Ave., but riot police were making arrests (there was no rioting) and filling up a PD bus, and we

couldn't get past the next corner. We went over to Lexington, which was one big street party of cops and protesters, all the way down to Grand Central, where we could get a shuttle and a train home. (One funny sign: "FUCT TAPE")



We went to stop at the Oyster Bar, but they, like the NYPD, had not anticipated the number of people who might want oysters (don't forget, many demonstrators were from out of town, and looking to take advantage of a visit to Gotham.) The Oyster Bar was swamped. Too long a wait, hungry as we were.



I have been told that 5th Ave. was also thronged with signs, and that there were crowds northward as far as the 80's.



Yes, I smiled and laughed a lot to see this outpouring of my Murrican friends. The official response from Pres. Twerp so far has been that he is seeking peace too, and Americans have a right, and so on. I wonder if anyone has turned him on to the "Glamericans?" Maybe they're a matter for Ashcroft's Torquemada Squad.



Smile and laugh, friends. And come out for the inevitable next one.



All we are saying . . .

Is Oop Bop Sh'Bam!



IN RISU VERITAS--GG."



Mike again: Jon, got any scenes you'd like to share?

Read this article…

...on Hal Holbrook's nearly fifty years of portraying Mark Twain on stage. Take a look.

Read this article…

It's because I'm working on another book, which, if all goes well, will be inflicted sometime in October.



My editor Simon sent me this tremendously funny page. Look twice.



Also, last night Kate and I watched "Signs." Interesting, creepy. Reminded me of an excellent, even creepier non-fiction book my friend Courty Bryan wrote about alien abduction,Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind: UFOs, Alien Abduction and the Conference at M.I.T.. Back in the 1970s, Courty wrote "Friendly Fire," and rightly became known as one of America's premier investigative non-fiction writers. If you are at all interested in things exterrestrial, get this book. Intelligent, skeptical, excellently written. I had no interest whatever in the subject until I read it. I once asked Courty what he thought was going on and he said something like, "I used to think I knew, but now I'm not at all sure."

Read this article…

Those of you not living in New York might not have seen this column on Norman Mailer. I found it very thought-provoking, especially the part where he talks about ear-fisting. (Just kidding.)

Read this article…

Last night we saw the movie "Adaptation," and Kate got off a good line as the credits were rolling. "You know what I'd like to see?" "What?" I said. "No New Yorker writers were harmed in the making of this movie."



Also: my UK editor Simon forwarded me this email:

FOURTEEN THINGS THAT IT TOOK ME OVER 50 YEARS TO LEARN

By Dave Barry

1) Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night.

2) If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its full potential, that word would be "meetings."

3) There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."

4) People who want to share their religious views with you almost never want you to share yours with them.

5) You should not confuse your career with your life.

6) Nobody cares if you can't dance well. Just get up and dance.

7) Never lick a steak knife.

8) The most destructive force in the universe is gossip.

9) You will never find anybody who can give you a clear and compelling reason why we observe daylight savings time.

10) You should never say anything to a woman that even remotely suggests that you think she's pregnant unless you can see an actual baby emerging from her at that moment.

11) There comes a time when you should stop expecting other people to make a big deal about your birthday. That time is age eleven.

12) The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we ALL believe that we are above average drivers.

13) A person, who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person. This is very important. Pay attention. It never fails.

14)Your REAL friends love you anyway.

15)Thought for the day: Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic."



I love Dave Barry. He probably should write half as much as he does, and make it twice as deep, but shouldn't we all...

Read this article…

Antoine wrote me one of his usual thought-provoking emails this morning. He expresses gratitude for the "Americans, British, Canadians and even Poles," involved in liberating his country from the Nazis in 1944-5. "But," he writes, "I also know what a war of liberation means."



Antoine wrote of the damage France suffered in the process, inflicted by the friendly bombs of "the RAF and the US 8th Air Force. The objectives were plants or railway stations, but 'collateral damages' were already known. When the invasion began, cities like St Lo, Carentan, Caen or Brest were almost entirely destroyed; civilians had no time to evacuate their homes. The estimation of civilians killed during the Liberation rises to about 200 000." Clearly not all of these were from collateral damage, but it makes you understand that liberation won't be a bloodless process for Iraq. Is this part of France's reticence? Antoine thinks so. And yet, he makes the point that his country was and is still grateful. "The British and American soldiers could see union jacks and star spangled banners floating in the ruins of our liberated cities...So what's [my] point? In this period of glorious French bashing, I think it's good to remember that even a war considered as "justified" or "legal" wages a lot of horrors, even for the people that are to be liberated."



Here's what I said in response:

"...I think where the French-bashing comes from in America is a feeling that "an ally should ALWAYS agree with us; if not, you're not an ally." Americans don't yet understand--they may not, until our country really gets its foot stuck in a bucket--the value of allies who temper the excesses of the US. Confidence is good; over-confidence is not. Patriotism is good; blind nationalism is not. Not being afraid to go to war when necessary is good; being eager to go to war is not.



When you get angry at Americans, think of the following. We are not demons, and we are not dumb. We are distracted. France is one of the few countries not to be inundated (and to some small or large degree transformed) by the endless tidal wave of American media and pop culture. Nearly every other place, has. Well, we're right in the middle of it, all the time, every day. You think it overwhelms foreign countries? It overwhelms us even more--there is no time to read. There is no time to think. Every inch of mental space is grappled over by advertisers and TV shows and Hollywood.



And so the public debate over here--the basis of any democracy--is malnourished and cartoonish. There's only space for the simplest of ideas, expressed in the media-driven forms we all understand. That's why "Saddam=Hitler!" or "France=ungrateful for WWII!" and on and on and on. World War Two has become history as movie, and we are constantly referred to that simplified story. The American people are the monkeys this stuff is tested on first, and as a result, we suffer its effects most. Everything is a movie, where the villain is 100% evil (of course) and the hero is 100% lilywhite (of course). And we've all seen enough movies to know that there HAS to be a showdown at the end. Don't talk to us about funding Saddam, or being in it for the oil, or that North Korea may be a bigger threat--shhh! you're spoiling the movie!"

Read this article…

Quite possibly the funniest Strong Bad email ever. Easter Eggs can be found by clicking on the first sunday and last someday in SB's message at the end.

Read this article…

A while back, I wrote a book the main satirical point of which was that adapting a book into a movie destroys the book, given the dominance of visual media. Well, here's a new survey that proves my point. And if it's this bad in the UK, just think of what it's like in the US...Do us all a favor--put a brick through your child's TV.

Read this article…

Michael Cader called Michael Wolff "a humor columnist with a particular interest in media" as he pointed his readers to Wolff's blitzkrieg of vitriol regarding American book publishing. As Cader points out, many of the same complaints could be leveled at the magazine industry "with a generous measure of backstabbing" added for good measure. So they both stink...Hooray? Stimulating reading.

Read this article…

Here's what writer Salman Rushdie said recently (courtesy of J. Schwarz):

"The Bush camp's interest in "evil" and "evildoers" needs no further emphasis. But the Bushies are finding support in some strange quarters. To take just one example, the crazy rage of the writer Oriana Fallaci, directed without discrimination against every Muslim in the world -- "every Muslim, without exception, is a fundamentalist"; "they multiply like protozoa to infinity" -- is one example of what one might call the New Evilism that is busily painting the world in black and white."



And this from a man who spent a decent portion of his adult life under a fatwa. Makes you think.

Read this article…

The current issue of The New Yorker has a lovely little humor piece about reality TV by George Saunders. It is witty, compact, doesn't seem afraid to stir up the imagination, and has a nice satirical point, one that goes beyond the usual "isn't TV stupid?" barrelfish shooting that Shouts is so fond of.



Also: ever since a fascinating college course, I have been interested in the First World War; hence the current exhibit at Britain's Imperial War Museum, "Anthem for Doomed Youth," spotlighting that country's war poets (Sassoon, Graves, Owen and others) was a recent surf. On their site, I dug up a nice review of it in the Sunday Times. Here was the portion that moved me to blog it: "In the best of all worlds, I would wish the history of warfare to form a less prominent part of the education of my children and their children than it did my own," reviewer Jon Stallworthy writes. "In the world in which I find myself living, however, I wonder if American public opinion of an invasion of Iraq would be closer to British public opinion if Americans had heard and read as much about the wars of this past century..."



Most days, the History Channel seems to be all grainy green shots through a tanker's night-vision scope, or smart bomb footage that allows the viewer to watch with delicious anticipation and glorious release. Don't be fooled by the stagecraft--modern war is slaughter with all the efficiencies and scope our technology can muster. It is to killing what McDonald's is to food, and should be undertaken with the greatest unwillingness and trepidation, no matter what the reason, or the perceived odds. Back in 1914, they expected the war to end by Christmas, but an argument could be made that it didn't end until 1945. Much is made of Americans' lust for bloodless (or at least one-sided) conflict, usually negatively, as if being able to countenance the wholesale killing of other humans is a virtue. This sensitivity is our culture's self-protection kicking in; on some wordless level we realize that "the necessitites of war" are just as much of a threat to the way we live as an anthrax attack.



During the First World War, after a few disasterous attempts at documentary, the governments of the countries effectively drew a curtain over what was really going on. Only engineered public ignorance allowed them to fight--no sensible person would've allowed it. I think drawing back the curtain, as widely and as often as we can stand it, is a wise idea. Since we cannot do this in real-time, the conflicts of the past will have to do.

Read this article…