Posted on 06/20/2006 7:01:29 PM PDT by pissant
"Writing," observed the French playwright Moliere, "is like prostitution. First you do it for love, then for a few close friends, and then for money."
This aphorism is brought forcefully to mind by the cover of Ann Coulter's latest book, leering at customers from the windows of America's biggest bookstores. As always, the cover features a portrait of the artist as a young tart, blond locks flowing, her size zero little black dress catering to a combination of ideological and erotic perversion that's disturbing to contemplate.
In The New York Times, David Carr doesn't hesitate to label Coulter a literary crack whore, although naturally the editors of that august publication won't allow such an indelicate phrase to appear in its pages. Coulter, Carr suggests, "knows precisely what she is saying" when she says of certain 9/11 widows that she's "never seen people enjoying their husband's death so much."
For Carr, Coulter's habit of making outrageous statements is part of a simple and cynical swindle: say vile things, get lots of publicity for doing so, then sell hundreds of thousands of books as one's reward for performing unnatural intellectual acts on TV.
Prostitution, however, is a tricky business. I can attest that when she was an unknown law student, Coulter said outrageous things all the time, in class, in conversation, and in print. Was she merely laying the groundwork for selling her honor dear? It seems doubtful.
For what it's worth, Coulter's views have always seemed to me to be sincerely held, to the extent that narcissistic borderline personalities can be sincere. Not all writers are prostitutes, but all writers are narcissists, and Coulter appears to represent an especially acute case of someone who writes in order to be at the center of attention (hence the glossy locks and little black dress).
Nevertheless prostitution is everywhere in our society, and indeed the willingness to sell what shouldn't be sold often helps explain what's happening when one tries to interpret otherwise puzzling events.
Consider the drive to get the American Medical Association to redefine "obesity" in a way that will cause 40 percent of America's children to suddenly contract a dreaded disease. The campaign will likely succeed, which means that in September, when the new guidelines are announced, the media will uncritically parrot this ridiculously unscientific claim, leading to yet more hysterical demands that we "think of the children," and do something about this deadly epidemic, immediately if not sooner.
How does this happen? Here's how: The International Obesity Task Force, a drug company lobbying group disguised as an organization of disinterested scientists, has spent the past decade co-opting governmental policy by influencing groups such as the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control.
Recently, a prominent government scientist spent several hours detailing for me how the IOTF is at the forefront of a concerted campaign by the pharmaceutical industry to, as this researcher put it, "soften up" governmental regulatory agencies, in order to get various new weight loss drugs approved.
Ray Moynihan, an Australian academic, makes a similar point in a new article in the British Medical Journal. (Moynihan is the author of the book "Selling Sickness: How Drug Companies Are Turning Us All Into Patients.")
Does this mean every researcher who claims to be concerned about childhood obesity is an intellectual prostitute? Of course not. Even the members of organizations like the IOTF join these groups for complex reasons.
What should not fool us is the eminently respectable facade such groups manage to maintain. We should remember that, whether in science, literature, or life, the great social distance separating streetwalkers from trophy wives doesn't alter the fact that they're all in the same line of work.
All Campos can do is pull out the old Liberal reaction of name-calling. Not one sentence given to refuting the Coulter documented malaise of liberal religion.
This guy writes like a tranvestite hooker.
How in the world do you go from a rant about Ann Coulter to whining about obesity standards and drug companies.
Dude needs some Focusin.
But she shore is a QT PIE!
The Garden of Eden for Conservapervites...
Aren't you watching the game, instead of worrying about Coulter?
Not all writers are prostitutes, but all writers are narcissists...What a fruitcake. Plus, with these words, in a column he's written, pot meets kettle. Yeesh.
Agreed!:)
Not all writers are prostitutes, but all writers are narcissists...What a fruitcake. Plus, with these words, in a column he's written, pot meets kettle. Yeesh.
Prostitution, however, is a tricky business. I can attest that when she was an unknown law student, Coulter said outrageous things all the time, in class, in conversation, and in print. Was she merely laying the groundwork for selling her honor dear? It seems doubtful."
I agree with the author's point. Coulter has been saying outrageous things for as long as I've been listening to her, well before her first book. It is the way she is. She doesn't hold back. Like it (and most of the time I do) or not, that's Ann.
I feel that way about a Hillary! presidency./
Agree with you!
. . .even worse ". . .Campos offers. . .her size zero little black dress catering to a combination of ideological and erotic perversion that's disturbing to contemplate".
Wonder if he ever thought Hillary's black pants suits were 'ideologically disturbing'. .OR an 'erotic perversion'. . .
Think Campos reveals more of himself here than Ann Coulter.
That said. . . he would no doubt deny it. . .but he is dead on for Hillary. . .
I thought the word "prostitute" wasn't in the lefties' vocabulary.
I thought the word they used for that was "exotic dancer".
GO HEAT! (snort)
New York Time an august publication? You ought to be joking me!...august?
The ONLY august publication IMHO is "The Wall Street Journal" period!
New York Times is a rag/fish wrap/bird cage liner etc,etc,etc.
. . .Liberals do not believe ANYone; who does not share/promote their idiological line.. .deserves to speak.
Look at how they happily lip synch along with Cindy Sheehan. . .or maybe it is the other way around. . .
Oh well. . .so long as these Libs stay on the same page. . .and sing from the same song book. . .
"I thought the word "prostitute" wasn't in the lefties' vocabulary. I thought the word they used for that was "exotic dancer".
Look, first - it's 2 words. Second, they do use "exotic dancer" to describe a prostitute - they reserve the use of the word "prostitute" apparently to describe an opponent.
...and that's exotic professor to you!
ROFLMAO!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.