Posted on 01/31/2003 7:02:53 AM PST by rface
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:09:04 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
I have not been to Washington State,
but Sam talks about the bombs.
He lives through bad habits, shallow thinking, the Socialist lie.
The children of New York and Virginia and Pennsylvania have seen so much death
that death means nothing to them now.
They wait in line for parents.
They wait in line for friends.
Their eyes are black moons reflecting towers.
We've seen them a thousand times.
Soon, Sam Hamill will speak.
He will have nothing to say about torture, or WMD
or the death of thousands or threats to freedom and our way of life.
I will ignore Sam's books. I always do.
Because I can't bear to hear
the poison from his pen.
And the most wonderful collections are probably the two books of short stories bracketed by poems, Puck of Pook's Hill and Rewards and Fairies. Kipling himself said that people supposed those two books were written for children -- but they supposed wrong. Taken together they are a meditation on English history and destiny (in a larger sense the destiny of Western civilization), beautifully realized and as clearly detailed as miniatures. Those two books in an old hardcover edition live on my bedside table. Illustrated by Arthur Rackham of all people - I think he missed the point and H.R. Millar though not as good an artist qua artist did a better job.
Donn Byrne is another favorite of mine - his short stories are Irish countryside with a touch of the supernatural - and Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories (although I like his historical novels best). Also Lafcadio Hearn (the master of interpreting traditional Japanese culture to the west - I actually frightened a bunch of 7th grade boys telling some of his ghost stories :-) ), Giovanni Guareschi (the "Don Camillo" man), and of course Mark Twain. I don't like the Russians by and large -- I can't remember who said that Stendhal tells you more about war in five pages than all of War and Peace -- but I enjoy Turgenev. Scott Fitzgerald and Hemingway I cannot stand. Go figure.
But of course.
2500 civilians killed in Serbia are no cause for protest.
Yep, this is undeniably true. But those musicians composing music in a genuine sense will compose it none the less, not because they want to earn money or fame, and not because they're in any "team sport". You certainly know that as you come from generations of musicians. Inspired artists keep going and keep composing because it brings them joy beyond measure.
The "hundred year rule" weeds 'em out pretty effectively, and we're getting close on some of the early jazz now. It will be a little longer for rock. Many of your points are so valid, and I enjoy (I was going to say conversing, but the web doesn't allow that)--communicating with you. Music
Same here. Except that I think it takes a longer time for history to determine the fate of artists, and I think that some of the best artists are somehow ignored.And also, a lot of these artists are not blowing it out of their arses re the impending war. Many believe this is an unfortunately hurried role to take. I agree with them.
Most of the time, as you are aware, most artists of any kind are more interested in their stories or songs or pictures or sculptures. We don't make divisions among our fellow travelers. We just enjoy the art. And we don't understand why anyone, anywhere, can't enjoy that art. (Not to be confused with Twain's 'practicing the art'.) Take the time to consider your ancestors and the music they composed and played, and the music you composed and played. Do you really want to sacrifice your country and your freedom (to create, to procreate, whatever) based on a hunch?"The Tumbling Woman" has already been covered by a sheet. "Guernica" has been covered by a sheet as well.Various musical compositions were banned from radio after 9/11...why?
Also, why is the composition in this forum controlled?
If one is to cry in a corner,
For the love lost in a virulent rage,
Upset from the self hate of a loner,
Blame another for locking your cage.
Oblivious to the waves of the ocean
Ignorant of the darkness of men,
Pomposity, contempt is your motion,
In your butt I believe is your pen.
Because you are a fool before artist,
Thou a word smith is which you proclaim,
Jealousy, lust, and covetous
Is what hinders your white horse to lame.
Though I hate you stupid F#$$en liberals with passion,
I move through the world with one thought,
That your philosophy is pure self-destruction,
Darwinism is proved but your not.
I used to earn my living making quick judgments of jurors and witnesses (I was a civil litigation attorney, defending trucking companies, insurance companies, small businessmen, etc.) with a lot at stake. My assessment of President Bush is that he's trustworthy and has displayed good judgment in many areas. He doesn't remind me of slugs or maggots (like a certain former Prez., or, since Jimmah's latest antics, two.) He has chosen competent and qualified people for his team.
We can NOT know all the reasons for going to war. If you and I know them, everybody knows them, and that would compromise too many intelligence assets (both hardware and humint) just to satisfy our curiosity. In other words, we have no "need to know" sufficient to justify risking the lives of informants or the integrity of intelligence methods (just like Churchill with "Enigma" or the U.S. with the Japanese code.)
The bottom line is that we have to trust the President and his Cabinet when they say they have hard evidence. They can only show us what they can afford to lose.
I think artists run largely on emotion and feelings rather than logical analysis (because of the field they are in - my mother is a prime example. Incredibly talented dancer but there are so many everyday things she knows NOTHING about - and what's more she doesn't care!) So naturally these poets are annoyed because they don't understand the practical necessities of modern warfare -- all they know is that they DON'T know, and they don't like that, it offends them on some basic gut level.
As for "Tumbling Woman", I think it's a tour de force and beautifully executed. The artist and his sponsors, however, committed a horribly unfeeling and probably unforgiveable wrong by placing it in Rockefeller Plaza so soon after 9-11, while the ruins of the WTC were still smoking, and where survivors and next-of-kin couldn't help but see it. THAT was the problem, not its content. It was as though Picasso had gone to Guernica a few days after the bombing and forced the survivors to look at his painting.
As for "hurried", if the French had hurried a little when Hitler marched into the Rhineland, much trouble could have been avoided. Now we're looking at 12 years already, and it's a "pay me now or pay me later" situation. The longer we wait the bigger the bill - and it may come due in nukes if we wait too long.
Now, to me, the word most important here is not TRUST, but REASONABLE. I find very little reason in the current administration. I've never felt this way before about an American administration. Many people feel the same way.
I used to earn my living making quick judgments of jurors and witnesses (I was a civil litigation attorney, defending trucking companies, insurance companies, small businessmen, etc.) with a lot at stake. My assessment of President Bush is that he's trustworthy and has displayed good judgment in many areas.
In terms of foreign policy, he's a nightmare. He wasn't exactly a well-traveled guy before assuming the presidency--I'm sure you're aware of that. I would like to feel as confident as you do in this respect, but I simply can't. So in light of your experience of making quick judgments, you might want to consider taking your time even more in these dark days. Take your time before making judgments.
He doesn't remind me of slugs or maggots (like a certain former Prez., or, since Jimmah's latest antics, two.) He has chosen competent and qualified people for his team.
You've lost me a bit here--"slugs, maggots, jimmah." ?? As for the "team" aspect, let me say this here: I am sick and tired of the goddam TEAM. Everything in this culture has to do with TEAMS, sports, TEAM LEADS, WINNING, all of that. It is really disgusting these days. Life is not a football game. Business isn't either. The whores of politics may make use of this--I suppose that's up to them.
We can NOT know all the reasons for going to war. If you and I know them, everybody knows them, and that would compromise too many intelligence assets (both hardware and humint) just to satisfy our curiosity. In other words, we have no "need to know" sufficient to justify risking the lives of informants or the integrity of intelligence methods (just like Churchill with "Enigma" or the U.S. with the Japanese code.)
Nobody is asking for the equivalent of the Japanese code. And no one is insisting that U.S. intelligence (or anyone else's) be compromised. But there are intelligent people asking for real reasons for such a war when heavy pressure on Iraq, in the forms of deterrance and inspections could yield some real results. The U.N. now is proposing to send in its troops. Let them go and do what they have to do. We have other things (like terrorism!) we have to deal with now.
The bottom line is that we have to trust the President and his Cabinet when they say they have hard evidence. They can only show us what they can afford to lose.
So said communists and fascists in days gone by. Don't be a fool!
I think artists run largely on emotion and feelings rather than logical analysis (because of the field they are in - my mother is a prime example. Incredibly talented dancer but there are so many everyday things she knows NOTHING about - and what's more she doesn't care!) So naturally these poets are annoyed because they don't understand the practical necessities of modern warfare -- all they know is that they DON'T know, and they don't like that, it offends them on some basic gut level.
This is another party line. Again, I'm not a member of any political party, but I see the "emotion vs. fact" garbage over and over again. In truth, nobody can say whether or not people are acting out of fact or out of emotion, because in truth, they act out of both on all sides. If anything, I see people on the Right acting more emotionally than those of the "Left" because there is often religion and regionalism involved. Think about it.
As for "Tumbling Woman", I think it's a tour de force and beautifully executed.
I'm so glad you like it. I mean this.
The artist and his sponsors, however, committed a horribly unfeeling and probably unforgiveable wrong by placing it in Rockefeller Plaza so soon after 9-11, while the ruins of the WTC were still smoking, and where survivors and next-of-kin couldn't help but see it. THAT was the problem, not its content. It was as though Picasso had gone to Guernica a few days after the bombing and forced the survivors to look at his painting.
The artist is my cousin. Our mothers are sisters. He didn't have "sponsors." The only time any unrest occurred was after some typical columnist in the New York Post voiced objections ad infinitum. And to be honest, the ruins of the WTC were not still smoking a year later. Let's be honest about this. This happened THE SEPTEMBER BEFORE, over a year after the distaster happened. Still smoking--indeed!
And let's look at Guernica, and the way in which the U.S. and associated media insisted on its being covered up when Powell did his press conference at the U.N. How crazy was that?
As for "hurried", if the French had hurried a little when Hitler marched into the Rhineland, much trouble could have been avoided. Now we're looking at 12 years already, and it's a "pay me now or pay me later" situation. The longer we wait the bigger the bill - and it may come due in nukes if we wait too long
But we can't base our war policy on "ifs" or "mights" or anything like that. It's too risky and fatal. NO PREEMPTIVE STRIKES.
My opinion of these poets IS political, and I think they are flaming idiots to have turned this event into a political statement.
Cheap shot. Few recent presidents have had much direct foreign policy experience - they have mostly been state governors, who by definition have little if any. I think the last president elected from the Senate was Kennedy.
I would like to feel as confident as you do in this respect, but I simply can't.
Why not? Specifics? You say he's a "nightmare", but you don't say why.
So in light of your experience of making quick judgments, you might want to consider taking your time even more in these dark days. Take your time before making judgments.
I do. I have followed politics since the early 60s, when I was old enough to observe my parents - who were what I would call progressive Southern Democrats at the time. They are now Southern conservatives without a party, the national party left them. But dad was active in local campaigns for something like 40 years, as was I for a shorter time (before kids and job obligations took over.) I was active from the mid-70s myself, and continue to follow politics keenly. I personally know a good number of folks who served in the Reagan and first Bush administrations. Before the election they had varying opinions of the current President's ability to handle the job, but all the doubters have concluded that either he has "grown in the job" or he just had it all along and they didn't recognize it.
"Slugs - maggots - Jimmah" was first of all my reference to former president Clinton, who from the very first time I saw him gave me an absolutely shuddery feeling of repulsion. I cannot understand the folks who rave about his "charisma" - I have even seen him in person and it's no different. His activities in office (aside from his juvenile sexual behavior) such as lying under oath, taking Chinese bribes, petty revenge upon his enemies or those who were simply in his way, etc. etc. simply reinforced my initial bad feelings about him. "Jimmah" is of course former president Carter, the only president I feel that I know well on a personal basis. He was a terrible governor, he was an even worse president, but until his recent shenanigans doing freelance diplomacy against the interests of the United States (and he did it to Clinton as well as to Bush and I didn't like it then either) and accepting a Nobel Prize given to him under false pretences publicly acknowledged by members of the committee, I thought he was a decent man who had just been promoted to his level of incompetence in accordance with the Peter Principle. But in light of recent events, I've revised my opinion: he's either a pompous self-promoting ass or an evil man; I hope the former.
I am sick and tired of the goddam TEAM.
Exactly what I meant by emotion over reason. Think! Given the complexity of modern government, there is absolutely no way that a President can do his job without a tremendous number of helpers, consultants, delegates (see, I'm avoiding the "team" analogy since it bothers you.) The most recent president gave a good impression of doing this, since he had an eidetic memory and could spout endless facts and figures. But not only were many of his facts and figures out and out lies (e.g. the church burnings in Arkansas, "worst economy in 50 years", etc.) he seemed to be unable to delegate or to reach a decision, hence the major foreign policy lapses of the last administration (such as refusing Bin Laden when he was offered up on a platter by the Sudan).
President Bush's background in business (a Harvard MBA is no picnic and they don't hand them out for anything but hard work) would seem to assist him in identifying those best able to handle various areas of expertise and in managing those people once he has them on board, since that is exactly what a good CEO does. That's all I meant by use of the analogy you dislike. Do you have specific objections to those people he has chosen?
Nobody is asking for the equivalent of the Japanese code. And no one is insisting that U.S. intelligence (or anyone else's) be compromised. But there are intelligent people asking for real reasons for such a war when heavy pressure on Iraq, in the forms of deterrance and inspections could yield some real results. The U.N. now is proposing to send in its troops. Let them go and do what they have to do. We have other things (like terrorism!) we have to deal with now.
This is such circular logic and so self-contradictory, that it's hard to pick out a place to dive in and untangle it. Did you listen to Secy of State Powell's speech? He specifically said that he WAS compromising certain aspects of intelligence. Just as Osama bin Laden quit using satellite phones when it was disclosed that we were monitoring them, so the discussions re concealing WMDs over phone lines will cease forthwith (and, incidentally, the officers whose voices were heard on the line are probably dead.) Any further provision of "real reasons" would involve still more compromising of intelligence. So you ARE asking for just that. As far as "yielding real results", the actual statement of Inspector Blix (as opposed to the gloss put on it by Reuters) is clear that without cooperation from Iraq inspections will go nowhere no matter how many inspectors are put on the job, and according to Blix there is no cooperation at this time. As for "deterrence", how do you propose to deter without the use of force? Sanctions have been tried for 12 years, without any effect on the arms buildup by Saddam. And, according to Powell, terrorism is exactly what we're dealing with here. Afghanistan has been removed as a terrorist base, and Iraq is next. As Powell detailed, known al-Queda agents are operating within northeastern Iraq and moving in and out of Baghdad, something that does not happen in a dictatorship without the full knowledge and consent of the dictator.
So said communists and fascists in days gone by. Don't be a fool!
(Re disclosing too much intelligence). Clinton got quite a number of U.S. agents and friends killed by blowing their cover, in northern Iraq and elsewhere. It has nothing to do with communism or fascism, and everything to do with protecting sources. It's the same principle that applies with witnesses and confidential sources of all kinds - don't bite the hand that feeds you, and don't get the owner of said hand killed. By its nature this entire practice is done secretively, and unless you adhere to the line of the pre-WWII British defence minister who opined, "Gentlemen do not read one another's mail," you must realise the necessity of this.
As for "Tumbling Woman", you should know that the ruins continued to smoke and emit dust until they were completely cleared, which was eight months and nineteen days after the attack. Not quite a year, maybe, but I wasn't being precise. It was still too soon, according to New Yorkers that I have spoken with (including my son's testing psychologist, who lost her brother in Tower 1). The point is not the exact date or time, or whether everybody feels that way, or whether some over-zealous columnist publicized it -- just that hostility to the work was due to abraded feelings and grief, not to some conspiracy of censorship as you suggested.
But we can't base our war policy on "ifs" or "mights" or anything like that. It's too risky and fatal. NO PREEMPTIVE STRIKES.
But we MUST base our reaction to events (particularly military strategic events) on what we have learned from past events. When Hitler occupied the Rhineland, the German Army had barely begun its massive clandestine buildup. At that time, France alone had a much larger military and the means to demand he leave, and failing that to toss him out. But Hitler counted on France and Britain still being war-weary from WWI, and on the chorus of die-hard pacifists in both countries. He was a supreme politician (though thankfully a lousy general) and he counted correctly. The intervening years of appeasement and dithering allowed Germany to build the Wehrmacht, and meant many more years of war and many more lives of Allied soldiers, not to mention all those who perished in the "Final Solution".
And, technically speaking, the United States' action against Germany WAS a "preemptive strike". Germany had not attacked America, and never did commit any attack on American soil (unless you count that abortive submarine raid on Long Island that didn't amount to much.)
Wow. Didn't mean to write a dissertation. But, so it goes.
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.