Dr. Marc Leeds, PhD, an English teacher and old friend of mine, albeit 30 years my junior, recently asked me what he might say to his students about the writers Arthur Miller and Susan Sontag, both of whom had died very recently, both friends of mine. I said that the fact of Miller’s having been widely and deeply mourned as… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (55)Page 1 of 1 pagesThank you, Mr. Vonnegut, for reminding us that civilization needs art, and that writing connects us through time and space. Maybe there is hope for the readers…
Posted by Sian on Mar 3, 2005 at 9:35 AM And that 80% really are the problem aren’t they?
You know the most dangerous thing about the 80% is that they can be so easily convinced that they’re doing the work of the 10% merciful—at least that’s what I see today.
http://craicpipe.blogspot.com/
Posted by craichead on Mar 3, 2005 at 10:35 AM I’m conflicted: Vonnegut is by far my favorite author of fiction, yet his politics make me want to puke.
Posted by J Craig on Mar 4, 2005 at 12:01 PM In many ways Kurt reminds me of Orwell in that Orwell was an avowed socialist his entire life, yet 1984 and Animal Farm very definitely seem to be along the lines of what happens when you place the power for social provision in the hands of government: one rigid class system is replaced with another that’s worse.
I have trouble getting over the irony sometimes of pointing out how evil and coercive government can be on the one hand and then wishing they’d take over our health care on the other!
Hilary says that it takes a village to raise a child which is sort of what Kurt’s saying here I guess and in some ways I agree. However there is not village. The federal gov’t sure as hell ain’t one! If we want to raise our children in a village we have to create a new one WITHIN our civilization. That’s what Jesus seemed to be saying anyway.
http://craicpipe.blogspot.com/
Posted by craichead on Mar 4, 2005 at 12:20 PM “I’m conflicted: Vonnegut is by far my favorite author of fiction, yet his politics make me want to puke.”
It’s sad that you’ve read Mr. Vonnegut’s work but have failed to grasp that someone who has witnessed the greatest horrors government can inflict on humanity, might be disposed to desire a government that actually cares for humanity. The goal of Socialism has always been to extend the benefits and protection of society to all of it’s members, not just the rich - why this should be viewed as nauseating is mystifying, to say the least.
I recommend that you avoid irony and satire in the future, as your inability to detect these items may lead to further confusion.
Posted by Barry Miller on Mar 4, 2005 at 7:17 PM “I’m conflicted: Vonnegut is by far my favorite author of fiction, yet his politics make me want to puke.”
I suggest you seriously revaluate your own politics if you have this strong a conflict. Perhaps, the way you have been instructed to feel/think and the way you actually do are not one in the same.
Posted by Disseminator on Mar 5, 2005 at 1:54 PM The funny thing for me is: we can all be viewed as being on both 10%s.
The happy thing for me is: Mr. Vonnegut is so brilliant, he can type a fart and we’ll gladly try to decipher meaning or value from it.
The sad thing for me is: Few of us really hug each other anymore.
And the great thing for you is: i’m gonna shut up now.
Posted by Surge on Mar 5, 2005 at 3:20 PM “The goal of Socialism has always been to extend the benefits and protection of society to all of it’s members, not just the rich”
Then it sounds like socialists and I have that in common, but we just disagree on how to get there.
“why this should be viewed as nauseating is mystifying, to say the least.”
The ideal is nice. But to the degree that I’ve been able to surmise how exactly he’d like to get there, it’s awfully naive for such an intelligent guy.
But he’s one of the funniest writers around! Hey, I’m a huge fan of movies too, but the politics of most of Hollywood makes me feel just as sick.
Posted by J Craig on Mar 6, 2005 at 2:07 PM “I suggest you seriously revaluate your own politics if you have this strong a conflict.”
Nope. Not necessary. His writing is just entertainment to me. My politics are important.
Posted by J Craig on Mar 6, 2005 at 2:09 PM J Craig
On second thought don’t revaluate your politics. In fact don’t give anything a second thought. Never question your preconceived notions. Never challenge yourself to think in a different way. Be content with what you know or think you know.
Posted by Disseminator on Mar 6, 2005 at 6:53 PM Dear Disseminator,
“On second thought don’t revaluate your politics. In fact don’t give anything a second thought. Never question your preconceived notions. Never challenge yourself to think in a different way. Be content with what you know or think you know.”
You sound like you’re really big on giving things second thoughts. As such a bigh “second thinker”, it’s no surprise you have such high expectations of others.
As you say, be content with what you know or think you know.
Sincerely,
J Craig
Posted by J Craig on Mar 6, 2005 at 9:13 PM To whom it may concern,
This is now my favorite fringe left website. I shall hang around here for some time.
Sincerely,
J Craig
Posted by J Craig on Mar 6, 2005 at 9:18 PM I never understood why these things always need to degnerate into defensive macho posturing and name-calling. Vonnegut might be right or wrong… can’t we have a rational exchange over this?
J Craig, you could only have been seeking to provocate posting as you did, claiming that KV’s politics make you want to puke w/o mentioning any specific points of contention or providing your opposing viewpoint. So may I ask… what particular aspects of Vonnegut’s politics revealed in this short piece do you take issue with? Why are these ideas so offensive to you?
It also seems somewhat unfair to label Vonnegut as “just entertainment”. I mean Stephen King is just entertainment (no offense, I like King). Vonnegut’s political and philosophical leanings are laid pretty bare in his novels. It seems difficult to imagine anyone enjoying his books while being so opposed to his message. I mean did you enjoy “God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater”? I imagine that one would be particularly nauseating for you… at least as compared to this rather tame article.
Posted by Bernard on Mar 7, 2005 at 3:13 AM Yeah I hate when people stop listening and considering and degenerate into defensiveness. Seems to happen a lot these days.
Like Mr Craig, I agree with Kurt on his desire to live in a more humane world and agree that it’s time to begin considering new ways to acheive that. Am I the only one who finds it ironic in one sentence to claim the potential for evil of ANY government and its ultimately coercive means, then in the next sentence to lament that this coercive evil also won’t manage my healthcare for me?
Of course the only other alternative bandied about these days is the “every man for himself” philosophy of free market consumerism. There is a middle road to consider such as the construction of cooperatives to provide health care, housing, daycare and nearly every sort of big ticket financial needs we have. Soemthing to consider I think.
I compare Kurt to Orwell a lot mostly because of the paradox that I see in them—the struggle to resolve the idea of a more humane world against the resolution of what seems to me to be simply the creation of a new class based system.
But there’s a few things I think to keep in mind about today:
1. Most of the liberal/conservative conflict we see in our country today could be broken down into the philosophical conflict of Marxism vs Objectivism. Think about it like that and read those things and you may find a good middle road by using what was right about both things while casting off what was wrong.
2. We don’t live in a capitalist world any more. We live in a corporatist world. There’s a big difference and it’s important to understand that both left and right gain immensely from this system and as such BOTH sides have broken down into nothing more than a battle for political power, regardless of the moral superiority claimed by either side. This is something Mr Orwell seemed to see coming.
http://craicpipe.blogspot.com/
Posted by craichead on Mar 7, 2005 at 6:21 AM Vonnegut’s work is like socialism, best appreciated as a juvenile.
Posted by Ice nine on Mar 7, 2005 at 7:26 AM J. Craig writes:
“His writing is just entertainment to me. My politics are important.”
I suggest you have it backwards:
Writing is important.
Politics is entertainment.
Posted by R Thornton on Mar 7, 2005 at 7:28 AM Dear Bernard,
I had no problem with this particular piece. I just took this opportunity to speak up. So I’ll comment on a different ITT piece of his:
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/the_end_is_near/
“we…have now all but destroyed this once salubrious planet as a life-support system in fewer than 200 years, mainly by making thermodynamic whoopee with fossil fuels.”
“We have squandered our planet’s resources, including air and water, as though there were no tomorrow, so now there isn’t going to be one.”
Prior to reading his work here at ITT, I had read only his fiction. I understood his politics, but I never would have thought him to be such an alarmist prone to hyperbole on serious matters.
“It also seems somewhat unfair to label Vonnegut as ‘just entertainment’.”
I didn’t say he is just entertainment. I said he’s just entertainment to me. There’s nothing unfair about that. It is a fact. To me, he is just entertainment.
“It seems difficult to imagine anyone enjoying his books while being so opposed to his message.”
I’ve read Deadeye Dick, Player Piano, Breakfast of Champions, Slaughterhouse-Five, Cat’s Cradle, Galapagos, Sirens of Titan, and Welcome to the Monkey House. I didn’t really care much for Galapagos. Slaughterhouse-Five was fine. Player Piano was very entertaining. Deadeye Dick, Breakfast of Champions, Cat’s Cradle and Sirens of Titan are my four favorite books. Not my four favorite Vonnegut books. My four favorite books. I’m not opposed to all of his message, or even most of it. I’m opposed to what it appears would be his real world policy solutions.
A lot of people that frequent this website think we need greater prosperity. So do I. We agree on the message, but we’re at polar opposites on the policy needed to get there.
Sincerely,
J Craig
Posted by J Craig on Mar 7, 2005 at 10:12 AM Odd how a tribute to Sontag and Miller has been hijacked into a deconstruction of Vonnegut.
Posted by John Powers on Mar 7, 2005 at 10:31 AM Dear R Thornton,
His writing has little if any tangible effect on the real world. Politics does. For example, it’s hard to name a writer in the last 25 years that has had a bigger tangible effect on the world than Ronald Reagan (whether you agreed with Reagan or not, he had a substantial effect).
Sincerely,
J Craig
Posted by J Craig on Mar 7, 2005 at 10:33 AM J Craig-
Read this if you’d like:
http://craicpipe.blogspot.com/2005/02/whats-gone-wrong-with-liberalism.html#comm ments
Posted by craichead on Mar 7, 2005 at 10:42 AM J Craig
I am glad this is now your favorite website. Please keep coming back. But is it too much to ask for you to contribute something that isn’t simply meant to provoke others. Or could you possibly write something that exposes your politics so someone might actually be able to comment on them (as Bernard writes). Coming up with something a little more in depth than “his politics make me want to puke” might be a good start. I understand you are afraid to do this because that would leave you open to real attacks on your beliefs, as opposed to the petty squabble we are now engaged in.
But I know you will not do this (prove me wrong). You are unable to put yourself in a vulnerable position, just as you are unable to challenge your current beliefs (whatever they may be). You are afraid. You lack the balls to put your ideas out there for other people to criticize and the brains to articulate them. Why else would you go onto a left leaning site, which you obviously disagree with, yet only manage to spit slurs.
By the way, don’t try and be cute by pointing out the irony of me spewing slurs at you. You came to a left leaning site to instigate and this is what you get. If you go to Yankee stadium with a Red Sox cap on don’t be surprised if someone throws a beer on you. Not that you are worth the $7, but still.
Respond to this in a comment longer than a few blurbs. Or respond the way you have been responding and prove me right.
And to R Thornton
Right on!!! I wish I could have put it that well.
Posted by Disseminator on Mar 7, 2005 at 11:06 AM Dear Disseminator,
“But is it too much to ask for you to contribute something that isn’t simply meant to provoke others.”
You asked me to tell you what about his writing I have a problem with. I gave you a few quotes. Why no comment on that?
“You are afraid. You lack the balls to put your ideas out there for other people to criticize and the brains to articulate them.”Are you kidding? You think this Vonnegut article is the only place I’ve been speaking? Check out the “Midwest Union Rollback” and “Debtor Nation” strings. It’s quite lively at “Midwest Union Rollback.”
Beyond that, name the issue! I’ll be glad to talk about it.
Sincerely,
J Craig
Posted by J Craig on Mar 7, 2005 at 11:19 AM I find his view on the environment far from hyperbole. True nobody knows exactly when all our resources will run out, but how could anyone deny that our current way of life is unsustainable. It is hardly alarmist to say we need to rethink our current way of life it has us on a collision course.
Oil has already become a problem. Water will become a problem in this century. We use too much of it to raise livestock and their feed. We are depleting the ocean. We are polluting our air and water.
It is naive to think this problem will not occur, or that we can fix it if they do. The common response I hear when discussing the water problem is desalinization plants. Is that what we must come to? Getting water from filtration plants?
Soylent Green anyone?
Posted by Disseminator on Mar 7, 2005 at 11:37 AM J Craig
I don’t know where else you have been speaking and frankly I don’t care. If all you can do is pull up a quote and then say you disagree with it that is worthless. I want to hear how you arrived at your opinion. I want to hear your reasoning. I have heard your opinion. Make an argument and support it. Don’t just jump to your conclusion.
Posted by Disseminator on Mar 7, 2005 at 11:47 AM Dear Disseminator,
“It is hardly alarmist to say we need to rethink our current way of life”
That’s a reasonable comment. This is alarmist hyperbole:
“And nobody can do a thing about it. It’s too late in the game. Don’t spoil the party, but here’s the truth: We have squandered our planet’s resources, including air and water, as though there were no tomorrow, so now there isn’t going to be one.”
There is nothing we can do. There isn’t going to be a tomorrow. What the hell has he been reading?
Vonnegut, the alarmist.
“Oil has already become a problem. Water will become a problem in this century. We use too much of it to raise livestock and their feed. We are depleting the ocean. We are polluting our air and water.”
Those are some strong assertions. I don’t know that any of it is the case. On the energy issue, supply and demand will handle it. If and as oil becomes more and more scarce, alternative and cleaner energies become viable. For example, at prices around where they are now, Canada’s oil sands have become profitable. Oil prices may rise, but we’ll be using oil as a primary source of energy for the next hundred years based on reasonable estimates of demand (which will grow) and the numbers of proven and probable reserves along with unconventional but viable sources such as the oil sands in Canada and the oil clay in Venezuela. France thrives on nuclear energy. Wind energy is costly, but it will become more viable as energy prices rise. We are awash in coal in the U.S.
Sincerely,
J Craig
Posted by J Craig on Mar 7, 2005 at 12:03 PM Dear Disseminator,
“I don’t know where else you have been speaking and frankly I don’t care.”
You should know, as I just told you, and I don’t care that you don’t care. I didn’t mention it because I thought you might care. I mentioned it to controvert your assertion. You asserted that I don’t have the balls to put my ideas out there, and I controverted your assertion with references to this very website, where I have “put my ideas out there.”
Sincerely,
J Craig
Posted by J Craig on Mar 7, 2005 at 12:34 PM J Craig
Good, finally real discussion. I apologize for the lengths I had to go to get it out of you.
First I don’t know when oil will run out, but it will. It is finite and we must move to alternative sources soon. Otherwise we won’t have enough oil to manufacture all the synthetics which we have also become depenent on. Much of the remaining oil on the planet is difficult to extract (as you stated). This makes things increasingly difficult.
It takes somewhere around ten pounds of grain to produce one pound of beef. Now think about how much meat americans eat. This is not my area of expertise, but essentially this is why the water table is so low and why water may be a problem soon. I think anyone will tell you we are over fishing the oceans. As clean as some waterways have become over the past few years, we still dump all sorts of things into the water. A lot of this comes from poorly regulated coal burning plants which produce a lot of mercury.
But, I think the most basic problem is that the world population is out of control and always has been. At some point the earth will not be able to support everyone. And that time will come sooner, not later.
Posted by Disseminator on Mar 7, 2005 at 1:11 PM Dear Disseminator,
“I apologize for the lengths I had to go to get it out of you.”
No offense, but blow it out your ass. You didn’t drag anything out of me. I’ve been doing this at this website for at least a week now and elsewhere for years.
I think market forces will work out the problems you refer to regarding food and water, as it will with energy. As resources become more scarce, the market rations these resources. That’s all prices are: a reflection of scarcity. Vonnegut the alarmist makes it sound as if there is nothing that can be done, period. It’s just too late.
Regarding population, I’m aware of two distinct purported problems: excessive growth in less developed countries, but slow growth in the developed world, particularly Japan and much of Europe. If and when the stewards of less developed countries manage to implement economic systems that tend to the material interests of their people, I think the continuing spread and affordability of birth control along with the rational economic compulsion to have fewer children will take care of the population problem.
Really, no offense with the blow it out your ass comment.
Sincerely,
J Craig
Posted by J Craig on Mar 7, 2005 at 1:25 PM “You didn’t drag anything out of me. I’ve been doing this at this website for at least a week now and elsewhere for years.” Yes I did drag something out of you I got you to respond in something broader than “Vonnegut makes me want to puke.” But anyway, good for you. I am glad to see you get a kick out of spitting venom on liberal websites. Get a hobby, I have already wasted so much of my time on you today I can’t imagine how much time you waste on these things.
You call socialism idealistic (and it is), but you are equally idealistic when you talk about how the forces of capitalism will save us from global collapse. It is not only a matter of economics. Rationing has its limits. No matter how much you ration a loaf of bread at some point you have eaten the whole thing. This is what I meant when I said you should question the way you look at things. The earth has its own system that does not always coincide with capitalism. Try to look at the world through a different lense.
Yes as countries become more industrialized their population growth tapers off. But, when this happens we will still be left with (at least by most current estimates) 8 billion people. When the population gets out of control their will be famine. A lot of people will die, their will be chaos.
this is my last exchange with you. you have dragged me down into the mud for too long. a word of advice: read a little more critically. you have a habit of responding to half a comment and then responding to the other half in a separate post. this exposes you as someone who is rushed, does not pay attention, and only wants to speak, not listen.
Posted by Disseminator on Mar 7, 2005 at 2:35 PM Dear Disseminator,
“Yes I did drag something out of you I got you to respond in something broader than “Vonnegut makes me want to puke.””
Are you under the impression that I was holding back until you came along? Hardly.
“I am glad to see you get a kick out of spitting venom on liberal websites.”
What venom? Read what I’ve written very closely. I take much more venom than I give. For the most part, I give reason and get venom. Here’s about all the venom I’ve offered: “It makes me want to puke” and “blow it out your ass.” And that’s out of probably 5,000 words in the last week or so.
“No matter how much you ration a loaf of bread at some point you have eaten the whole thing.”
And yet we manage to produce more. Bad example. What have we consumed all of? Is there anything we’ve ever wanted so much and couldn’t live without that we consumed all of? Yet you and Vonnegut seem to know this is just around the corner with oil, water and clean air.
“Yes as countries become more industrialized their population growth tapers off. But, when this happens we will still be left with (at least by most current estimates) 8 billion people. When the population gets out of control their will be famine. A lot of people will die, their will be chaos.”
When will this happen? When will the chaos begin? I would bet in 1979 you would have been one to predict it to occur before 2000.
“this is my last exchange with you.”
Is it? I’ve dragged you into rational discussion. it just seems like mud to you cause you’re not enjoying how it is going. Why don’t you cut and paste a few of my “mud” comments?
“you have a habit of responding to half a comment and then responding to the other half in a separate post.”
Give me an example.
Sincerely,
J Craig
Posted by J Craig on Mar 7, 2005 at 3:01 PM V’s politics aren’t the problem, it’s half-assed unfinished “articles” like the one above that make me want to puke.
He knows very well that In These Times will continue to publish whatever excrement he produces for them.
Posted by giu on Mar 7, 2005 at 5:16 PM Thank you for another entertaining article,I learn something new from you each time I read your works.May you live a thousand years.
Hi Ho.
Posted by wwoods on Mar 8, 2005 at 12:20 PM V’s writing stands on its own of course…
I am reminded by another of my favorite authors who has a character reflect, “That we are capable only of being what we are remains our
unforgivable sin.”
Posted by Paulimorph on Mar 8, 2005 at 4:30 PM Dear Everyone
(and that includes J Craig and the Dissemintor),does anyone ever realize how we could all be flinging flinging poo and stuff at each other like this, and Mr. Vonnegut could just as well be laughing his head off on us?
Pretty much like what God might be doing right now with the way the human race is going.
Thank you.
Posted by putingtikbalang on Mar 9, 2005 at 7:55 AM J Craig, if you are not alarmed by what has happened to our environment in the last 50 years, you ain’t looking too closely.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Cheers.
Posted by Rob G on Mar 9, 2005 at 8:55 AM Putingtikbalang
Yeah, I think that is why I stopped. I get carried away sometimes and I wish I would have stopped sooner. Also, Rob G, right on man.
Posted by Disseminator on Mar 9, 2005 at 1:44 PM Vonnegut is a brilliant writer, but his remarks above are lazy and uninteresting.
Posted by Rodney Welch on Mar 10, 2005 at 8:55 PM Which brings us to the age-old question of whether an artist’s politics or personal life matters at all. What did Arthur Miller’s marriage to Marilyn Monroe bring to the literary table? For that matter, do Mr. Vonnegut’s polemics in this forum diminish the genius of his novels?
On the other end of the spectrum you have V.S Naipaul’s dreadful bitching about colonial peoples. Didn’t prevent him from winning a Nobel, did it?
Posted by CAM on Mar 11, 2005 at 5:10 PM Dear Mr. Vonnegut:
thanks for your insights on two of the most important authors I have ever read.
Posted by Sophi Z Good on Mar 11, 2005 at 6:41 PM What on earth does this article have to do with Vonnegut’s politics? The people who post all these negative comments really need to go find something better to do, their comments add nothing to the discussion. I’m sure they have something else boring and pathetic they could be doing, and ought to occupy themselves with it.
Posted by Ryan Conover on Mar 12, 2005 at 2:09 PM J Craig--
Market forces are real, and may, even function to leaven the excesses you choose to characterize as hyperbole.
A caveat being that those market forces exist in a pure, open, and unfettered market system. In our present condition of transnational oligarchal domination of economies, such is not the case. The fix is in as it were. Might it be suggested that you pontificate a little less and devote a few more moments cracking open a history book or two on the Gilded Age of the Robber Barons. “Those who don’t know history are...”Regards
J Hoover Bushwah
Posted by J Hoover Bushwah on Mar 13, 2005 at 11:29 PM “What on earth does this article have to do with Vonnegut’s politics?”
There are those who believe Huckleberry Finn is about a boy and a raft. Mahalo.
The Crucible, about wizards, and Slaughter House Five, luminous spaghetti--- Indeed!
In his autobiography, Mark Twain confessed; “I have always preached....If the humor came of its own accord and uninvited, I have allowed it a place in my sermon, but I was not writing the sermon for the sake of humor.”
Miss the message and stumble again. Thus it is that Twain’s ‘A Greeting From The Nineteenth To The Twentieth Century’ resounds with greater relevance a hundred years later:
“ I bring you the stately nation named Christendom, returning, bedraggled, besmirched, and dishonored, from pirate raids in Kiao-Chou, Manchuria, South Africa, and the Philippines, with her soul full of meanness, her pocket full of boodle, and her mouth full of hypocrisies. Give her soap and towel, but hide the looking glass.”In reply to the initial question, everything.
Peace, where’s the profit in that?
G Ronby
Posted by G Ronby on Mar 14, 2005 at 7:40 AM Oh boy, you sure got me Ronby, how could I have missed all that? Idiot. Continue to enjoy hearing yourself speak.
Posted by Ryan Conover on Mar 14, 2005 at 11:49 AM “Peace, where’s the profit in that?”
So true. Profiteers of war and lethal science are raking it in, but war-torn countries aren’t havens of upbeat economies. Peace is a necessary ingredient for prosperity.
How long can arms manufacturers export death without the rooster coming home to roost?The irony is just too deep, Vonnegut’s specialty.
(ps. I think G Ronby was just reflecting on the question philosophically, not trying to put you down, Ryan.)
Posted by pick of the litter on Mar 14, 2005 at 1:47 PM Such scathing vitriol.
Out of morbid curiosity, how does one intelligently discuss the writings of Miller, Sontag, and Vonnegut, and at the same time, avoid the political ramifications of their work?
We are in agreement on one thing--- “The people who post all these negative comments really need to go find something better to do.”
Peace, where’s the profit in that?
G Ronby
Posted by G Ronby on Mar 14, 2005 at 1:53 PM Mahalo to you, pick of the litter.
Thank you for getting it.
G Ronby
Posted by G Ronby on Mar 14, 2005 at 1:57 PM Were it not for the occasional quippy commentary from Kurt, I can’t say that I would remain for very long a bona fide ITT subscriber, even though published of such thought provoking writers in my kind of town, Chicago. But then, wherever such noble vestiges evolve in description from a fringe lunatic as “fringe,” then here, too, shall I troll - for there’s no place quite like home.
“Let the dead eat the dead. Let us living ones dance about the rim of the crater, a last expiring
dance. But a dance!”—Henry Miller, ‘Tropic of Cancer,’ 1934Author, L. Frank Baum wrote: “There’s no place like home.” But then again, Baum once wrote
editorial sermons calling for the extermination of the Native American Indian. And so, if home is
where the heart is, then bury my heart at Wounded Knee. Their sins were unforgiven.No one knew better than Arthur Miller the unforgivable sins of Elia Kazan (and Ronald Reagan)
and yet years after the McCarthy hearings, Miller did team with Kazan for ‘After The Fall’ and
Reagan pulled the old switcheroo and became president as a Republican. And although Kazan
received his Lifetime Achievement Award at the Oscars, it was not without painful controversy
and, likewise, the legacy of Ronald Reagan—at the other end of the political spectrum.In Susan Sontag’s deconstruction of Leni Riefenstahl (’Fascinating Fascism’), she points out
how proscribed figures can find redemption through a turning of the cultural wheel: how a liberal
society settles incongruence “by waiting for cycles of taste to distill out of the controversy.”
Time doesn’t really heal all wounds, there’s always going to be scar tissue, but it’s amazing
what a little modern hocus-pocus (propaganda) can do for the complexion - particularly among
that 80% previously mentioned.Henry Miller
http://www.levity.com/corduroy/millerh.htmMark Tansey: [url="http://www.artchive.com/artchive/T/tansey/derrida.jpg.html"
]’Derrida Queries de Man’[/url]
Posted by Tim Christopher on Mar 14, 2005 at 10:20 PM ‘Scathing vitriol’ and ‘morbid curiosity’. Lord help us!
Posted by Riolo on Mar 15, 2005 at 12:39 AM scathing: to denounce fiercely---harsh or caustic [scathing remarks]
vitriol: sharpness or bitterness of feeling, as in speech or writing; venom
morbid: resulting from or as from a diseased state of mind; esp., having or showing an unwholesome tendency to dwell on gruesome or gloomy matters
curiosity: 1. a desire to learn or know 2. a desire to learn about things that do not properly concern one; inquisitiveness 3. anything thing curios, strange rare, or novel
raillery: 1. light, good-natured ridicule or satire; banter 2. a teasing act or remark
satire: the use of ridicule, sarcasm, irony, etc. to expose attack, or deride vices, follies, etc.
Mahalo
Posted by GR on Mar 15, 2005 at 3:46 AM Ah, “Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee” (Dee Brown).....that book ought to be required reading for every U.S. history class.
Posted by pick of the litter on Mar 15, 2005 at 5:47 AM As a Vopnnegut fan and part-time scholar, I am saddened to see Kurt’s message be rejected by so many because they find its tone disagreeable.
On the environment - http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050314/140/fe84p.html
Conservatives have always appreciated Vonnegut, though often for the wrong reasons. William F. Buckley’s remarks regarding Harrison Bergeron are worth looking up to anyone who needs a laugh.
But anyone who’s read more than a little Vonnegut should be familiar with Vonnegut’s conception of the artist’s role - the “canary in the coal-mine” theory of the arts, he calls it.
I am glad this magazine has such a diverse audience. However, I hope anyone reading Vonnegut’s essay will be open to understanding the importance of his message. I believe it was in Hocus Pocus when he coined “Your planet’s immune system is trying to get rid of you.” Vonnegut’s writing is such that every truth he writes grows more and more true as time passes. So pay attention now, and remember later.
Posted by BartCopFan on Mar 15, 2005 at 11:18 AM I know the meaning of those words, G Ronby just speaks like a pompous tool. How flamboyant…
Posted by Ryan Conover on Mar 15, 2005 at 2:31 PM For more on the 10% theory of mankind, you are cordially invited to check out http://www.disinfotainmenttoday.com/issue111.htm#norms.
Posted by Michael Dare on Mar 17, 2005 at 8:32 AM peace 1. freedom from disagreement or quarrels; harmony; concord 2. freedom from public disturbance or disorder; public security; law and order 3. an undisturbed state of mind; absence of mental conflict 4. calm; quiet; tranquility
civility 1. politeness, esp. in a merely formal way 2. a civil, or polite act or utterance
civilization 1. the process of civilizing or becoming civilized 2. the condition of being civilized; social organization of a high order, marked by the development and use of a written language and by advances in the arts and sciences, government, etc. 3. the total culture of a particular people, nation, period, etc. 4. the countries and peoples considered to have reached a high stage of social and cultural development 5. intellectual and cultural refinement
maturity 1. fully grown; fully developed, as a person, a mind, etc. 2. fully or highly developed, perfected, worked out, considered, etc. 3. a state of full development [a person of mature age]
enlighten 1. give the light of fact and knowledge to; reveal truths to; free from ignorance, prejudice, or superstition
-----Aspirations to be shared?
Peace, where’s the profit in that?
GR
Posted by GR on Mar 17, 2005 at 9:06 AM Thank you for the thoughtful comments....you will always have a special place in my heart, Mr Voneegut. As for the 10%/10%/80% commentary by Susan Sonntag?
That is an insightful comment by Ms Sontag, and I have no hard data to dispute it. I suspect she’s near the mark.Now, how to sway that 80%.........
Posted by minerva_jones on Jul 18, 2005 at 12:12 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Kurt Vonnegut
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2005 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
