Saturday, May 31, 2014
Friday, May 30, 2014
Book Review 325: In the Garden of Beasts
“In the Garden of Beasts” reminds me of why I detest grand opera. In opera, there is only one question: Will the soprano/tenor get laid? Different operas have different settings, some of them serious and even fatal situations, but the significance of those problems is always subordinated to the sex story.
Likewise, Erik Larson chose to examine a serious and definitely fatal situation, the encounter of the American government with the Nazi Party and the German state in the first year of Nazi power; but what we get is the adventures of the ambassador’s round-heeled daughter.
She did get laid.
The ambassador, Professor William Dodd, is an attractive character, a southern liberal (there once were such creatures) chased out of the South by racists, a respected historian who had been trained in Wilhelmine Germany, and nobody’s fool when it came to the character of the Hitler state, although less aware of his daughter’s character.
Nor was President Roosevelt at all deceived by the Hitler speeches that took in so many Europeans. Storm troopers were kidnapping and beating American citizens on German streets, so there was an instant diplomatic crisis; along with the question of whether Germany would keep (strictly speaking, start) repaying its American loans.
So we hear about Martha Dodd’s romances. She was one of a good many foreign blondes who trolled the Nazi Party for supermen, and nowhere near as dim as Unity Mitford, who thought she would marry Hitler but ended up shooting herself. Martha Dodd eventually -- although slowly -- came around to recognizing evil, or at least the Nazi variety, and left a mass of more or less revealing documents, a feast for a historian of Larson’s bent.
But while the salacious and violent private lives fitted right into his story of the Chicago World’s Fair in “The Devil in the White City,” Martha Dodd’s hijinks add nothing to the serious question of the encounter between American democracy and German militarism.
Ambassador Dodd’s troubles with the stripy-pants cookie pushers at Foggy Bottom also added to the difficulties of the encounter, and we get quite a lot about them. But not so much about the main event.
We also have to deal with Larson’s simple-minded misunderstanding of world politics in the Thirties, although it is astonishing that a professional historian can still maintain such innocence at this date.
To the meagre extent that Larson pays attention to the main event, he does state a theme, which is to wonder whether, if Roosevelt had pushed a more forward policy, the rise of Germany could have been limited.
The short answer is, no. A longer answer would note that because of the idiotic Republican policies of the Twenties, Roosevelt was holding an impossibly weak hand:
The Republicans had sunk the Navy second to none, signed the pollyannish Kellogg-Briand pact, lent Germany billions so it would not have to pay Versailles reparations from its own income, restructured that debt twice and ruined the American economy.
Larson mentions none of this, nor does he suggest what resources Roosevelt could have called on to back up an anti-German policy.
This comes pretty close to professional malpractice for a historian, even a popular one always looking for the tabloid angle. But if you like your Nazi history sexy, Larson’s the boy.
A cheap, EZ & surefire solution for Ukraine
This morning, Bob Corker, who is the best the Republicans can do in the Senate when it comes to foreign policy, gave an interview to deplore Obama's weak sister foreign policy.
This is a favorite theme of the rightwing lately, building, I guess, on their own smashing successes in the foreign field between 2000 and 2008. Corker believes the problem is not, for example, that George Bush wrecked our military. Nor that Bush wrecked the economy, to the point where Republicans have been forced, while crying many bitter tears, not to fund the Veterans Administration at levels needed to deal with the tens of thousands of grievously wounded vets who hobbled home from the defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan.
No, Corker says what's in short supply is clarity:
Come on, Bob, throw us a bone. What, what should the president say and do?
{CRICKETS}
Honest, if he's going out in public to complain that the other guy is running a big clarity shortage, you'd think he would have a clear statement prepared for himself.
Fortunately, the Republicans DO have a clear policy that could be applied to Ukraine at small cost, no risk and with certainty of success. Unfortunately, none of them seems ready to call for it. Although I am not a Republican, I will do it for them.
If they had only done it first, RtO could restate it, but since they have neglected to, here is a clear statement:
Since it is a clear belief of the hardcore Second Amendment folks that the only thing that prevents the government from being taken over and all our liberties being canceled by [FILL IN THE BLANK] the way Crimea was is their arsenal of mean-looking personal firearms (although these are NOT assault weapons, they are always careful to make that clear), clearly the thing to do is to give the democratic Ukrainians similar firearms. (Is that enough clarity?)
In fact, I propose giving them the rightwingers' AR15s and similar guns.
This would not lessen the arsenal of America's loudest patriots significantly, since there are 300 million firearms in the US but only 45 million Ukrainians. Subtract the bad Ukrainians who are trying to become Russians and the old Ukrainians over 85 and the youngsters under fighting age (about 10, if what I read on the gun blogs is to be credited), and it wouldn't take more than 30 million non-assault (but really cool-looking) guns. A mere 10% of what we have on hand.
Since most Americans do not have even one gun, it follows that the nation-in-arms averages at least 3 or 4. And since responsible gun owners probably need no more than one or 2, then the people like the brave patriots of Tarrant County Open Carry must have upwards of 6 or 10 each. Heck, they wouldn't miss 1 or 2, and they'd still have enough to protect the local Chipotle from whoever it is that's attempting to take it over (aside from Tarrant County Open Carry).
Eh, voila! Problem solved. If guns in the hands of patriots are sufficient to repel a leftist putsch from the most powerful military in the world, then standing off a few amateur insurgents armed with nothing better than armored cars and mobile antiaircraft artillery will be EZ.
No need to thank me, Republicans. I'm sure you'd do the same for me, if you thought of it.
This is a favorite theme of the rightwing lately, building, I guess, on their own smashing successes in the foreign field between 2000 and 2008. Corker believes the problem is not, for example, that George Bush wrecked our military. Nor that Bush wrecked the economy, to the point where Republicans have been forced, while crying many bitter tears, not to fund the Veterans Administration at levels needed to deal with the tens of thousands of grievously wounded vets who hobbled home from the defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan.
No, Corker says what's in short supply is clarity:
"I just didn't hear that clarity, so I would throw that speech in the trash can. I would do something far stronger when I'm in Europe, and then I would back it up," Corker told NPR's Steve Inskeep.Like what, asked Inskeep, reasonably and predictably enough. Corker had not thought that far ahead, because here was his answer:
So I think it's sort of in that air of permissiveness, the lack of clarity, that people miscalculate and really bad things can happen down the road. So that's what I'm concerned about. This is something that's heartfelt, it's of deep concern on both sides of the aisle, and again, I hope when he goes to Europe, he'll speak in a different way but then I hope he will also follow up in a different way.
Come on, Bob, throw us a bone. What, what should the president say and do?
{CRICKETS}
Honest, if he's going out in public to complain that the other guy is running a big clarity shortage, you'd think he would have a clear statement prepared for himself.
Fortunately, the Republicans DO have a clear policy that could be applied to Ukraine at small cost, no risk and with certainty of success. Unfortunately, none of them seems ready to call for it. Although I am not a Republican, I will do it for them.
If they had only done it first, RtO could restate it, but since they have neglected to, here is a clear statement:
Since it is a clear belief of the hardcore Second Amendment folks that the only thing that prevents the government from being taken over and all our liberties being canceled by [FILL IN THE BLANK] the way Crimea was is their arsenal of mean-looking personal firearms (although these are NOT assault weapons, they are always careful to make that clear), clearly the thing to do is to give the democratic Ukrainians similar firearms. (Is that enough clarity?)
In fact, I propose giving them the rightwingers' AR15s and similar guns.
This would not lessen the arsenal of America's loudest patriots significantly, since there are 300 million firearms in the US but only 45 million Ukrainians. Subtract the bad Ukrainians who are trying to become Russians and the old Ukrainians over 85 and the youngsters under fighting age (about 10, if what I read on the gun blogs is to be credited), and it wouldn't take more than 30 million non-assault (but really cool-looking) guns. A mere 10% of what we have on hand.
Since most Americans do not have even one gun, it follows that the nation-in-arms averages at least 3 or 4. And since responsible gun owners probably need no more than one or 2, then the people like the brave patriots of Tarrant County Open Carry must have upwards of 6 or 10 each. Heck, they wouldn't miss 1 or 2, and they'd still have enough to protect the local Chipotle from whoever it is that's attempting to take it over (aside from Tarrant County Open Carry).
Eh, voila! Problem solved. If guns in the hands of patriots are sufficient to repel a leftist putsch from the most powerful military in the world, then standing off a few amateur insurgents armed with nothing better than armored cars and mobile antiaircraft artillery will be EZ.
 | |||
| AP photo from link above |
No need to thank me, Republicans. I'm sure you'd do the same for me, if you thought of it.
Phoney claims
Are all round us.
One that particularly irritates me is that the oceans are acidifying. They might be getting less alkaline but they are never going to get acid.
This might be less because the global warmers are trying to fool you than because there is no convenient short word for becoming less basic. But it might also be because the warmers are trying to fool you.
English is a supple and magnificent tool but it is an historical accident and a convention, not designed to work well in every circumstance. George Bush sounded an awful fool because he was, but one famous instance -- when he referred to Muslim terrorism as a crusade -- was really the fault of English.
That's the only word we have for that sort of campaign.
RtO has avoided engaging with some of the commoner forms of lunacy on Maui because some things are just too stupid and, so far as I can tell, believing in chemtrails does not have any fallout (pun intended) other than labeling yourself as a nitwit. Not so with some other fantasies, like harmful GMOs (see "About the GMO petition," May 18) which is already harming people and, now that the liars at SHAKA are on the verge of getting their nuttiness on a ballot, has the potential to do some real damage.
However, I have said enough about GMOs. I want to link to an interesting post, by Eric Hall, on the subject of checking claims. It is followed by a longish comment thread that expands on the point in interesting ways.
It is called "Trusting the Internet," and if there's anything I'm sure of, it's that the people who most need to read it won't.
One that particularly irritates me is that the oceans are acidifying. They might be getting less alkaline but they are never going to get acid.
This might be less because the global warmers are trying to fool you than because there is no convenient short word for becoming less basic. But it might also be because the warmers are trying to fool you.
English is a supple and magnificent tool but it is an historical accident and a convention, not designed to work well in every circumstance. George Bush sounded an awful fool because he was, but one famous instance -- when he referred to Muslim terrorism as a crusade -- was really the fault of English.
That's the only word we have for that sort of campaign.
RtO has avoided engaging with some of the commoner forms of lunacy on Maui because some things are just too stupid and, so far as I can tell, believing in chemtrails does not have any fallout (pun intended) other than labeling yourself as a nitwit. Not so with some other fantasies, like harmful GMOs (see "About the GMO petition," May 18) which is already harming people and, now that the liars at SHAKA are on the verge of getting their nuttiness on a ballot, has the potential to do some real damage.
However, I have said enough about GMOs. I want to link to an interesting post, by Eric Hall, on the subject of checking claims. It is followed by a longish comment thread that expands on the point in interesting ways.
It is called "Trusting the Internet," and if there's anything I'm sure of, it's that the people who most need to read it won't.
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Hog wild, wild hog or what?
Georgia Teen Accidentally Shot And Killed On Father-Son Fishing Trip
From TPM.They thought they might bag a hog. Fishin' is different in Georgia than in Hawaii.
The comments at TPM are generally unsympathetic to the allegedly grieving father. Some wonder if he just murdered his son and, this being Tea Party country, had the perfect alibi. Who knows? Dead sons tell no tales.
LoganFive comments:
For any conservatives reading this thread, you can calm down. This kid wasn't killed in the womb or in Benghazi, so you're off the hook in terms of having to give a shit about his death.That sounds about right.
thomasmatthew comments:
I am wondering whether the NRA will attack this distraught father like the attacked the distraught father in the Santa Barbara shootings. Or do they only attack distraught fathers not involved in the shooting?
That is unfair. So far as I know, the NRA has not attacked Mr. Martinez. The NRA usually maintains a cowardly silence in the first couple of news cycles after one of their child sacrifices. thomasmatthew is confusing the NRA with various rightwing gun nuts who have sounded off.
If you need that, Wonkette is attempting to keep a sort of linkfest to the "stupid bloviating" of America's defenders of the Second Amendment.
Monday, May 26, 2014
I wonder what the poor people are doing tonight?
At the Manduke Baldwin Cup polo tournament:
 |
| Paniolo polo; playing without a helmet |
I like the composition of this one.
 | ||
| Audience participation: tamping down divots between chukkars to the music of Chubby Checker |
 | |
| Willing volunteers |
 | |||||||||||||||||||
| The heat was too much for one |
Sunday, May 25, 2014
Book Review 324: Walt Kelly
Thomas Andrae and Carsten Laqua consider Walt Kelly the best cartoonist ever. I agree. Too bad this biography hardly rises above the level of a fanzine.
Kelly wasn’t just superior in each of the cartoonist’s tasks, he was unique in some, such as creating an argot found nowhere else (not unlike P.G. Wodehouse, although Kelly differentiated his voices via typography, too).
He was easily the best caricaturist using animals. Nast did it but he just pasted recognizable faces on animal bodies; and McNelly did skillful personality types but not individuals. Kelly’s best was
Joe McCarthy, first as Simple J. Malarkey and later as Wiley Catt.
Though Kelly has a deserved reputation as a McCarthy-killer, and he was satirizing illiberal values from the first (in 1949), he came rather late to McCarthy, 1953. Herblock had caricatured McCarthy (and invented the word McCarthyism) as early as 1950, but Herblock weakened his attack by occasionally depicting McCarthy (and Nixon) as mischievous boys. Kelly never showed McCarthy as anything but the menace he was.
It has been claimed (though not in this book) that Kelly created more characters than any other cartoonist, more than 150.
He was the finest draughtsman ever to do cartoons, with a line as expressive as Caran d’Ache’s, and, needless to say, without Caran’s noxious antisemitism.
As one of few animators to turn to newspaper strips (though he was considered too independent at Disney), he also created motion in his panels that has never even been attempted by the second-raters who are sometimes compared to him, like Breathed and Trudeau.
Finally, he was funny. To everybody but the morons at the FBI who -- unbelievably except that it fits a pattern already known -- assigned codebreakers to find the hidden messages to the Communist underground in “Pogo.”
“Pogo” has also shown staying power. No one reads “L’il Abner” any more, but “Pogo” remains popular among children and adults. I had a nearly complete set of the 30-odd “Pogo” books, but my children discovered them when they got to be about 9 or 10 years old, and read them over and over till they disintegrated.
So much for who Walt Kelly was, which you will glean from this biography, although not much more. His marriages and alcoholism are barely alluded to. Although a fond remembrance by his stepson mentions numerous “antidotes” that his multitudinous friends would tell about him, we do not hear more than a couple of them.
Kelly, at least, would have appreciated “antidotes” and the numerous other illiteracies in this badly edited volume, and with his habit of making satire out of misunderstandings, would probably have laughed until the tears flowed to read this:
“As a concession to the Republican right-wing he chose Richard Nixon as his running mate, a HUAC lawyer who made his reputation by helping prosecute Albert Hiss, a lawyer suspected of leaking atomic secrets to the Soviets.”
Bad as it is, true Pogophiles will want “Walt Kelly” for (not especially adoitly-chosen) reproductions of many strips and especially photographs and fugitive Kellyana not within reach of any but the well-heeled collector.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)