Skip to main content

Honeymoon for salmon-eaters (16 February 2009)

There are theories which argue that people who come out of more controlling and less loving families, tend to vote Republican. They fear Socialism, are repulsed by the idea of hippie-togetherness, and like to grand-stand Independence, because as children, being part of a family meant experiencing life as if they were mere extensions of their parents' (not just wishes and needs but) BODIES. They fear real economic and social growth, and are willing to vote for those who would destroy such, because as children they also understood that when they attended to their own needs rather than those of their parents, they were acting up as selfish, spoiled, egocentric--bad: and they are forever hoping to demonstrate themselves good boys and girls by voting for those who see life as about hardships, and by hating those they can construe as believing otherwise (i.e. democrats).

Other point: Pelosi suggests that the democrats are honeymooning right now. Their euphoria seems a bit forced, to me. And they seem more angry than island-sunners should be. How sure are we that the pains the Right is experiencing right now, aren't fundamentally related to those that are causing democrats to be somewhat less than ebulliently happy? I'm not suggesting that it's 'cause we're all suffering from the economy. Instead, I'm wondering if BOTH repubicans and democrats feel abandoned right now -- that they're both waiting for Obama to emerge as an empowered, assertive daddy. Perhaps Pelusi is happy because Obama right now still is somewhat like her mother to her, like her and her friends, in that he is the elite, polished/mannered, person-in-power, who is not yet charged-up with a nation's passion. He is the salmon-eating, ivy-leaguer, who looks trepedatiously at a coarse nation, that Hillary Clinton believed America would never be able to relate to. This won't last for long. And I suspect when things settle in, when he becomes more Andrew Jackson and less John Quincy Adams, the mannered left will feel less easy with him. Whether the Right will declare him their Omighty, I can't yet tell. But to me it is more than a possibility: I actually expect it.

Link: Salon

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense ...

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump...

The Conjuring

The Conjuring 
I don't know if contemporary filmmakers are aware of it, but if they decide to set their films in the '70s, some of the affordments of that time are going to make them have to work harder to simply get a good scare from us. Who would you expect to have a more tenacious hold on that house, for example? The ghosts from Salem, or us from 2013, who've just been shown a New England home just a notch or two downscaled from being a Jeffersonian estate, that a single-income truck driver with some savings can afford? Seriously, though it's easy to credit that the father — Roger Perron—would get his family out of that house as fast as he could when trouble really stirs, we'd be more apt to still be wagering our losses—one dead dog, a wife accumulating bruises, some good scares to our kids—against what we might yet have full claim to. The losses will get their nursing—even the heavy traumas, maybe—if out of this we've still got a house—really,...