Reply
Sun 16 Mar, 2008 08:49 pm
This reader comment
was posted in response to a
Maureen Dowd column on the NY Times and chosen as an Editors' Selection. (I've broken it into paragraphs for clarity's sake.)
That's kind of an interesting thesis, though I wonder if the author thinks that any of his 'friends' would be better off dead as opposed to annoying him with their war-like hobbies?
Too simplistic for my tastes but an interesting read nonetheless. Thanks for posting it.
I oppose the massacre of American Indians, yet love western movies. There's a big difference between play games and actually committing atrocities.
Sounds like manufactured experiences to support a notion that popped into his head while commuting to work.
I guess there are Vietnam veterans who have a draft-dodger or two among their associates, but three they see regularly, and who all have become old-age psuedo warriors?
Perhaps this is actually the case for this fellow and his friends, but if so, it certainly isn't common enough to support any sort of theory.
Furthermore, if these three "friends," actually exist, there sure isn't any reason to believe they are expressing memories of earlier testosterone levels. On the contrary, their late in life affinity for things martial seems, if anything, to be a result of delayed testosterone release.
Mitch tells us nothing about their early days other than they all dodged the draft. Were they Middle Linebackers in HS? Did they "rumble" with other local gangs? Did they even read Modern Mercenary? What evidence is there that they ever were flushed with a level of testosterone that they might "remember" and act upon in their later lives? Dodging the draft is hardly evidence of a hormone infused Alpha Male.
What is actually telling about this story is that the NY Times "featured" it. Any even slightly critical reading of this letter has to call into question its validity or, at best, relevance. But if your Editorial Board believes George Bush is oddly both pathetic and diabolical, and is generally down on all thinks stereotypically "manly," it's not so surprising.
As usual, we're living in a myth making age. Glorious fiction is available on small screens and large screens--as well as in print and embattled screeds of discontented warriors have been set to music.
Walter Mitty was a domesticated dreamer, an introvert without a peer group.
Extroverts dream, too, both asleep and while waking.
Noddy24 wrote:As usual, we're living in a myth making age. Glorious fiction is available on small screens and large screens--as well as in print and embattled screeds of discontented warriors have been set to music.
Walter Mitty was a domesticated dreamer, an introvert without a peer group.
Extroverts dream, too, both asleep and while waking.
Who is Walter Mitty? Mitch or "his friends?"
Finn dAbuzz wrote:Noddy24 wrote:As usual, we're living in a myth making age. Glorious fiction is available on small screens and large screens--as well as in print and embattled screeds of discontented warriors have been set to music.
Walter Mitty was a domesticated dreamer, an introvert without a peer group.
Extroverts dream, too, both asleep and while waking.
Who is Walter Mitty? Mitch or "his friends?"
His "friends."
Mitch knows the reality of war, and has no need to dream about the romanticism of it.
DrewDad wrote:Finn dAbuzz wrote:Noddy24 wrote:As usual, we're living in a myth making age. Glorious fiction is available on small screens and large screens--as well as in print and embattled screeds of discontented warriors have been set to music.
Walter Mitty was a domesticated dreamer, an introvert without a peer group.
Extroverts dream, too, both asleep and while waking.
Who is Walter Mitty? Mitch or "his friends?"
His "friends."
Mitch knows the reality of war, and has no need to dream about the romanticism of it.
So you, like the NYT, buy this shite of Mitch's. Figures.
I used to read all the journals, dailies, around the globe.
One should read and ponder over.
I come to the conclussion that most of the
USA's embedded easy-chair intellectual are not critcal enough to expose the hypocracy
of the corporate criminals.
(neither WP, NYT nor any tome dick and harry tabloids.)
And what in heavens name does that have to do with this thread?
And is Germany really any better? The paper that sells 10 times more than any other there is a tabloid rag, and for every Sueddeutsche Zeitung you have a Welt or a Frankfurter Allgemeine.
Talking about easy-chair intellectuals.. You only ever offer up empty slogans and sweeping generalisations. Have you ever argued anything in any kind of specifics? Like, actually argued it, rather than just post a couple of sentences about what "America" or "the rest of the world" are like, in general?
If it's a language problem, by all means post in German. Just one coherent, specific, in-depth post, rather than a few lines of platitudes.
nimh wrote:Talking about easy-chair intellectuals.. You only ever offer up empty slogans and sweeping generalisations. Have you ever argued anything in any kind of specifics? Like, actually argued it, rather than just post a couple of sentences about what "America" or "the rest of the world" are like, in general?
If it's a language problem, by all means post in German. Just one coherent, specific, in-depth post, rather than a few lines of platitudes.
If you drive by this thread,
Ramafuchs, I'd be interested, too...
nimh wrote:And what in heavens name does that have to do with this thread?
And is Germany really any better? The paper that sells 10 times more than any other there is a tabloid rag, and for every Sueddeutsche Zeitung you have a Welt or a Frankfurter Allgemeine.
Talking about easy-chair intellectuals.. You only ever offer up empty slogans and sweeping generalisations. Have you ever argued anything in any kind of specifics? Like, actually argued it, rather than just post a couple of sentences about what "America" or "the rest of the world" are like, in general?
If it's a language problem, by all means post in German. Just one coherent, specific, in-depth post, rather than a few lines of platitudes.
How do you have such a command of the English language, and all its colloquial expressions? You're Hungarian?
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace