Auteur
Amateur
Alex Ross'
"Island of
Lost Auteurs" suffers from deficiencies that his just verdict on the latest
film cannot alleviate. In praising John Frankenheimer's earlier works, Ross is
much too gripped by a childish auteuristic fascination with the technical
aspects of what are very minor works. And his appraisal of actors and acting is
shockingly amateurish. It is amusing that he could mistake Brando's ludicrous
and perfunctory posturing as some controlled experiment in caricature and
parody, but the homoerotic slavering over Val Kilmer is infantile and
unbecoming of anyone who is supposed to make informed aesthetic judgments. One
would think a magazine like Slate would hire a film commentator who has
something other than breezy pop-cultural enthusiasms to offer.
--Alex
Khan
Pointless
Huh?
Could Ann Hulbert's review of Joan Didion's latest novel ("The Last Thing We
Expected") be any more convoluted? Hulbert takes Didion to task for writing
stories that go nowhere. I think Hulbert likes Didion's new work.
Unfortunately, her review reads like any one of Didion's earlier novels, dense
on prose, short on directness. If Hulbert has a point to make, she missed
making it. I think I'll buy the book and take my chances.
--Ted
Hopper
Property
Rights
The premise of "The Norplant
Option," by Stuart Taylor Jr., reminds me of the plan my township put into
effect in the mid-'70s to protect and preserve prime farmland by purchasing the
development rights.
This concept was picked up in
the Clean Air Act: Polluters who reduce their toxic output beyond requirements
can sell the right to molest the environment to others less willing or less
able to control emissions.
Taylor proposes that
teen-agers on welfare be paid to use an implanted device to prevent pregnancy.
In effect, he suggests the government purchase reproductive rights, at least
for a limited time.
Since wage
slavery is a well-established phenomenon, and getting better established by the
day, a little nonreproduction bribery sounds pretty mainstream. Our loyal
opposition on the right used to tell us that "a man can do anything with his
property." (Land-use regulation is a plot by Commies.) Isn't a woman's body her
most personal property? Can't she do with it what she will?
--Paul
Silver
Sexual
Experimentation
I believe we would probably
be justified in experimenting with the initiative outlined in "The Norplant
Option," by Stuart Taylor Jr., in a limited and controlled way. At the same
time, I am struck by what I find to be considerable conceptual confusion as
well as an absence of fundamental analysis based on solid biology and
sociology.
The initiative is, in fact,
an intrusion by the government upon the individual. True, the government
already makes or withholds payments based on a number of individual conditions,
including the birth of a child, etc. However, there is a quantum leap in
intrusion levels when payments are made based on something that is put under
people's skin.
Coercion is inevitable. The
argument that beneficiaries will get paid more rather than less for something
is disingenuous: They will be paid less than would otherwise be the case if
they refuse to submit, a point that no doubt will be made by many program
administrators.
More fundamentally, the
debate seems to ignore the biological forces at work. While underclass
teen-agers may consciously have no interest other than in fooling around, their
underlying reproductive strategy is a wide dissemination of genes to numerous
offspring in the statistical hope that a few will make it. The proposed
initiative equals an attempt to "buy people out" of their biological destiny.
Some may reject it ; some others may, in effect, make a successful transition
to a higher-class reproductive strategy and become "like us." Still others may
be "neutered," with their vital energies being redirected in potentially
dangerous directions.
Having
said this, and given that there presumably are no panaceas, it might be
appropriate to proceed with caution and let different proposals compete in the
market of real life.
--Paul
Kailor
Us and
Them, Rights and Wrongs
I was disappointed that Slate
chose to publish "The Norplant Option," by Stuart Taylor Jr. Why are we so
interested in interfering with the sexual and reproductive rights of Them,
those other than Us? If we turn the tables, and ask ourselves what laws we
would choose to enact to curtail our sexual and reproductive rights, it becomes
immediately clear how offensive and obtrusive such laws are to the rights of
Them. What law would I be willing to sign against myself to curtail my sexual
and reproductive freedoms? If I were certified insane, I might want the
government to assign a guardian who would act to protect my reproductive
rights, as I would not have the mental faculties do so myself. Otherwise, I
cannot imagine any situation in which I would choose to have some
self-righteous neighbor, a k a our government, sticking his nose into my
business by telling me if, when, and how I can have sex or reproduce.
The fact
that these sexual and reproductive intrusions are typically proposed by white
men for black women should raise a red flag for anyone listening to such
nonsense. One moment these self-righteous men would force a woman to bear a
child. The next moment these same self-righteous men would force a woman not to
bear a child. Either way, I cannot think of a more intrusive act--short of
hanging.
--Jim
Adcock
Duh
Michael
Kinsley, you really are brain-dead to propose eliminating the 13 th
Amendment to solve the welfare problem ("Good Jobs at
Now Wages"). You should consider this truism: "For every complex problem
there is a simple solution, and it is always wrong."
--John
James
Two
Cheers for Slavery
I was disappointed that
Michael Kinsley's "modest proposal" to reform the welfare system by
re-establishing slavery ("Good Jobs at
Now Wages") did not mention the book from which it was likely inspired,
Hilaire Belloc's The Servile State (1911).
Unfortunately, a reader might consider the article merely humorous, describing
an impossible proposition, where in fact, the basics of The Servile
State (concentrated ownership and status-based laws governing
employee-employer relations) have been long established, and the need for
slavery in the light of the increasingly degraded condition of the welfare
class becomes more evident. Slavery has been part of organized human society
for thousands of years; people should not assume that it has breathed its last.
Despite its obvious drawbacks, I doubt it is the worst way to organize society,
and it may be better than our present narcissistic fashion.
--Brian
Sponsler
Apples
and Oranges
Please
inform Robert Wright that he is indeed confused ("Styles of
Polygamy"). There is a difference between adultery and divorce. I was
flabbergasted that he could compare the morality of President Clinton and Bob
Dole and imply they are the same. Divorce is caused by many things, including
adultery, but to imply there is no difference between the two is just
unbelievable.
--Joel
Kimzey
Blue
Notes
Jeffrey Steingarten's article
on food aversions ("The
Omnivore") reminds me of a perplexing phenomenon I have observed during the
past few years. I am talking about the apparent growth in the popularity of
blue food.
A study conducted at Oregon
State University (where the maraschino cherry was invented) about 25 years ago
found that blue was almost universally disliked as a food color.
Recently, however, something
seems to have changed. I have seen many blue foods on the market: blue Jell-O,
blue juicelike drinks, blue ice cream, and blue candy.
Mr.
Steingarten, are we seeing a trend here? Assuming the Oregon State study was
correct, what has changed in the Zeitgeist of the eating public to cause
blue food to become acceptable? Do you think its rise in popularity parallels
that of blue lipstick and blue nail polish? Are we talking about postmodern
food here? Or punk food?
--James
Curry
To the
Left ...
Still
heavy on the left-wing status quo. Not even any token "balance." Kind of like a
Clinton promise. Nothing really new or different here either. You can get the
same info in any of the mainstream press. Thoughtful and insightful? I don't
think so. I guess you can still fool some of the people some of the time.
--Steve
Hoke
... And
to the Right
Despite
assurances that your corporate sponsor would never influence editorial content,
you are presenting such a right-wing, anti-Clinton position (don't believe it?
Check out all the adjectives used in supposedly "evenhanded" stories) that your
true colors (mainly yellow) are apparent.
--Tom Tarnowski
