A man of prodigious fortune, coming to add his opinion to some light discussion that was going on casually at his table, began precisely thus: "It can only be a liar or an ignoramus who will say otherwise than," and so on. Pursue that philosophical point, dagger in hand.

--Michel de Montaigne, Of the art of discussion.



Stab back: cmnewman99-at-yahoo.com


Home

 
MY AMAZON REVIEW IS UP. They edited it down, though. Here's what I actually sent them:

I first read the article of which this book is the extended version in October 2001, a few weeks after it was published in Italy. At the time I, like many Americans, was struggling with a number of questions: To what extent are we responsible for the hatred directed against us? How wary should I be of the paroxysms of flag waving sweeping the country? I had spent a lot of time in Italy, and had become used to eye-rolling mockery of anything smacking of American patriotism and idealism as yet another "americanata." I was aware of the many just condemnations to be made of the actions our government has taken in the world, the valid reasons why many people might hold grudges against us, and was rather agonized in trying to decide how I should understand and react to the atrocity of 9/11.

To me Fallaci's article was simultaneously a slap in the face and a shot in the arm. Here was the most independent-minded journalist of Italy—of Europe, probably—a woman who had spent 30 years travelling the world and witnessing American interventions first hand, from Vietnam to the Gulf War, who had confronted and conversed with the most important leaders of not only the Western but the Arab and Muslim world, who had grilled Kissinger and William Colby as well as Khomeni and Bhutto. Who had spent more than her fair share of her time documenting and criticizing harshly the blunders and tragedies of U.S. foreign policy, and who shared (still does) much of the condescending European appraisal of American culture. And what was she saying? That we agonizers were all missing the forest for the trees. That there are times when you have to stand back and look at fundamental values and have the courage to say, "Yes, I know that we are not perfect, but the basic values we stand for are good and worth defending. And those who have attacked us, whatever legitimate grievances they sometimes use to advance their cause, have declared war on those values. They hate us, not for our faults, but for our virtues—our personal liberties, our treatment of women, our material achievements. And we have to decide whether to defend those virtues or not, because if we don't we stand to lose them." She was saying that when patriotism means spontaneous banding together in shared love and defense of basic values, it is the noblest of impulses, and those who sneer at it--like too many of her fellow Italians--exhibit pettiness rather than superiority.

Much has been made and will be made of Fallaci's attack on Muslims. It is true that she generalizes and does not draw distinctions that we, as Americans, must draw. Because we have Muslims as friends and fellow citizens, and because many (most, I hope) of the Muslims who choose to make their home in this country share our basic values. But again, we must not miss the forest for the trees. Much of the Muslim world beyond our borders (and some within them) is presently in the sway of an ideology that rejects our values and defines us as the Great Satan. The most prominent spokesmen of Islam in the world regard 9/11 as a laudable and just act. It may be that Islam, properly understood, is "really" a religion of peace. But the way it is being taught and understood and practiced by millions, it is an incitement to violence. If Osama Bin Laden is not the true voice of Islam, ultimately it is the Muslims who must disavow him and make their disavowal unequivocal. Until then, Fallaci is justified in taking him and his brethren at their word and judging the "sons of Allah" by the acts they espouse, by the societies they set up, by the words they use to express what they regard as the will of their God. The Muslims of whom Fallaci speaks express and act on deep hatred of the West, and Fallaci is not one to bear the hatred of others without responding in kind, viscerally and vehemently. The first reviewer mentioned a quote from the book in which Fallaci speaks of Muslim men as being sexually undesirable. The quote is from a footnote in which Fallaci is responding to a prominent Muslim figure who accused Fallaci of acting out of sexual frustration at never having been properly serviced by one of his brothers. She is trading one sexual insult for another, not gratuitously indulging in broad smears.

This book is, as its title announces, a scream of rage, not a calmly reasoned policy analysis. It is a wake up call, not an agenda. We need to absorb Fallaci's rage and pride and figure out how to channel them constructively. Her message has many rough edges, but on its central thesis she is right: we must not allow our liberal virtues, our penchant for self-criticism, to acquiesce in the destruction of the culture from which they spring. Yes, the West must continue to look in the mirror at its own flaws—a mirror Fallaci has spent most of her life holding up. But there are times when you have to take sides, when you have to choose between black and white, and when it's an act of moral abdication to insist that everything is gray.

posted by CMN at 10:45 AM
0 stab(s) back

 
ANOTHER REVIEW: David Harsanyi in the Weekly Standard.
posted by CMN at 10:22 AM
0 stab(s) back

 
FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COLLISIONS BETWEEN ROTATING VENTILATION DEVICES AND FECAL MATTER: Three expert depos, two summary judgment motions, and a partridge in a pear tree. Don't expect to hear from me for a while.
posted by CMN at 2:19 PM
0 stab(s) back

 
FALLACI LIVE: I just learned from this article that Oriana is now giving lectures in conjunction with AEI's New Atlantic Initiative. Let's hope one of them gets on C-Span.

Sembra che la sibilla stia diventando meno eremita di prima...

Update: Well, not that much less. I contacted New Atlantic Initiative, and they said it was a one time deal, not a series as the Italian paper had reported. And it sounds like a transcript but not a video will be made available. Peccato...

But their website says an audio tape is available on request.
posted by CMN at 9:50 AM
0 stab(s) back

 
Hey, I got linked by the Miller himself. And he managed to stump me on what should have been an obvious Shakespeare reference. Another one like that and I'll have to take a refresher course with Babs. And to think I played Prince Hal in college.
posted by CMN at 9:37 AM
0 stab(s) back

 
I finally read Fallaci's translation over the weekend. I'm actually not sure "translation" is the right word. It's more like she rewrote the same book in a different language, following the same train of thought but adding or changing things here and there without much interest in tracking exactly what she'd said the first time around. I had noticed a similar phenomenon when I read the Italian book version as well. Even though ostensibly she was merely restoring the passages she had cut out for publication in Corriere, I was too intimately familiar with the text not to notice lots of little word changes and such even in the passages that had remained in the published article. (These weren't major changes, mind you--they were the kind of thing that would only be of interest to someone like me who had racked his brain to come up with an English equivalent of "mancato playboy" only to find that she had switched to the much simpler and less evocative "ex-playboy.") Since it's probably only of interest to me, I won't go into detail about all the things I noticed about the way she chose to express herself in English, the (mercifully few) places where I can see I had clearly made wrong choices, or the places she seems to have chosen softer language (saying "make love" where she had said "scopare" or "damn" for "fottutissimo"), or the extra details she seems to have added just for us (like the wonderful ass-kicking she doles out to Hanoi Jane).

I am conflicted about the way she sounds in English. Her English is certainly serviceable, but it definitely lacks the assured colloquial fluidity of her Italian. Its "oddities," as she puts it, stem not from the expression of her personal style in English but from her using the same kinds of Italianate constructions that all Italians do when they try to write in English. (Unless they've really made a concerted effort to master the nuances of colloquial American English like my own sposa bellissima.) So while I can respect and even admire her reasons for not doing so, there's still part of me that wishes she'd at least collaborated with a native speaker. (The book was printed by Rizzoli in Italy, and I wouldn't be surprised if no native-English-speaking editor laid eyes on it before they fired up the presses.) In Italian Fallaci reads as though she's writing with a stiletto. In English, I feel like she's got a wet washcloth wrapped around it. But I may not be able to judge objectively, because I can't read her English without comparing it to the original Italian, and to my own attempt at writing English to match that Italian. So I'm still interested in reactions from anyone who can read the book without my baggage.

UPDATE: Paola isn't as benevolent in her interpretation of Oriana's decision as I:

I disagree here. I think that what she did doesn't prove much more than her stubborness and inability to come to terms with her own linguistic shortcomings long enough to allow herself the humility of consulting someone who could have helped her with the fine points of the seemingly easy, yet very difficult syntax of the English language. (Which allows one to vent in long-winded sentences just as well as Italian.) I don't understand how a world-renowned journalist, so knowledgeable about the world and so culturally aware, could be so shortsighted when it comes to the very simple, yet crucial matter of the importance of an accurate translation. Did she think that the universal language of outrage and self-righteousness would cross all linguistic boundaries? Can you say hubris?

Italian women don't mince words.

UPDATE: Judging from the comments to this post, Oriana's translation is playing just fine. I'm so glad. I'll be even more glad if the success of this book leads to her other books being reissued in this country. And I'll be ecstatic if they collect and republish in book form all her articles--especially her dispatches from the (last?) Gulf War. And all the interviews--like Khomeni and Sharon--that aren't included in Interview With History.


posted by CMN at 5:59 PM
0 stab(s) back

 
A LONG SHOT:
Anyone in the Los Angeles area who plays Settlers of Cataan? The three of us are looking for some fresh blood.
posted by CMN at 8:55 PM
0 stab(s) back

 
ANOTHER REVIEW:
This one's from my grandmother, who is in her own right an extraordinarily talented and intellectually voracious woman of Oriana's generation:

Thank you very much for Rage and Pride. I almost read it at one sitting but my eyes complained. What a passionate cry of frustration and heartbreak. Fury is the only answer to despair when the barbarians are at the gate - or already breaching it. Unfortunately, I think, her commentary is too extreme to have the effect she is obviously hoping for -- at least in this country and others of teutonic bent. Too few people here have even remotely experienced what she has or are able to recognize what they are observing globally today, and what it really means. Elie Weisel, I think, would share her feeling of impotent horror, although he expresses himself very differently. Her reaction to meeting the Dalai Lama and to the detached peace and "otherness" of silent churches seems to me to indicate the unspeakable gratitude of a weary, sensitive soul for finding a bulwark against despair. Her vision is terrible and I wish I could think it is not valid, but she is right, the world is run by stupid, shortsighted people according to their own agenda, people who do not seem to understand the relentless power and drive of hatred. Elie Weisel said recently that our current "terrorists" differ from those of the past in that they make no demands -- e.g. release of prisoners, political gestures -- their only purpose is death. Death is their message. The thing that strikes him most about this "war" is the depth and intensity of the hatred. For a survivor of the holocaust, that seems a chilling observation.

Thank you for introducing me to Oriana - what a woman!

My pleasure, Grams.

UPDATE: She had a comment in response to my concern about the translation, too:

No, the oddness of the language adds to her personality. She is obviously not a conventional woman and somehow the "creative" translation comes across like a flambuoyant toss of a scarf over a shoulder. Don't forget I spent High School being taught by Germans and am no stranger to creative English. Her cussin' I accepted as part of years with the press corps and, I have no doubt is as natural as her anger.

I hope Fallaci's other readers share Gram's nimbleness of mind.


posted by CMN at 3:04 PM
0 stab(s) back

 
HERE'S Rod Dreher's review of Fallaci for NRO. His overall take is pretty much in line with mine. Though I think it should be pointed out to any readers of his review who haven't read the book that Fallaci's remark about the sexual undesirability of Muslim men appears in a footnote, as a direct riposte to someone who asserted publicly that her animus against Islam was only the result of her frustration at having failed to get what she needed from one of his brethren. I posted a different example of this sort of thing earlier. And her footnote ends thus: "I also reply that his vulgarity fully demonstrates the contempt that Moslem men vomit on us women. A contempt that once again I reciprocate with all my heart and brain." (Unfortunately, it appears that Oriana has not had much opportunity to interact with Muslim men like Aziz Poonawalla, who exhibit utmost respect for women, and with whose criticism of the oversexualization of American culture she seems to largely agree.)

So again, the generalization is to be deplored, but the offensive statement has to be read in context. It may be, as Aziz has argued, that this contempt for women really has nothing to do with Islam but rather with tribalism. But the fact remains that this tribalism is being sold to (and/or imposed on) lots of people in the guise of Islam, and fair or not, ultimately it's Muslims like Aziz who are going to have to reclaim their religion's good name from within (and by example, as he so eloquently does). Fallaci's fighting a different battle, one that has to be won before the rest of us can even get into judging such nuances: she's fighting for our right to judge in the first place, to revere our own values and defend them from attack, whatever the actual historical or theological provenance of the values motivating the assault. She's waging an all out war on cultural relativism, which tells us that any judgments we make in this arena about right and wrong, good and evil, or even just good and better, are mere indefensible parochial prejudices. Unless of course, we are judging ourselves to be wrong and evil.

That's why even though the passage made me squirm when I first read it, I ultimately decided it's legitimate for Fallaci to ask, in effect, with regard to Arab/Muslim culture, "You want me to treat your culture as an equal of mine? Okay, tell me: what has it done for me lately?" There was a piece in Salon a while back called A is for Arabs, which aimed to show what an ignoramus Fallaci is by alphabetically listing Arab contributions to civilization. Of which, to be sure, there are many. But the piece ultimately supports Fallaci's point, because virtually none of the listed contributions postdates the Middle Ages. So that when Fallaci says she finds nothing but Averroes and Omar Khayyam, she's not fundamentally off track. Granted, she states her point in such a tone, and in such absolute terms, that she's asked for much of the flack thrown her way. (Another of those parallels I mentioned earlier.)

I JUST (LITERALLY) RECEIVED MY COPY FROM AMAZON: She has a one page intro to the American reader, explaining that she chose to translate it herself despite the oddities of her English, because "I want to have total responsibility for every word and comma I publish under my name in this language that I love as much as my own." Given the intensely personal nature of this cri de coeur, and the extent to which its power rests on the stature and life experience of the person issuing it, that may have been the right decision. I'll go further: the book's character, which both gives it its strength and makes excusable its flaws, flows precisely from the fact that it is a cri de coeur and was written under the circumstances in which it was. To spend too much effort polishing the language would be incongruous with the choice not to polish the rough edges of the message, and once you start doing that you wind up with a different book. The question in my mind is: How long a shelf life does a cri de coeur have? I wonder why they didn't get it into bookstores for the anniversary of 9/11, when it would have made more sense to be listening to this voice of immediacy from the past. (I have no idea, but half suspect she didn't want it to come out then because she's already been accused of mercenary motivations in Italy and wanted to avoid any possibility of looking like she was trying to cash in on the anniversary. Such a decision would be in character.) It will be interesting to see what effect this has on me when I read it in her own English now, after all this time. And I'd be interested in hearing the same from others.
posted by CMN at 3:28 PM
0 stab(s) back

 
BONO'S VOX:

The Italian pop magazine ROCKSTAR (closest thing they have to Rolling Stone) just published an interview with Bono. Here's what he's quoted in the Italian press as having said (translation mine):

Once I was a pacifist. After September 11 I'm not one anymore. If someone threatened my wife and my children, I don't think I'd turn the other cheek.
. . .
[The attack on Afghanistan:] There was no alternative. It was clear that cities like New York or London would have been hit by chemical weapons or by awful nuclear devices.
. . .
[The roots of the conflict:] The lack of a solution to the struggle in the Middle East, and more generally the lack of effort with regard to the developing world. When you have nothing, you're easy prey to groups like Al Qaeda. But having criticized their foreign policy for years, the time has come to give the U.S. the credit they deserve.

So, is he playing the politician? Making sure he keeps good relations with the folks in the U.S. he wants to fund his Africa aid program? Maybe, but I don't think that's it. There have been times I've found him annoying (like when he took it upon himself to "steal back" Helter Skelter from Manson--to which I replied, "I'll bet at least Manson could get the lyrics right."), but I really do think the guy has integrity. My favorite U2 song used to be "Like A Song." Near the end Bono yells, "Is honesty what you want?" I think he's actually walking the walk, even though it's led him now to say things that put him beyond the pale of the europop political universe. Like his insistence that Africa needs free trade as much as it does handouts. (OK, he's still pretty keen on the handouts, but at least he's actually doing enough homework to realize there's more to it.) As might be expected, the heresy of St. Bono is ruffling feathers in the fold. (Yes, I know it's a mixed metaphor. I'd have said "causing bleating," but post-Lileks I can't bring myself to use that as a term of disparagement.) Yesterday the front page of Corriere had a truly fisk worthy op-ed lamenting Bono's defection from the ranks of those who want peace on earth. (Yes, it quoted the song.) I was tempted. But I'm still working on my response to Adam. Really.
posted by CMN at 8:02 PM
0 stab(s) back

 
TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS IS TO ANSWER THEM... Here's one from Ebert's review of The Rules of Attraction:

The parties are a lapse of credibility. I cannot believe, for example, that large numbers of co-eds would engage in topless lesbian breastplay at a campus event, except in the inflamed imaginations of horny undergraduates. But assuming that they would: Is it plausible that the horny undergraduates wouldn't even look at them? Are today's undergraduate men so (choose one) blase, Politically Correct or emasculated that, surrounded by the enthusiastic foreplay of countless half-naked women, they would blandly carry on their conversations?

Actually, I guess that's two. Speaking of perfect pairs.

Yes, folks, Chris is at work way the fuck too late tonight. And has been here since yesterday morning. Almost feels like I'm clerking again.
posted by CMN at 9:29 PM
0 stab(s) back

 
Another speech I wish I'd heard on NPR.
posted by CMN at 2:14 AM
0 stab(s) back

 
FINALLY! I just got the notice from amazon that my pre order is shipping. It's going to be very interesting to see what reception this book gets. And check it out--she's at 66.
posted by CMN at 7:36 PM
0 stab(s) back

 
FALLACI ON TRIAL:

"When one finishes reading the book, one recognizes the right to kill any Muslim on the street," argued Hacen Taleb, the lawyer representing MRAP, in a statement to the court.

What a load of merde de moo. Or perhaps it's merely a telling admission. Fallaci's accusers routinely level condemnations of the West, of America, in tones similar to (or worse than) hers, and they really do believe that this makes it legitimate to kill any Westerner, any American on the street. They really do believe that the people in the World Trade Center "deserved to die". So they read a book condemning themselves, and equate it with a call for their indiscriminate murder. That, after all is what they mean when they say such things. But Fallaci's book is not a justification of murder, not remotely. Fallaci makes some threats of violence, but they are far from indiscriminate. Yes, she threatens to wage a one-woman war against anyone who tries to pull a Bamiyan number on one of Italy's artistic treasures. And when a mob was turning one of those treasures--the Piazza del Duomo of Florence--into a shithouse, she threatened to burn down their tent to make them go elsewhere. One can certainly question the latter threat--though interestingly enough it seems to have worked, and achieved its purpose without the need to actually endanger anyone. If Fallaci really thought the way her accusers do, she wouldn't have complained to official after official and then made an exasperated threat to a police officer to spur him into enforcing the law. She'd simply have lobbed a bomb among the offenders. It would have been easy. They were packed in there. She could have killed lots of them. And according to the world view of her victims, she'd have been entirely justified. After all, weren't they occupying land that didn't belong to them?

All I can say is, thank God we Americans lack European sophistication and pragmatism when it comes to freedom of speech, thank God we have at least a few rights that we actually enforce jealously against the thought police, whether they come at us quoting the Bible or the Koran or Marcuse or MacKinnon.
posted by CMN at 9:49 AM
0 stab(s) back

 
I've listened to the debates on and off today as I happened to be in the car. Those guys do this speech making gig for a living. So how come none of what I heard was remotely as moving or as honest or as clearminded as this?


posted by CMN at 7:19 PM
0 stab(s) back

 
Thanks for the links, Meryl. Meryl keeps citing "Battle of Nevermore" as having Tolkien references. I had never picked up on them myself, but by Luthien the fair, she's right.

The pain of war cannot exceed the woe of aftermath
The drums will shake the castle wall
The Ringwraiths ride in black, ride on
Oh, sing as you raise your bow/Ride on
Shoot straighter than before
No comfort has the fire at night that lights the face so cold
Dance in the dark of night, sing 'till the mornin' light
The magic runes are writ in gold to bring the balance back
Bring it back

To me, the obvious Tolkien song was always "Ramble On":

Mine's a tale that can't be told, my freedom I hold dear
How years ago in days of old when magic filled the air
'twas in the darkest depths of Morder, mm-I met a girl so fair
but Gollum and the evil one crept up and slipped away with her
her, her, yeah, yeah, and ain't nothin' I can do, no

Lyrics courtesy of "Accurate Led Zeppelin Lyrics". And if they live up to their billing, the battle is of "Evermore", not "Nevermore." (They misspelled Mordor, but then they're not claiming to be 100% Tolkien accurate, now are they? Actually, to give them their due we should really say that Plant mispronounced it, and they just transcribed him 100% accurately. Of course, having seen the movie, I now know that we were all mispronouncing it all these years. At least, I never used to trill my r's...)

Meryl's comment about "Stairway" made me think of a potential problem for a logic 101 exam.

There's a lady who's sure all that glitters is gold. Bilbo, on the other hand, assures us that all that is gold does not glitter. Assume both are correct, and draw a Venn diagram combining their respective statements.

Such a problem, of course, could only be written by one of those profs who is trying to be hip but whose hipometer is about 30 years out of date.

posted by CMN at 10:50 AM
0 stab(s) back

 
COMMIT MURDER, BUT MAKE NO SPEECHES; POISON PEOPLE, BUT WRITE NO FAXES...
What a bonehead Barbara Streisand is. Leave aside her tiresome tendency to harangue her fellow travellers. On that score, the rest of us can quote something a fictional version of a classical Roman actually did say: "I have never been the friend of Cerberus, and I need not be ashamed of his howling." The real irony is that now she's destroyed even the much vaunted "artistic" credentials on which her only claim to intellectual heft rests. I mean, the passage doesn't even sound like Shakespeare. And her attempts to brazen it out just make it even worse. How can you extol as "beautifully written" something containing the following sentence?: "It both emboldens the blood just as it narrows the mind." I guess to be fair though, compared to the fax she sent anything sounds like Shakespeare.
posted by CMN at 7:16 PM
0 stab(s) back