Slate's Bizbox




the breakfast table: An e-mail conversation about the news of the day.

Andy Dehnart, Wesley Morris, and Alex Pappademas

from: Wesley Morris

Fanning Lame Ideological Fire

Posted Monday, April 23, 2001, at 7:01 PM ET

Boys,

I'd like to offer the first obligatory God-Bless-"The Fray" shootout. Although as Jim Hoberman noted last year, that place can be insane. I'll see how I feel about the mark-ups come Wednesday. Andy, you've taken things to another level, invoking the problem of campus censorship. David Horowitz is an interesting practical problem that should not be solved with theory. Although from a polemical standpoint, the dude has missed his era. He's so "Phil Donohue."



What chafes me about guys like Horowitz, with their revisionist agendas and unkempt facial growth, is that they fan such lame ideological fire. Not that ideas are fads, but the "don't blame whitey" retaliation against African-Americans seeking slave reparations is tired. So is the search for the reparations, one could argue. But if talk shows are our daily news on some level, then perhaps we should take a cue from Ricki-Jerry-Raphael and try to get these people makeovers. Ideological, cosmetic, whatever.

When it comes to discussing race and racism now, it really can be done without going there. I can see the show titles now: "You May Think Reparations for Blacks Is a Bad Idea for Blacks--and Racist, Too, but I'm Still Banging Your Wife" or "Too Political, Too Soon?" Horowitz, though, is good for college campuses, places where time evolves in dog years, allowing for students to spend most of their time honing the art of outrage. I say this as a black guy whose best conversations on race in America never had anything to do with slavery. They were about the Sturm und Drang of where the hell to sit in the frigging dining hall and the essentialist stress of being the only Negro in an Af-Am lit class, and the inexhaustible implications of such scenarios. Welcome, I suppose, to the Ivy League, but then: Welcome to America.

(I always get a little wistful when kids sit around and mist themselves over '80s teen director John Hughes. It doesn't perplex me so much as it makes me wonder why a black sense of humor has yet to find its way into the American high school, then onto the page or to the screen with that kind of impact. There was some early '90s rap that comes pretty close.)

Somewhat related is all this ongoing "Clinton comes to Harlem" talk. I think more people would rather talk about that than Horowitz. It's minty-fresher territory. There's a fine piece in this month's Washington Monthy that lays out a beautiful narrative analysis of "America's First Black President" and his new home. I find the relationship fascinating. How could he be blacker than Jesse Jackson? And less white than Eminem? Someone like Charles Burnett, Oliver Stone, or even Spike Lee really ought to take another wack at Primary Colors and try to lay all the wonderful, horrible, socio-racial, and sexual complexities. To my mind, his blackness is a question mark, but there is a sense of displaced triumph in the throngs of Harlemites who herald his arrival. Better yet, will he appear in an Outkast video? Not because he wants to make reparations, boys, but because he's so fresh and so clean.

Hearts,
Wesley

from: Wesley Morris

Fanning Lame Ideological Fire

Posted Monday, April 23, 2001, at 7:01 PM ET
Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Andy Dehnart publishes Reality Blurred, works as a Web producer and free-lance writer, and is pursuing a master of fine arts in nonfiction writing. Wesley Morris is a film critic at the San Francisco Chronicle. Alex Pappademas is an editor at Blender, a new music magazine.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Reader Comments From The Fray:


[Notes from the Fray Editor: President Bush on drilling, MTV and the youth market: same situation? Talk to WillV here. Thread your way through all the posts saying yes they do have the ads in Chicago (we know now, OK?) and find some posted lists: Zeitguy's Rools of Cool, Paul Caniff's answers to questions, and Gypsy's theory on disco. Jared White suggests Eggertian rather than Eggersesque. Check out the checkmarks for discussions on criticism and music. For more good stuff on film reviews read in full the fascinating posts from Steve Sailer and Aluminum Man (below). Done all that? Congratulations, you are now a complete popular culture Instant Expert. (Or a Breakfast Table Fray expert--same thing.)]


At the risk of sounding churlish--or rather, gleefully trying to sound churlish--the comment of your "Breakfast Table" writer about the Bush administration--"Essentially, they're politically motivated cowards" [Monday's entry]--demonstrates an acute lack of insight into, well, one of the great features of civilization. Politically motivated bravery is usually a suspect virtue--it led Napoleon into Russia, Hoover into a principled stand against "hand-outs," and Tom DeLay into being Tom DeLay. The real problem is that the Bushies face no bullying from the other side of the aisle: nobody who is willing to demagogue them, dog them, and dice them into the neutered conservatism which was Jr.'s daddy's trademark. In the weird mores of Washington, the dogger/dicer really doesn't have to have a national constituency--just a nasty taste for institutional infighting. If only Wellstone had Gingrich's taste for lowmindedness.

--Roger

(To reply, click here.)


Having recently become the film critic for United Press International, I've been thinking a lot about these issues. The biggest problem with movie reviews in general is that reviewers are so homogenous--almost always male, white, upper middle class, with a grad degree in humanities or liberal arts, urban, high IQ, intellectual but not hugely logical or well-informed about things beyond the cultural realm like business or science or sociology, and extremely opinionated--that the tastes of huge demographic groups get ignored. I fall in most of those categories, too, but coming at a rather late age to this trade, I just don't as often experience anymore the testosterone surge that makes me want to shove my opinion down the throats of people who aren't like me.

For example, women. Over the years I've noticed that women generally don't like the same movies I like. That used to offend me greatly. I figured I could cure women of their bad taste in movies by exposing them to the really good stuff (i.e., what I liked) and explaining to them--over and over again--why it's better than the crap they liked. Slowly, though, I grew to respect women and their tastes more. I also learned that lots of other people aren't as smart as me and that making them watch what I liked to watch wasn't going to make them enjoy it more. Now, I take steps to help put myself in other peoples' shoes...

--Steve Sailer

(To reply, or to read this post in full, click here.)


Most Tom Green fans (and I'm not one of them) will have already decided to see Freddy Got Fingered a long time ago, and nothing that reviews have said (or will say) makes any difference. The same is true of the upcoming Lord of the Rings trilogy or the last installments of the increasingly awful Star Wars series. In fact, contrary to what the Breakfast Tablers are suggesting, I think most people have their minds made up about whether or not to see any given movie long before reviews hits the stands.

What informed, thoughtful, articulate critics can do is make us see, hear and understand things in movies that we otherwise might miss. They can challenge us by forcing us to examine elements that we might otherwise pass over, and make us look at a movie from a perspective perhaps unlike our own.

--Aluminum Man

(To reply, click here.)

(4/25)





Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Over the Line
Harold Ford Jr. | I know what it's like to be smeared by your opponent.
: The Positive in Negative Ads
PLUS » Milbank: The President's Lullaby