It may be harmful to your health.
Author: Bill Vallicella
Leftist ‘Logic’
The Question of the Reality of God: Wittgensteinian Fideism No Answer
Substack latest.
Twitter and the War of the Oligarchs
Geoff Shullenberger at Compact:
Those fretting about the world’s wealthiest man gaining control over their favorite site have scarcely objected to the fact that the media outlets, think tanks, NGOs, and universities they work for comprise a patronage network bankrolled by a handful of other billionaires like eBay founder Pierre Omidyar and Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. Musk has done a service by exposing the function Twitter performs for this alliance of oligarchs and the professional classes, which Michael Lind terms “Progressivism, Inc.”
From the beginning, Twitter has been central to the agenda of this alliance, though that agenda looked very different only a decade or so ago. During the Arab Spring, for example, Western journalists, NGOs, and politicians rhapsodized about the democratizing potential of Twitter in much the same terms as Musk today. Indeed, many of the same reporters, bloggers, and columnists who now inveigh against Musk’s support for free speech hailed how free expression, enabled by platforms like Twitter, could bring down dictatorships.
At this earlier moment, Progressivism, Inc. saw social media as an opportunity to spread its values abroad: The free flow of information was seen as a way of attenuating the power of foreign governments in favor of a loose affiliation of Western state entities, NGOs, and media outlets that sought to expand their influence. More recently, in the face of the populist threats that emerged around 2016 at home, the same alliance has deployed censorship to reassert its hegemony. Thus, while elite ideological opinion on free speech has reversed, what remains constant is the attempt to control the circulation of information in favor of certain interests.
Both Musk and those who fear him position themselves as the defenders of democracy. In reality, the episode reveals how vacuous the term has become. In the final analysis, the conflict over Twitter is a war between rival factions of oligarchs. A less censorious Twitter is desirable in itself, as is the emergence of any meaningful challenge to the conformity that stifles cultural and intellectual life. But a less censorious internet also risks obscuring how power is really exercised in a world where the so-called public square is a patchwork of privatized ideological fiefdoms.
Two-Fisted Self-Pity: Anatole Broyard’s Review of Richard Yates, YOUNG HEARTS CRYING
In what follows I correct the digitized version of Broyard's review which first appeared in The New York Times on 28 October 1984. Yates' novel appeared in the same year. Blake Bailey masterfully recounts the book's reception in A Tragic Honesty: The Life and Work of Richard Yates (Picador 2003), pp. 529-541, with special attention to Broyard's trenchant and somewhat mean-spirited review. Yates made it as a novelist; despite his considerable literary promise, Broyard never did and his envy shows.
Broyard was quite a character, "the greatest cocksman in New York for a decade" (Bailey, 201, quoting a former girlfriend of Broyard) and "the only spade among the Beat Generation” as he is described here. A light-skinned black, he tried to pass himself off as white.
……………………………………..
Anatole Broyard is an editor of The Book Review.
YOUNG HEARTS CRYING
By Richard Yates. 347 pp. New York: Seymour Lawrence/Delacorte Press. $16.95.
THERE seems to be an element of relief in some of the critical praise given to the novels and short stories of Richard Yates. William Styron called ''Revolutionary Road,'' Yates's first novel, ''classic'' and Ann Beattie used the same word for ''Liars in Love,'' his second collection of stories. ''Realistic'' and ''craft'' are two more terms that are often applied to his work. The way these words are used is interesting: they are the visible half of an implicit opposition, suggesting that most novels and stories are not so conspicuously classical, realistic and well crafted.
Mr. Yates is seen as turning the tide, or holding the line, against a general moral and esthetic deterioration. We know where we are with him: in the American mainstream. Hemingway and Fitzgerald are waving from the banks of the stream and they can be heard in Mr. Yates's pages. Like Hemingway's heroes, Mr. Yates's male protagonists worry about their masculinity and talk at length about the integrity of art. Like Fitzgerald's men, they care about style and status and drink a lot to keep up their courage.
Mr. Yates's heroes are classical in the nature of their adversary relation to culture, for it's not the war in Vietnam or the civil rights struggle that arouses their moral indignation, but the mediocrity, emptiness and conformity – all Mr. Yates's words – of American life itself. When, in ''Revolutionary Road,'' Frank Wheeler talks of throwing up his job at the Knox Business Machine Company and ''finding himself'' in Europe, he is closer to Henry Miller and the expatriates of the 1920's than to the people of John Updike, John Cheever or Donald and Frederick Barthelme. In fact, he may be closer to Theodore Dreiser and Thomas Wolfe.
Yes, I Repeat Myself
Easter Monday Local Ramble
Ratzinger on the Resurrection of the Body
Substack latest.
You will note that in my writings I use the gender-neutral 'man' and 'he.' It is important to stand in defense of the mother tongue. She is under vicious assault these days. You owe a lot to your mother; show her some respect. On Easter Sunday and on every day. Anyone who takes offense at standard English takes offense inappropriately.
Dissent = Hate = Violence
Holy Saturday Night at the Oldies
Herewith, six definite decouplings of rock and roll from sex and drugs.
Norman Greenbaum, Spirit in the Sky
Johnny Cash, Personal Jesus. This is one powerful song.
Clapton and Winwood, Presence of the Lord. Why is Clapton such a great guitarist? Not because of his technical virtuosity, his 'chops,' but because he uses them to say something. You don't agree? De gustibus non est disputandum!
George Harrison, My Sweet Lord
George Harrison, Hear Me Lord
George Harrison, All Things Must Pass. Harrison was the Beatle with depth. Lennon the radical, McCartney the romantic, Starr the regular guy.
Some Very Good Masters
Come May, I will have been on a Richard Yates jag for a year. What follows is my correction of the digitized version of Yates' essay "Some Very Good Masters" which first appeared in The New York Times on 19 April 1981. Yates explains what he learned about writing from F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby and from Gustave Flaubert's Madame Bovary. He also supplies examples of T. S. Eliot's "objective correlative."
This article is credited with bringing Yates out of literary eclipse.
More Yates quotations here.
………………………………
IT must have been the movies of the 1930's more than any other influence that got me into the habit of thinking like a writer. I wasn't a bookish child; reading was such hard work for me that I avoided it whenever possible. But I wasn't exactly the rough-and ready type either, and so the movies filled a double need: They gave me an awful lot of cheap story material and a good place to hide.
When I was about 14, I started submitting movie-haunted stories to my English teachers, as if to prove there was something I could do, but it wasn't until three or four years later that reading, both fiction and poetry, began to sweep the movies into a dark and vaguely shameful corner of my mind, where they have remained ever since. I almost never go to a movie now, and have been known to explain loftily, if not quite at the top of my lungs, that this is because movies are for children.
Wittgenstein on Christianity
Ars vivendi longa, sed vita brevis
Life is too short to master the art of life. That is surely the case for most. A few old souls are exceptions to the rule.
Self-Deprecation
A modicum of self-deprecation, judiciously deployed, will enhance your relations with others. Too much will earn contempt, and the opposite hostility.
Progress in Philosophy
I am making progress in philosophy, which is not to say that philosophy is making progress in me.
