Sunday, November 30, 2014

Around the internets, Vol. 3

Welcome to another installment of (dum-ta-da-DAAAAAHH...) Around the Internets! This awesome feature is one which I originally described as "[a] quick digest of stuff which I've seen, read, noticed, thought 'Gee I ought to blog that', etc. over the last 4 or 5 months." Actually the time-frame is a bit shorter this time. So without further ado....

Firstly, it's always a good idea to check in with Sistah Raccoon in St. Francisville, Louisiana. She always has something interestin' to share with us. Her latest:

Ain't you glad you not related to Lil Ray?

Lil Ray now telling the whole world how old an feeble an helpless Big Ray be now.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher...

Old age be a humiliation, say Lil Ray. Telling about old people like Big Ray crapping they pants in the hospital. Course he telling ever body all this about Big Ray out a LOVE, you understand, umh-hnh.

Slow down, Lil Ray. You gone get all that land in good time.

Just be glad Lil Ray not telling the world what happening in YOU pants.

Whoa. Let that be a warning to all y'all who be lettin' y'all's kids borrow those bloggin' computers, let alone willing them over all that land. They'll be puttin' up pictures on billboards of you sitting in wheelchairs next!

Meanwhile, in an entirely different part of the internets which Diane pointed out to us (thanks, Diane!), there is some discussion about animals and human sexuality and Rod Dreher's take on it. Near the end of the comments, our friend Owen White reminds us of an incident in Paris back in 2012. From the link provided by Owen:

The taste was electric, almost indescribably good. It was one of the few times in my life when the experience of tasting something delicious made me feel a sense of exaltation. They were like cold sea grenades exploding in my mouth, bursting with saline, iodine, and that metallic taste you only find in oysters. I slurped them from the half-shell, holding them in my mouth longer than usual to savor the new sensations. I have never, ever eaten oysters that prepared me for these glorious creatures. Later, I e-mailed Julie that eating French oysters was like licking the ta-tas of Poseidon’s favorite concubine. She was not amused. But it’s true! The aesthetic frisson was absolutely erotic. Dominique Strauss-Kahn lives around the corner, at the Place des Vosges; I think his proximity to Le Bar a Huitres (Oyster Bar) might explain a lot.

So why was Rod Dreher's wife not amused by his description of eating good oysters being like licking a concubine's breasts? I don't know; maybe it's because she is a Christian. Well, he went ahead and put it out there anyway, along with her reaction. I guess he has a shorter memory about this

So many times, I’ll put something on my blog, and my wife will say, “I wish you hadn’t done that.”

than we do. Just for a sanity check I read this to my wife. Fortunately the floor wasn't damaged when her jaw hit it. But I have to saw that Dreher has bigger ones than me; that doghouse don't be looking too good this time of year. The obvious takeaway is this: it's okay to have sex with animals if they are dead and being served by a Parisian cook. For the record, I'm still going to pass.

This all reminded me of the time (and you'll see why in a moment) that Dreher referred to conservatives as "mongoloids" and then made the weak excuse that he meant it in "the Ignatian sense", referring to the character named Ignatius Reilly in A Confederacy of Dunces. My memory had been jogged about a link Topix Pat provided to another man's experience with the book; excerpt:

One scene, near the beginning of the book, had an especially dizzying effect on me. (I’ve read it hundreds and hundreds of times.) It’s where we find Ignatius practicing a little "self-love" in his bed; an innocent, even saintly, wank to a happier time in his life. He had accessories nearby: a rubber glove, a piece of fabric from a silk umbrella, and a jar of Noxzema:

Ignatius manipulated and concentrated. At last a vision appeared, the familiar figure of the large devoted collie that had been his pet in high school...Ignatius’s eyes dilated, crossed, and closed, and he lay back among his four pillows, hoping that he had some Kleenex in his room.

This is the page where I went fag. The solitude and isolation, the very sadness of it all, didn’t turn me off—on the contrary, it was the hook. Sex scenes had always been filled with gorgeous people. Ignatius wasn’t gorgeous. But he was sexual. I think it must have been the first time, in literature or film or life, when it occurred to me these were two different things. It was loud and clear. I had been fooling myself. I wanted something else from the Ignatiuses of the world. Something if much more than hugs.

So we find out now that the inspiration for Dreher's famous referring to conservatives as "mongoloids" is a grown man with over-valued intelligence who thinks about the collie he had as a boy while he is "practicing a saintly wank". I don't know if everyone who reads A Confederacy of Dunces becomes a homosexual the way Giancarlo DiTrapano says he did, but it's probably not worth the risk. At any rate, this might explain why the topic of sex with animals is of interest to the Working Boy; it's been in his wheelhouse for a long time, or so it would seem.

By the way, you all might want to give that entire oysters post a read. It has a lot of interesting material about going to a Novus Ordo Mass celebrated in Latin in Paris and how great it was. I think it's just one more piece of evidence that, like Casella noted, Mr. Dreher remains "culturally Catholic" no matter how incessantly he insists that he's not.

Update: Pikkumatti has provided a pertinent link with this very interesting selfie. (Title translation: Ignatius, my love)

15 comments:

  1. The really outrageous thing in RayLand the past few days is the extreme credulousness he has shown the frankly BS "UVa Frat Gang Rape Story" in Rolling Stone. A completely unsourced, Stephen Glass-like fabrication to anyone who reads it with an iota of critical judgment, but for Rod it's like The Scandal allover again, only this time with the Greek System rather than the Church.

    It reminds one of just what an absolutely crap journalist he was before the blog. No ability to look at claims with any skepticism. No willingness to lose any shoe leather to get counter-narratives, identify witnesses, get people on the record. In fact, the spectacle leads one to make two tentative conclusions:

    1) He was never really a 'journalist' at all. Just a C-list belle-lettrist at best even when he was with NR etc.; and

    2) If his investigative skills were so lacking all along, perhaps it might be appropriate to stop viewing his work in 2002 on The Scandal as necessarily 100% truthful.

    -The Man From K Street

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I realize people often get tired of my critiques of Rod Dreher, but, really, to me Dreher himself is only of passing interest, merely the vehicular cart carrying the pathologies I try to describe.

      For, you see, another perfectly acceptable way of describing what I'm always going on about is that Obama is the consequence of Rod Dreher happening to a nation: the same charismatic predation on the credulous and the needy, the same narcissistic petulance, the same opacity and obsessive urges for iron-clad control.

      Watch Rod Dreher close up and in small scale, learn the lessons of Rod Dreher's masterful passive-aggressive crowd manipulation, and maybe you'll learn a little something about how to prevent the next Obama, even if he shows up from our side the next time around.

      Now you understand that Dreher's "journalism" with respect to the Catholic Church was about promoting Dreher, about giving him a platform cloaked in how-dare-you-raise-rational-critiques-while children-are-at-risk, the same play Obama just ran on immigration, which from just about any angle actually harms immigrants far more than helping them, but which has as its primary real purpose simultaneously tempting Republicans into a political double-bind while turning them into a handy footstool for Obama to stand a head taller on top of.

      So every time Dreher says "Catholic" what you really should be hearing him saying is "footstool" instead.

      Delete
    2. I think that, at least at this point in time, The Scandal is nothing more than another leftist myth. The fact that he is still hooked and hoodwinked by it shows that he is just as naive about it as Laura Turner is about Ferguson.

      Delete
    3. Keith: "I realize people often get tired of my critiques of Rod Dreher..."

      Not at all. Those critiques are why I come here. I disagree emphatically with almost all of the political posts on this blog (I don't comment on them), but we all, left and right, can join hands in bipartisan harmony and sing around the campfire where Rod's "journalism" burns. So, behold the unifying power of Rod's writing. Kind of heart-warming, innit?

      Delete
    4. It is heart-warming, I agree! Because for some reason there are a number of people -- both liberal and conservative -- that don't see him for the phony hack and faux intellectual that he is. But once a person has awakened to how strange the man's narcissistic totalitarian ideology is, he/she can be of any political persuasion and still relate to our serial exposés. We see ourselves first and foremost the honest kids at end of the Emperor's New Clothes fable. We possess no wisdom beyond recognizing the look and smell of bullshit.

      The truth is that I've gotten emails from people who have told me that he has literally gone after them in the real world, trying to turn people in their church against them. I've gotten an email from a popular Catholic writer praising something I wrote, but then adding the paranoid disclaimer "Hey, don't let Rod Dreher know I said that." Dreher can be mean, vindictive and manipulative, and he doesn't get called on his gross inaccuracies, misrepresentations and errors in judgment nearly enough. All we are really doing here is attempting to equalize things.

      My favorite emails say things like “You don’t know how much I appreciate what you write about Rod Dreher. Somebody need to write this stuff.”

      Delete
    5. Watch Rod Dreher close up and in small scale, learn the lessons of Rod Dreher's masterful passive-aggressive crowd manipulation, and maybe you'll learn a little something about how to prevent the next Obama, even if he shows up from our side the next time around.

      Don't worry; I think Newt's had it. (Whoops; did I offend anyone?)

      Delete
  2. This "journalism" is allowed because Dreher has no real editors who will call him out. I emailed Wick Allison asking him to name the bishop who caused Dreher problems back in 2002. I pointed out that it was to generalized and not specific enough. Did Allison offer any information or ask Dreher to modify his column? Of course not. Dreher could not do what he did without the enablers he has. Jonathan Carpenter

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think Rod has more to worry about on that score from Julie then from Wick.I always chuckle at his repeated story about their first encounter: how she was so awestruck to finally meet a Real Journalist.

    Ray, she's still looking...

    -TMFKS

    ReplyDelete
  4. This selfie of Dreher with the Ignatius J. Reilly statue in New Orleans now takes on a whole different meaning.

    I guess one thing to be grateful for is that Dreher didn't write about having an erotic experience while eating escargot -- the simile would have been even more uncomfortable.

    ReplyDelete
  5. In the meta-land of Ouroborus Boy, his own credulity is part of his credibility. It's not the destination, Grasshopper, it's the journey.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yep, Keith, it's not about Truth for him, it's about his heroic struggle against his own confirmation biases as he thinks about the Truth.

    N.B. in his walking back piece today, he also opened the door to the possibility he might have, um, been party to some fudging of the truth in 2002: "[t]he familiarity of this narrative does not mean that when it is alleged — within the Church or other institutions, like UVA — that it actually happened...I was prepared to believe [... this] story on the basis of little real evidence offered because it fit my preferred narrative."

    -TMFKS

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've probably said this before, but a centralized archive fact-checking things Dreher has gotten wrong (like the recent Irish babies thing) might be a kindness to those beginning to be swayed by him who may not know otherwise. Like an all-in-one "Day Rod Was There"-type page that could be group sourced and easily located for reference when needed.

      Delete
  7. Yikes! I believed the UVA story. Had it been credibly discredited?

    ReplyDelete