November 05, 2004
THIS ARTICLE BY JANE SMILEY in Slate is getting a lot of attention. Jessica Harbour suspects a cruel plot to discredit novelists who talk about politics. (We need a plot for that?) The Belmont Club summarizes it this way: "One of the several ways to parse this argument is to take it on its own terms. In this account, the bulk of Ms. Smiley's enemies consist of a single, undifferentiated mass of red staters with the bestial appetites and intelligence of retarded slugs. . . . As a model of simplification it is unexampled. Nothing could be clearer; nothing more proof against refutation."
I suggest that Ms. Smiley read James Lileks' response to the "undifferentiated mass of red staters" school of argument.
And she should also buy Lileks' new book! But then, so should everyone.
UPDATE: Interesting observation from the comments at The Belmont Club:
If Kerry had won, the war would undoubtedly be repudiated in the press everywhere. But now that Bush has won, it has been decided that he won on other issues like gay marriage and abortion.