Punching Paglia et alia

[MASCARO at humnet.ucla.edu]

Kudos to Cal McInvale for an articulate reply to good bud DYB and others re: Clobberin' 
Camille.  Also to Jean B. who notes some obviously reasonable positions Paglia holds. 
Actually, David, she doesn't need coffee; she's that way naturally.  I have published two 
interviews w/ her (APPLAUSE  mag 1990; JACARANDA REVIEW 11, 1995), and find that 
I strongly disagree w/ about half of what she sez and strongly agree w/ about half, and am 
uncommitted on the other half (this is Paglia-land, where ordinary physical laws don't 
hold, where the word *interesting* has only one syllable--she actually does pronounce 
that word in one syllable).  She's fun to talk to, though yes, it's mostly listening.  One 
thing  I'd like to clarify--someone accused her of not brooking critiscism from others and 
that's just flat wrong.  She gives no quarter nor asks  it.  She will listen to if not concede to 
objections to her ideas, reasoning etc.  Yes, she's probably a crypto-fascist  but who 
ain't--(surely not you, David C. to whom I apologize for my false implication that you 
approved of violence on those you disagree with; I still  object to that smarmy *Cheers* 
and suggest you vary your sign offs to show that old creative spirit.  I recommend you 
study the work of our own dear hag, master of the complimentary close--never the same 
one twice and all pure fun like a rich pus pudding.)  She also is a humanist (for good or 
ill).
BTW, Diana denies Paglia the mantle of *feminist* but Paglia herself claims to be one, in 
the "Amelia Earhart mode," as she puts it.  Now isn't it a basic credo of contemporary 
progressive thought that people should be called or labeled what they want to be called or 
labeled?  So how can we claim she's not a feminist and not ourselves be guilty of, etc. etc.

Basically I find her a hoot--very entertaining and not dangerous;  the fact that she excites 
such hysterical denunciations points to a need for a little lightening up all around. 

Chars,
john m


Cal McInvale wrote:
 
>In the midst of all this bickering about Camille "Slugger" Paglia, Diana
>York Blaine complains:
>
>     I certainly cannot speak for all feminists,
>
>And here all along that's what I thought you were doing.
>
>     but I know much of the frustration about Camille Paglia comes from
>     the assumption that she is a feminist because she is a woman.
>
>So do you get frustrated when people assumed that an individual is NOT a
>feminist because he is a MAN? I'd guess that you don't. What really makes
>feministas irate is that Paglia calls them on things that other people just
>blindly and stupidly accept as gospel. (See below.)
>
>     This is untrue.  Many women spout the male party line and get
>     mondo approval for it.
>
>Guess I need to pay my dues, cuz I haven't heard anything about a "male
>party line." I mean, when I took a shower this morning, I was male... so I
>should know a little bit about it... I think...
>
>Y'see, this is what I'm talking about: there is no "male party line," just
>as there is no "female party line" or any "black party line." And when
>"feminists" say this sort of thing, they open themselves up to the kind of
>shots -- cheap or otherwise -- that Paglia takes at feminism.
>
>     She is one of them.  That is her right.
>
>Nice of you to allow her free speech. Very un-feminist of you.
>
>     But don't confuse it in any way with "the radical notion that
>     women are people."
>
>Are you asserting that Paglia doesn't believe that women are people? I hope
>not; you're already teetering on the proverbial plank.
>
>As if to further the controversy, add fuel to the fire and enter his own
>arms into the fray, Chris Stolz offered:
>
>     1)  Paglia turns feminism into a straw man, i.e. imputes to it claims
>     which
>     it either doesn't make or which aren't representative of most of its
>     exponents, and then attacks the straw man (woman?)
>
>Try "Organically-Challenged Biped" instead of "Straw Man/Woman."
>
>And since it's nearly impossible to assert what "feminism" claims, I would
>have to clarify this for you -- Paglia takes on the claims of certain
>*feminists* (which may or may not compute to being "claims of feminism").
>
>     2)  she is, like her diss. adviser Bloom, fundamentally a monloguist who
>     speaks in sound bites and one-liners and doesn't listen to her opponents,
>     plus she drinks too much coffee.
>
>Hey, bud... unless your head explodes, there's no such thing as too much
>coffee.
>
>And in my experience/opinion, we're *all* monologists, who just happen to
>let other monologues cross our paths from time-to-time. Shit, man... the
>preferred mode of discourse these days is the monologue. Who the hell cares
>what other people think? Get an e-mail address, set up your own web pages
>and SPOUT to the world your opinions and ideas. That's what we're all on
>this list for, right? I mean, nobody *really* joined this list to learn
>more about Thomas Pynchon. (If you did, I suggest you go to the library
>instead.)
>
>Finally, Picking On Paglia (for all the trend it's been for these last
>coupla years) is about as original and innovative as making age jokes about
>Bob Dole. Get off it already.
>
>No cheers...
>
>
>------------------
>cal mcinvale                      entropy specialist
>calm at tpdinc.com                   tpd publishing inc.
>
>This message may contain forward-looking statements which
>involve risks and uncertainties. The user's actual results
>could differ materially from the results discussed herein.
>
>
>