Vonnegut Weighs In

January 30, 2003 2:51 AM

Vonnegut Weighs in on the State of the Union.As a writer and artist, have you noticed any difference between how the cultural leaders of the past and the cultural leaders of today view their responsibility to society?

Responsibility to which society? To Nazi Germany? To the Stalinist Soviet Union? What about responsibility to humanity in general? And leaders in what particular cultural activity? I guess you mean the fine arts. I hope you mean the fine arts. ... Anybody practicing the fine art of composing music, no matter how cynical or greedy or scared, still can't help serving all humanity. Music makes practically everybody fonder of life than he or she would be without it. Even military bands, although I am a pacifist, always cheer me up.
posted by crasspastor (80 comments total)

isn't it great when you hear opinions that reflect your own, home-grown opinions, from those you respect. i mean, the guy is 80 years old, and he has come to similar conclusions as me. it would be a great honour for me to be called 'as mad as vonnegut'.
'To say somebody is a PP is to make a perfectly respectable medical diagnosis, like saying he or she has appendicitis or athlete’s foot. The classic medical text on PPs is The Mask of Sanity by Dr. Hervey Cleckley. Read it! PPs are presentable, they know full well the suffering their actions may cause others, but they do not care. They cannot care because they are nuts. They have a screw loose!'
word!
Cleckley says:
"...No normal person is so unevolved and no ordinary criminal so generally unresponsive and distorted that he does not seem to experience satisfaction, love, hate, grief, and a general participation in life at human personality levels much more intense and more substantial than the affective reactions of the psychopath..."
i must concur. just as you would not choose a non-taster* as a wine buyer, i would not choose a psycho/sociopath as a leader of people.
*'a person with fewer sensors on the tongue, cheeks, and pharyngeal areas'
posted by asok at 3:48 AM on January 30, 2003

here's the link to an explanation of the mechanisms of taste, which i had intended to include.
i would be suprised if many of the ceos and polititians that rule (flash5 required) were not certifiable as psycho/sociopaths.
posted by asok at 3:56 AM on January 30, 2003

What has happened, though, is that it has been taken over by means of the sleaziest, low-comedy, Keystone Cops-style coup d’etat imaginable.

Yes! I love that. But then, I'm a sucker for comedy 'k' sounds, and alliteration, and melt when they are combined.

Like so many, I've always had a sophomoric soft spot (witness my weakness for alliteration!) for Kurt. And he puts in a reasonably good showing for an old bastard here. And so it goes.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:27 AM on January 30, 2003

This Vonnegut link would have been perfect on its own. Sans diatribe, that is.
posted by hama7 at 5:40 AM on January 30, 2003

This line stood out--And those now in charge of the federal government are upper-crust C-students who know no history or geography, plus not-so-closeted white supremacists, aka “Christians,” and plus, most frighteningly, psychopathic personalities, or “PPs.”

While the statement may not be exactly true, it certainly has a ring of truth to it. His idea of "PPs" running corporations makes much sense to me. Kurt is a crusty old son-of-a-bitch and I love him for it. I hope I have as much life in me when I'm 50, much less 80.
posted by ashbury at 6:11 AM on January 30, 2003

I'm only a degree away from KV, and have met him directly on a number of occasions (once at a party at his then residence in Iowa City).

On both occasions, I, having been known for verbalizing nearly every thought that happened to cross my mind, had been struck dumb in the light of his starshine. Being an aspiring writer at the time, I had come to view him as my personal Mecca, and in each occasion that I met him, he impressed me as being all of those things, and yet still maintained a completely earthy normality about him.

As he has just turned 80, I imagine that my life will soon be slightly darkened. Thought-provoking pieces like this will no longer emanate from the midwest, and I'll be left to think for myself. Ah, cruel time.
posted by thanotopsis at 6:15 AM on January 30, 2003

I "still can't help serving humanity" - that makes me feel pretty good. I've really enjoyed all the Vonnegut I've read, and this article was no different.

On the idea of music making people fonder of life, I recommend my friend Eric Whitacre's upcoming "opera electronica," Paradise Lost, in New York (both links require Flash).
posted by gsalad at 6:48 AM on January 30, 2003

Hama7, the "diatribe" is an excerpt from the interview. I enjoyed this excerpt as well:

And so it is with anti-war protests in the present day. Then as now, TV did not like anti-war protesters, nor any other sort of protesters, unless they rioted. Now, as then, on account of TV, the right of citizens to peaceably assemble, and petition their government for a redress of grievances, “ain’t worth a pitcher of warm spit,” as the saying goes
posted by jonah at 7:18 AM on January 30, 2003

my favorite bits:

Do this! Do that! Mobilize the reserves! Privatize the public schools! Attack Iraq! Cut health care! Tap everybody’s telephone! Cut taxes on the rich! Build a trillion-dollar missile shield! Fuck habeas corpus and kiss my ass!

and the immortal:

What targets would you consider fair game for a satirist today?

"Assholes"
posted by matteo at 7:53 AM on January 30, 2003

Well, we've heard from Kurt and Norman and John le Carre. That should be enough pop writers. But we really shouldn't make any hasty decisions until we've heard from Justin and Britney and J.Lo.
posted by jfuller at 7:54 AM on January 30, 2003

Shame on you, jfuller, for equating Vonnegut, Mailer and Le Carre with Justin, Britney and JLo. Especially Vonnegut. Shame!
posted by ashbury at 8:12 AM on January 30, 2003

I'm only a degree away from KV,

at first I thought you meant this kv and I was all, "word? tell her I said whats up!" but anyhow.

I saw Kurt in an ad for a car yesterday and he was lookin' ooooold. I hope he's all right :(
posted by mcsweetie at 8:41 AM on January 30, 2003

i hope so too mcsweetie. i've been one of vonnegut's biggest fans since i was fifteen.

i cant believe he's already turned eighty. its nice to see that he's still as smart as ever too.
posted by joedan at 8:49 AM on January 30, 2003

Seems to me that vonnegut's looked old for the last 40 years.
Maybe it's cuz the interviews that see the light of day (mostly) keep getting more and more shallow and product-driven (not to mention being with subjects that simply lack any imagination), but Vonnegut seems to keep getting more and more relevant, lucid and inspiring (and depressing) as we descend into our self-made shitstorm of consequences.
dunno. thanks for the link, tho.
posted by chandy72 at 8:54 AM on January 30, 2003

On further recollection, I would be interested to hear what britney, jlo and justin have to say on current affairs. I'm actually quite curious about why our so-called pop stars don't weigh in on the possible war, ceo's absconding with funds and other such weighty matters. I won't hold my breath though...
posted by ashbury at 8:58 AM on January 30, 2003

Vonnegut's maybe my favorite writer and philosopher (read God Bless You, Dr. Kevorkian), but some of his latest stuff, the "none of us asked to be born" stuff (there's a bunch in Timequake), just seems too depressing for me. I don't like it one bit. Maybe I'm missing the point, but it just seems so anti-humanistic. The point of humanism is to be good people, without concern for the afterlife. To be good because humans should be good to each other, unconditionally. The "asked to be born stuff," just seems to clash with that for me. Seems so nihilistic. Too "who cares?"
posted by gramcracker at 9:15 AM on January 30, 2003

Come on cp, this piece is not about the sotu. It was published the day before.
It's really about ......shhhhhh.....Iraq.
posted by shoos at 9:22 AM on January 30, 2003

mcsweetie: if kv is a her, (s)he's got a seriously misleading user page:

our host is rob (photo below. yeah he's single)
posted by languagehat at 9:38 AM on January 30, 2003

Anyone remember KV in Back to School? Ha!
posted by cell divide at 9:38 AM on January 30, 2003

Vonnegut in 2004!
posted by Outlawyr at 9:48 AM on January 30, 2003

mcsweetie: if kv is a her, (s)he's got a seriously misleading user page:

thats what I'm sayin! I dunno who that dumb lookin kid is.
posted by mcsweetie at 10:54 AM on January 30, 2003

But we really shouldn't make any hasty decisions until we've heard from Justin and Britney and J.Lo.

Oh, come now - while it's obviously clear that the sort of incisive, objective geo-political analysis required to make tough foreign policy decisions can't be considered fully complete until we hear from Britney and Justin, we've at least recieved enough guidance from Susan Sarandon, Barbara Striesand, and other actors, writers, and assorted artistic luminaries to reach at least a preliminary conclusion, haven't we? And I'm sure that just as soon as Britney and Justin resolve the issues surrounding the potential for future sexual relations, they'll immediately turn their full attention towards supplying us with the crucial insight we need reach a final, conclusive opinion on the issue.
posted by MidasMulligan at 11:19 AM on January 30, 2003

we've at least recieved enough guidance from Susan Sarandon, Barbara Striesand,

Don't stop there! What about Ahnold and Sonny Bono and Heston? And the perennial Saint Raygun!! We're all eager to hear from that one!
posted by nofundy at 11:37 AM on January 30, 2003

No foma or granfalloons; Vonnegut tells it like it is.
posted by Shane at 12:04 PM on January 30, 2003

we've at least recieved enough guidance from Susan Sarandon, Barbara Striesand

Well fortunately for us, we've also heard from retired Colonel David Hackworth. (He's against war with Iraq).
posted by spacewaitress at 2:49 PM on January 30, 2003

MidasMulligan: Oh, come now - while it's obviously clear that the sort of incisive, objective geo-political analysis required to make tough foreign policy decisions can't be considered fully complete until we hear from Britney and Justin, we've at least recieved enough guidance from Susan Sarandon, Barbara Striesand, and other actors, writers, and assorted artistic luminaries to reach at least a preliminary conclusion, haven't we?

nofundy: Don't stop there! What about Ahnold and Sonny Bono and Heston? And the perennial Saint Raygun!! We're all eager to hear from that one!

Hell, and don't forget Ted Nugent and Big Fred Thompson. And gee, don't Limbaugh and all the other right-wing talk radio anencephalics self-describe themselves as "just entertainers" too? What about the incisive and objective Ann Coulter? Isn't she a "writer"? (I use the term loosely, to be sure).

One really can't imagine why those particular folks didn't make it onto MidasMulligan's dumb little "artists who dare speak out on geopolitics" list. But once again, the hypocrisy of a certain segment here on MetaFilter never fails to amuse.

~guffaw~
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 3:00 PM on January 30, 2003

This Vonnegut link would have been perfect on its own. Sans diatribe, that is.

Oh, by the way....gotta admire your consistent stance on "diatribes".
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 3:08 PM on January 30, 2003

MidasMulligan: Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron has made its way into serious academic political theory texts and college courses throughout the globe. Just to let you know.
posted by raysmj at 4:00 PM on January 30, 2003

I say it's unrealistic to require all celebrities to survive the firebombing of Dresden as a POW, write a best-selling novel based on their PR work for a major corporation, or deliver humanitarian aid overseas in order to "earn the right" to have political opinions. Celebrities are usually pretty good at expressing emotions, and in times of war, conveying emotion is a source of healing. Like John Edmonds said,

"Once you look coldly at war we're in the hands of the devil."

Elsewhere in the world, great writers like Heinrich Boll are respected for their efforts to bring insight and reflection on important issues of the day.

All those years of Cold War lobbying to remove all socio-political content from the arts are finally starting to bear fruit. Even people like Newt Gingrich are beginning to acknowledge that the vapid arrogance of American pop culture is one reason teenagers around the world think poorly of the United States.

If politics is such a bad thing for writers and artists, howcome so many people around the world like Kurt Vonnegut and Bob Marley?
posted by sheauga at 4:38 PM on January 30, 2003

I am going to miss that man when he's gone.
posted by Optamystic at 5:39 PM on January 30, 2003

the excellent Kevorkian piece gramcracker alluded to is here
posted by matteo at 5:58 PM on January 30, 2003

One really can't imagine why those particular folks didn't make it onto MidasMulligan's dumb little "artists who dare speak out on geopolitics" list. But once again, the hypocrisy of a certain segment here on MetaFilter never fails to amuse.

You are absolutely right about that. And I appreciate your comedic efforts.
posted by MidasMulligan at 7:08 PM on January 30, 2003

Günter Grass.
posted by muckster at 7:24 PM on January 30, 2003

Oh, by the way....gotta admire your consistent stance on "diatribes".

F&M, all I can be thankful for is that your 'roasting babies over barbecue' references have finally reached a desistance.

In other news, Vonnegut is a funny and hilariously insightful writer, but like Alec Baldwin and Susan Sarandon and Richard Dreyfuss (*shudder*), when it comes to politics, he is an insufferable liberal dickwad.

Ah well, you can't win 'em all!
posted by hama7 at 3:45 AM on January 31, 2003

~wink~
posted by hama7 at 3:47 AM on January 31, 2003

~Irony just passes you on by~


In other news, Vonnegut is a funny and hilariously insightful writer, but like Alec Baldwin and Susan Sarandon and Richard Dreyfuss (*shudder*), when it comes to politics, he is an insufferable liberal dickwad.

~You simply do not get it~
posted by crasspastor at 4:27 AM on January 31, 2003

~hiya crasspastor!~
posted by hama7 at 4:47 AM on January 31, 2003

hama7, I know I've asked this before but you never gave me a clear answer last time, so I want to whether or not you're a real person or a "liberal" pretending to be a "conservative" to make the right look bad?
posted by mcsweetie at 5:47 AM on January 31, 2003

I want to whether or not you're a real person or a "liberal" pretending to be a "conservative"

Yes. Actually I am a cat, so I have several lives to fritter away before actually having to consider anything.

Or, no. I have purposefully undertaken a detailed rumination of goofy leftist hysteria, and decided it's a steaming pile of cheddar cheese.

Satisfied, mcsweetie?
posted by hama7 at 9:04 AM on January 31, 2003

A cat?
posted by Shane at 9:12 AM on January 31, 2003

Satisfied, mcsweetie?

I guess so.
posted by mcsweetie at 9:17 AM on January 31, 2003

Vonnegut is a funny and hilariously insightful writer, but ... when it comes to politics, he is an insufferable liberal dickwad.

You mean he's "funny and hilariously insightful" until he hits too close to home for comfort?
posted by muckster at 10:28 PM on January 31, 2003

Oh, the constant crying and whining when he gets so colicky from sucking venom and bile from the twin tits of Horowitz and Limbaugh.
posted by y2karl at 11:07 PM on January 31, 2003

You mean he's "funny and hilariously insightful" until he hits too close to home for comfort?

No actually, I mean Streisand is a wonderful singer, and Dreyfuss was pretty good in 'Close Encounters' and Alec Baldwin........well never mind. Sean Penn too, and Sarandon in 'Thelma and Louise'.

But off the job, when politics comes up, they all sound pretty much the same, and it's Hollywood liberal codswallop. It's just disappointing to hear the same from Vonnegut. But who cares?
posted by hama7 at 3:10 AM on February 1, 2003

hama7, I know I've asked this before but you never gave me a clear answer last time, so I want to whether or not you're a real person or a "liberal" pretending to be a "conservative" to make the right look bad?


That's my question too mcsweetie.

I mean everyone knows I'm well taken care of by the Soviet Union. That's no lie. They do take care of me. You should see the waterproof laptop from which in my hot-tub I post. They spare no expense.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Hama7 was a paid prop meant to bring a perceived inpromptu online acceptability to the biggest travesty in all of American History: George W Bush. You can't make benign excuses for the most asinine, corrupt, fascist, constitutionally unsound anti-administration in history and yet also exude a down to earth, ordinary-man chattiness in an online forum without having some sort of backing that's paid you off.

See what I mean.

It's just disappointing to hear the same from Vonnegut. But who cares?

Vonnegut's been doing it since well before you were born Hama7.

It's really quite hilarious to see Hama7 affix foot to grill the way he has in this thread. Trying to run circles around the great Kurt Vonnegut. It's pretty much an oxymoron.

You got some reading to do Hama. . .
posted by crasspastor at 4:43 AM on February 1, 2003

Vonnegut's been doing it since well before you were born Hama7.

That's funny, I've read a lot of Vonnegut, and his writing doesn't come off as drooling village-liberal slop. In fact, I rather enjoy his novels. They're re-readable even.

Again, what does this have to do with the price of oil in Iraq? Not a single canary whistling "Dixie" in a tub of Dom Perignon. Who cares?
posted by hama7 at 4:57 AM on February 1, 2003

You're good at keeping your chin up under fire, Hama. No sarcasm intended.

Is this thread over now?
posted by Shane at 9:25 AM on February 1, 2003

Not quite yet, Shane. hama said:

But off the job, when politics comes up, they all sound pretty much the same, and it's Hollywood liberal codswallop. It's just disappointing to hear the same from Vonnegut. But who cares?

As a writer and satirist, politics are Vonnegut's job. If you can seperate his novels from his politics, you're not reading the same books I am.
posted by muckster at 11:39 AM on February 1, 2003

it's Hollywood liberal codswallop
Unless they agree with Republican positions, right? I'm not saying any of these people are deep thinkers...

But neither is our president.
posted by owillis at 11:54 AM on February 1, 2003

Unless they agree with Republican positions, right?

No, when it's codswallop. A democrat doesn't have to swallow the whole Jane Fonda leftist political package, nor is every liberal a acid-tripping, bong-hitting peacenik, a la Abbie Hoffman.

I'm just calling codswallop codswallop, is all.

But neither is our president.

*Breeeet* Technical foul. Penalty- 20 yards.
posted by hama7 at 6:42 PM on February 1, 2003

If you can seperate his novels from his politics, you're not reading the same books I am.

Maybe you're reading into his books. Here are several. Which are as nauseating as Alec Baldwin's political mewlings?

I can't find any.
posted by hama7 at 6:48 PM on February 1, 2003

Are you in the military, hama? Just wondering because you're a conservative Republican American living in Korea, which gives it a good chance.
posted by Shane at 9:44 PM on February 1, 2003

Nope, he's an artist with a lapsed weblog.
posted by y2karl at 11:36 PM on February 1, 2003

And don't write me about it because I ain't tellin' any more than that.
posted by y2karl at 11:40 PM on February 1, 2003

codswallop--what a farrago of grandiloquent vainglory, huh?
posted by y2karl at 11:47 PM on February 1, 2003

Are you in the military, hama? Just wondering because you're a conservative Republican American living in Korea, which gives it a good chance.

No, but I wish I could join after several years in American flag-burning land, but my knee won't let me.

Nope, he's an artist with a lapsed weblog.

Abandoned weblog. I keep one still, but I got sick of the inane attacks on my weblog posts, among countless other things, so I changed the URL.

Super! Thanks for asking!
posted by hama7 at 12:46 AM on February 2, 2003

the inane attacks on my weblog posts

What's sauce for the goose in the black kettle is soup for the gander in the black pot. So it goes.
posted by y2karl at 1:26 AM on February 2, 2003

That's funny, I've read a lot of Vonnegut, and his writing doesn't come off as drooling village-liberal slop. In fact, I rather enjoy his novels. They're re-readable even.

You may have happened upon something here without even knowing it Hama7.

Liberals aren't sloppy, drooling villagers. We're people. People just like you. We have cats and dogs and kids and bongs and cars and computers, just like you ignorant morons do. We even read the same goddamn books for christ's sake.

Ah ha! We're all humans! Ah ha! Humanism.

Get it?

Humanism.

Humanity trumps all. Humanity comes before nationalism, religionism, militarism, Americanism, Islamism, Christianism, corporatism. You can't very well have any of those "isms" without the human being being there first now can you?

You can't be an ignorant, christian/muslim, fascist prick either without first being a human. In order to be fascist one must first be a human. See? Vonnegut wrote about that kind of shit.

No need to be a HUMAN about it and freak the fuck out about a humanist writer. Thinkin' human thoughts, just like you. Hateful, right-wing thoughts or not, you're still a ridiculously fragile human being.

Vonnegut wrote about people like you.

You may want to read him again.
posted by crasspastor at 1:28 AM on February 2, 2003

So it goes.
posted by y2karl at 1:33 AM on February 2, 2003

Hateful, right-wing thoughts or not, you're still a ridiculously fragile human being.

Preach it, brother!
posted by y2karl at 1:54 AM on February 2, 2003

Peemail--how the shoe fits.
posted by y2karl at 2:14 AM on February 2, 2003

What's sauce for the goose in the black kettle is soup for the gander in the black pot.

Not true. I have always complimented you and your website: Antennaradio, both to you and others.

You've always been remakably and consistently rude to me, y2karl, and if you expect me to return the favor, don't hold your breath. I've e-mailed you to no avail, and now you continue to carp and wheedle and issue personal attacks. Please stop. Please. Stop it.

Vonnegut wrote about people like you.

Vonnegut's writing has never been at issue here, and I've said so now how many times? When the man is interviewed on Iraq, he's a Jane Fonda liberal, and I find it surprising.

How hard is that to comprehend?
posted by hama7 at 3:43 AM on February 2, 2003

And don't write me about it because I ain't tellin' any more than that.

Liar.
posted by hama7 at 3:47 AM on February 2, 2003

Also, for the record, I think your interest in me is a little obsessive and creepy, y2karl.
posted by hama7 at 3:57 AM on February 2, 2003

Hateful, right-wing thoughts or not, you're still a ridiculously fragile human being.

Also, your crassness, I must have missed the part where I marinate my posts with profanities and foul language directed at fellow MetaFilter members. You obviously haven't.

Hateful indeed. Hysterical liberals are like self-mocking caricatures, and you seem to be hell-bent on pushing the envelope. Welcome to the club. (^_^)~~
posted by hama7 at 4:38 AM on February 2, 2003

Also in closing, I'd like to ask again as I've asked several times: who gives a twiddle on the fiddle about what Vonnegut thinks about Iraq?

What a colossal waste of time.
posted by hama7 at 7:03 AM on February 2, 2003

who gives a twiddle on the fiddle about what Vonnegut thinks about Iraq?

I care more about vonnegut's opinion than yours anyday.

I wonder if I'm alone in that one? does anyone else give a twiddle on the fiddle about what hama7 thinks about Iraq, France, Canada, Alec Baldwin, or any other right wing punching bag?
posted by mcsweetie at 9:23 AM on February 2, 2003

if you expect me to return the favor, don't hold your breath.

liar
posted by y2karl at 11:22 AM on February 2, 2003

What's sauce for the goose in the black pot is soup for the gander in the black kettle.

Since this is the only weblog I was talking about, I meant your gratuities here--to many others as well.

Your's has no comment feature, anyway--small wonder.

Hysterical liberals are like self-mocking caricatures

Bait, bait, bait--This I'm never rude bit is such a crock.
posted by y2karl at 11:38 AM on February 2, 2003

I care more about vonnegut's opinion than yours anyday.

Then how about discussing this link, which is about Vonnegut's flights of Iraqi fancy.

Oh I get it, you'd rather discuss me. How sweet.

On you go then.
posted by hama7 at 2:53 PM on February 2, 2003

Vonnegut's writing has never been at issue here, and I've said so now how many times? When the man is interviewed on Iraq, he's a Jane Fonda liberal, and I find it surprising.

What's different is that Vonnegut has seen war and been captured by the enemy, and what happened after that (Dresden firebombing by the Allies) forever changed his view on war, and the "good guys" and "bad guys," as the good guys wouldn't do what they did to Dresden if they were truly good (which doesn't say that Hitler was good, but it does make taking the moral high ground much more difficult). The man sounds the same today as he ever did, in books or interviews or lectures. I don't know what books you were reading, but they must not have been Vonnegut, or you must not have fully understood them. College classes teach his books all across the country. He is taken very seriously by countless veterans, writers, politicians, artists, recovering alcoholics, humanists, pacifists, and on and on, and of course ordinary people. Vonnegut's influence has been vast. Just because you don't take him seriously doesn't mean that a lot of other people don't. I wonder, however, just who is qualified in your eyes to speak about war or politics. Because if it's only the polticians who are, then you obviously do not want to live in a democratic country. Who are the politicians representing when they act? Are We the People not the government? Or maybe Reagan somehow was qualified to you when he jumped from being a low-rate Hollywood actor to the governor of California. And I have read that Schwarzenegger's chances are almost certain if he decides to run for governor of California. Will you complain that he is not qualified if this comes to pass, and have you done so about Reagan?

But I think that what really bothers you is the fact that some people who happen to agree with his position are easily labelled as liberal. Sometimes those people are not nearly as informed as Vonnegut is, they are just parroting others - Vonnegut parrots no one. Your mistake is assuming that people who happen to agree on a point (which you do not) are automatically considered part and parcel of the same, and apparently it's the lowest common denominator. Because Sean Penn has said similar things about Iraq, then Vonnegut is like him, hence his opinions are somehow invalid. This is faulty logic.

If you forgot the labels and intellectually dishonest dismissals for a second and simply read what he is saying, you might be able to get a better picture, without the generalizations and stereotypes. And, if you can do this, you really should re-read his books.
posted by krinklyfig at 3:03 PM on February 2, 2003

Then how about discussing this link, which is about Vonnegut's flights of Iraqi fancy.

Oh I get it, you'd rather discuss me. How sweet.

since you missed my point, I'll be plain. how can you diss someone's point of view and then turn around and ask why people want to discuss it? it's because they do, foolio. the same reason why some people care about vonnegut's point-of-view is the same reason why some, though outnumbered considerably, care about yours.

the conversation is spun on you because you're being an ass.
posted by mcsweetie at 4:17 PM on February 2, 2003

Who is this "you" that you are addressing? Me?

If so, maybe you (yes you, krinklyfig, and yes you, mcsweetie, and whoever else) should start a chat/ discussion on your own irc channel and call it "hama7".

College classes teach his books all across the country.

All kinds of brain-rotting, howling drivel is taught across the country in colleges, and that doesn't make it anything more than leftoid dreck, not the best example for a rationalization of Vonnegut's position on Iraq, specifically. 'Landscape appreciation' is also a popular class on the college circuit.

Because if it's only the polticians who are, then you obviously do not want to live in a democratic country.

That's a leap of faith, and rather vague, but we are currently expressing opinions, no? I disagree with Vonnegut's position on Iraq, regardless of where classes about his books are taught. I disagree with Nelson Mandela on Iraq, the U.N. and Bush. I disagree with Barbra Streisand and Sean Penn, and what all these opinions have in common is that they are liberal, leftoid opinions. The sky is blue, Babs is a liberal. Easy stuff.

Will you complain that he is not qualified if this comes to pass, and have you done so about Reagan?

Reagan was qualified. Overqualified. But Reagan didn't publicly state leftist opinions, so I didn't disagree with him, you see. Further, if Swarzenegger toes the leftist line regarding Iraq, I shall gleefully disagree with him too.

But I think that what really bothers you is the fact that some people who happen to agree with his position are easily labelled as liberal.

The reason they're "easy labelled as liberal" is because the are liberal, for the love of all that is holy!

If you forgot the labels and intellectually dishonest dismissals for a second

I endeavor to persevere. I've so enjoyed your comments.
posted by hama7 at 4:47 PM on February 2, 2003

hama7: you are the very definition of knee-jerk. Anything outside your filter is summarily rejected.
posted by krinklyfig at 5:06 PM on February 2, 2003

Great post, krinklyfig. He still won't get it, but thanks for explaining it so well.
posted by muckster at 5:08 PM on February 2, 2003

Anything outside your filter is summarily rejected.

I don't "reject" it, but I do disagree with it.
posted by hama7 at 5:12 PM on February 2, 2003

...and anybody who disagrees with hama is, of course, an insufferable liberal dickwad. Watch out hama, there's a lot of us.

And I'm still wondering how can you read Slaughterhouse 5 or Cat's Cradle without understanding Vonnegut's profound pacifism, which of course informs his stance on Iraq. Your pointless name-calling notwithstanding, the man is saying the same thing he has always said. It's his job to say it, and I applaud him for it.
posted by muckster at 7:14 PM on February 2, 2003

Watch out hama, there's a lot of us.

There are more of us.

It's his job to say it, and I applaud him for it.

I salute you.
posted by hama7 at 8:07 PM on February 2, 2003

Ah, the powers of Google--Alec Baldwin, Alec Baldwin, Alec Baldwin, Barbra Streisand and Alec Baldwin--boy, somebody's starstruck. Still trolling the liberals, hama? God, it's like your mission in life. It's so lonely to be sensitve and artistic and right wing and passive-aggressive. What's a fellow to do? Bait, bait, bait, taunt, taunt, taunt--and the fools try to reason with you. And you keep coming back and coming back, craving the attention and disapproval. Whew! Carry on!
posted by y2karl at 8:26 PM on February 2, 2003

I've been thinking about a favorite passage in 'Breakfast of Champions' I think, where Kilgore Trout is going to speak at the globe-shaped art center in Cleveland and Vonnegut himself enters the story with mirrored shades and orders a white Russian or something, and mentions that the characters should pay attention to him because he is the one writing the story. It's brilliant, inspired surreal Americana, Cohen brothers-style in spirit.

That's what I think when I hear "Vonnegut".
posted by hama7 at 10:52 PM on February 2, 2003