Support Denmark, Defend Freedom

Monday, May 08, 2006

The Times, it's never a-changin'

So here I am, innocently doing the boringly easy Monday New York Times crossword, when the article right above the puzzle catches my eye. It's a review of an episode of American Experience that airs tonight, the subject of which is Annie Oakley.

Here are the first two grafs of Neil Genzlinger's review, with some emphasis provided by Cranky:

Plenty of women accomplished plenty of things in the first century or so of United States history, so it's a little dismaying to think that the country's first female superstar was famous not for her voice or her musicianship or her brain, but for her ability to shoot firearms accurately. Yet tonight's installment of "American Experience" on PBS makes the case that Annie Oakley was the first American woman whose fame and knack for spawning legends (a close cousin of gossip) qualified as superstardom.

Even if her particular talent is not to your liking, it would be difficult to watch this program and not be awed by the woman's life. Oakley, born Phoebe Ann Moses in Ohio in 1860, lived during a remarkable stretch of history that encompassed both the Civil War and World War I, one that began on horseback by lamplight and ended in automobiles under electric bulbs.

I don't even know how to respond to that. First off, "it's a little dismaying" to whom, exactly? Second off, why is it "a little dismaying," exactly? Third off, WHAT THE FUCK DOES ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH A REVIEW OF A TV SHOW???

I'm sorry, but this is absolutely ridiculous. It's one thing to find idiotic statements like those on the editorial pages of the Times: you expect that. It's one thing to find slanted "objective" news stories that demonize guns, gun owners, gun rights organizations and/or people who don't have to twist themselves into logical contortions to make the Second Amendment say what they want it to say: you expect that. But what in the name of all that is holy are those sentiments doing in a review of a biography of Annie Oakley?

Oh, and by the way, sexist much, Neil? Got a problem with women who can handle firearms? A little insecure, maybe? Having trouble writing that novel that's gonna make you famous? You know, the one you've been working on for nearly three years, now? Hmmm?

Yutz.

Now I remember why I stopped reading the Times.

Anonymous Pierre duPont Copeland, IV said...

"WHAT THE FUCK DOES ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH A REVIEW OF A TV SHOW???I'm sorry, but this is absolutely ridiculous."

No it's not. It's the New York Times doing exactly what they should be doing, catering to their readership: upper-class, left-wing elites (how many poor people tune in the Public Broadcasting Service?). Li'l Pinch and his satrap Billy haven't lost sight of at least one very capitalistic notion: give the customer what he wants.

Furthermore, to write: "Now I remember why I stopped reading the Times" is disingenuous, to say the least. How did you pick up this item then? Via osmosis?

Furthermore still: if you find the Times crossword less than challenging as I did some years ago, pick up a copy of the ultimate prole journal, The New York Post and have your hand at the Times of London crosswords they publish six days a week; far more (absurdly so) challenging.

00:36  
Blogger The Cranky Insomniac said...

Furthermore, to write: "Now I remember why I stopped reading the Times" is disingenuous, to say the least. How did you pick up this item then? Via osmosis?

Mr. "DuPont Copeland IV":

I believe I said in my post that the article caught my eye whilst I was doing the crossword. (Yes,"whilst."} I do not believe that is incompatible with the statement, "Now I remember why I stopped reading the Times."

Furthermore, even if I hadn't said that the article caught my eye, there is nothing in my statement that is dispositive of the notion that I once stopped reading the Times, only to start reading it again, and then found myself reminded why I stopped in the first place.

Furthermore still, I did not say that I find the Times puzzle less than challenging: I said that I find the Monday puzzle to be "boringly easy," a phrase that I believe I may have invented. I find the Friday and Saturday puzzles to be anywhere from fairly to very challenging. And I can't do the London crosswords, which makes them a priori and a posteriori stupid, which I'm sure you'll agree is highly irregular.

On behalf of a grateful nation, I thank you for your input.

03:07  
Anonymous Pierre duPont Copeland, IV said...

I have only one thing to say to you, Mr. Cranky: the "D" in duPont should be lowercase.

17:38  
Blogger The Cranky Insomniac said...

Oh yeah? Well you're...er...um...right.

17:58  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home