Woodward was on celebrity jeopardy once. Obviously one can't draw concldude's an idiot.

I mean, shit, his role in the Watergate reporting was essentially 1. Republican and 2. hair.

The way Woodward's reporting of events is described in that article, it comes across as a nearly pathological misunderstanding of nuance. I'm tempted to call it autistic, but that's unfair to autistics.

I think he's just a prig.

This one isn't half bad.

Well, and also not smart.

I think Joan Didion would probably be my first choice if I could write non-fiction like anyone alive in the world today. I once would have said John McPhee, but he's slipped a lot in recent years.

Von Wafer, I totally agree, but I fear that Didion's slipped in recent years, too. I thought her book about her husband's death was most painful in demonstrating how much she needed him as an editor.

I have definitely typically been a much bigger John McPhee fan than Joan Didion fan (although 5 is awesome, and for some reason has got in my head Frank the Bunny from Donnie Darko accosting Bob Woodward saying "why are you wearing that stupid Robert Caro suit" which is definitely a tangent) but I feel like some of these young bucks coming up can really turn their mouth around a sentence or whatever.

8: I saved myself a lot of pain by not reading that book. Also, will you send me an e-mail when you have a moment?

9: you should read the essays in The White Album. You might change your mind.

On the other hand in his prime John McPhee had an ability to describe complicated spatial and temporal relationships in dynamical systems utterly clearly and vividly in elegant prose, which was basically astounding and which nobody can do.

I get most impressed in non-fiction by the ability to set the scene in preparation before anything happens. John McPhee's thing about the Nevada cow-branding inspectors is the best piece ever.

I would choose to write like David Quammen. Zoom in and out, from the big picture to the perfect detail.

11: sure, I doubtless should do that first part. I like things that are good.

12: yeah, he used to be the best. But he's slipped so much in recent years that it's hard for me to think of him as being the same writer. And though I believe Didion has slipped too, I haven't witnessed the decline, so I can pretend she's as good as she was in 1979.

13.2: what of his should I read?

What of McPhee's should I read?

The Song of the Dodo is a phenomenal book. Although the point it makes, amazing at the time (1988?), is kind of conventional wisdom now.

All of the other DQ books I've read are basically collections of journalistic pieces. Wait, that's what McPhee did too. Anyway, Monster of God is very interesting too.

17: I'm a particular fan of Levels of the Game and The Curve of Binding Energy, for different reasons, but they just are mostly great.

17: my current favorite is Pine Barrens. But Coming into the Country (about Alaska) is also outstanding. Or, if you like geology, read his trilogy on the subject (now collected under one cover and title: Annals of the Former World). There are many others that are also fantastic, including Control of Nature (a three-part examination of people's efforts to control nature), Encounters with the Archdruid (about the former head of the Sierra Club, Dave Brower), or Curve of Binding Energy (a long profile of Theodore Taylor), but I think the ones listed above are a good place to start.

Oh man and The Control of Nature, of course.

Actually, don't start with The Pine Barrens. And yes, Levels of the Game is also wonderful for the reasons Jetpack gave above: a sense of how to convey space that's unparalleled among non-fiction writers.

Annals of the Former World is wonderful, but some people (my dad) have been put off by how intensely focused on geology it is.

No, I made my recommendation first. Noseflow has to start with the one about the Nevada cow-branding inspectors.

18: thanks!

If somebody can find me Tom Junod's essay about Mr. Rogers formatted in a way that isn't completely hideous, I'll be very grateful.

I read the piece linked in the OP earlier today, because Slate is pretty much my go-to place for at-work procrastination these days. I thought it was quite good.

my go-to place for at-work procrastination

Clearly we need to step up the contrarianism.

It was certainly a much more interesting read than such other Slate offerings as The Dave Weigel Show and Mr. Yglesias Goes to JCPenney.

Clearly we need to step up the contrarianism.

If you could step it up enough to circumvent my employer's website-blocking software, that would be... impressive.

And we even cut down on the cock jokes.

Have you considered changing jobs so you can talk to us more?

I have not read John McPhee. I guess I should.

They don't seem to filter by content; instead they have some sort of system that classifies sites by type and blocks certain types entirely. So sites classified as "blogs" are blocked entirely, but sites classified as "news" are allowed even if they also contain blogs. It's a weird system.

Have you considered changing jobs so you can talk to us more?

No, the advantages of this job have overall outweighed the disadvantages (of which this is the primary one) enough that I'll just live with it.

I don't read non-fiction. I prefer never doing anything at home except wasting time on the internet and occasionally watching movies and tv shows. Also, writing comments.

I don't read non-fiction.

You read the criticism, though, right?

I have not read John McPhee. I guess I should.

Eh, I read Coming into the Country and it was okay but I think that style of lyrical non-fiction is not really for me. I definitely thought it dragged in places, especially toward the end. I haven't read any of his other stuff, so I'm not sure how much I can generalize from the one book. I've also never read any Didion.

It's a weird system.

In the world of classification systems, there are only two categories: weird and miscellaneous. They overlap.

34 I thought this was an eclectic web magazine.

I too enjoyed the article in the OP.

Bob Woodward is a zit.

In addition to The Control of Nature and Encounters with the Archdruid, I'm quite found of Looking for a Ship. (I've never read The Curve of Binding Energy, but I've added it to my list; thanks.)

I really like the Didion stuff I've read, but it's mostly her early work.

Woodward's history of Unfogged would be called Cocked.

42: On the whole, I like Slouching Towards Bethlehem better than The White Album but both are strong. Salvador was pretty much crap and I've only read the occasional essay since then. Probably too harsh and stupid on my part, the Woodward thing is excellent.

And for fiction I really liked Run, River and Play It as It Lays. I liked her before she sold out, man.

38: that wouldn't have been my first choice, in fact, for anybody else new to McPhee. I like it, but I think he gets a bit indulgent. It was appropriate for you because reasons, of course.

La Place de la Concorde Suisse is an extremely weird, and hilarious, McPhee book.

It was appropriate for you because reasons, of course.

Right. When I was in graduate school my roommate actually loaned me a copy of The Pine Barrens but I never got around to reading it and then she moved out and I gave it back. I probably should have made more of an effort to read it.

And I either did not know (or more likely) had totally forgotten that Woodward had written Wired. Jeez. I thought this was the best line, Wired was so wrong, Belushi's manager said, it made you think Nixon might be innocent.

I like to think that the autopsy was done by the Samurai Coroner.

Yeah, that was a great line.

47: "I roomed with this totally cute guy but I knew it was never going to work when I lent him The Pine Barrens and he didn't even read it."

I started but never finished Control of Nature.

48.1 -- the longtime LA coroner who conducted Belushi's autopsy was Japanese-American, you racist.

52: Then he probably could have pulled it off.

Damn it, 48.2.

Also to get in my 2 cents as quickly as possible, I like John McPhee's geology books are the best because they're the most straightforward, sometimes he has a bit of the New Yorker profile disease which puts me off. The White Album and Slounching Towards Bethlehem are two of the best books of all time. I liked Miami for later (but still very old!) Didion and I haven't read the book about all the death.

52: Also it goes 1 then 2. Eat some bread and you'd remember things like that.

sometimes he has a bit of the New Yorker profile disease which puts me off

Right, this was the problem I had with CitC.

54,55: Fuck.

Slounching! We're halfway to Flouncing Towards Bethlehem!

What is the New Yorker profile disease?

Logorrhea?

I'll spare folks the full monty, but here are the Woodward relevant parts of something I had fun writing back in the day [*cough* defunct blog whore *cough*]:

Outlined against the troubles of a nation, the Four Writers wrote again. In Internet lore they are known as arrogance, pomposity, cluelessness and idiocy. These are only aliases. Their real names are: Broder, Woodward, Howell and Hiatt. They formed the crest of the cyclone before which the reputation of the Washington Post was swept over the precipice these past ten years as a million readers peered at the bewildering panorama spread out on their breakfast tables and computer screens.

11.[Woodward] And when he had opened the second link, I heard the second courtier say, Come and read.

12. And there I read another work of stenography: and power was given to him that wrote therein to transcribe the thoughts of the mighty, and that they should flatter one another: and there was given unto him great riches for his efforts.

59: teo called McPhee "lyrical" upthread. Maybe that? (Though lyrical is not a word I'd use to describe McPhee.)

I liked Slouching Toward Bethlehem a lot more on first reading than second. In the interim I grew older and saw Didion speak in person. I admit to not being able to fully separate the politics from the writing, for her or anyone else, and her politics irritated me.

I've barely read McPhee. I have to say I've really liked what nonfiction of Steinbeck's I've read.

Anne Lamott is someone else who I really loved on first read but seemed to have gotten pettier and more abrasive when I went back. Even Bird by Bird, which I once loved, and still do give as a gift.

There is an absolutely beautiful poetic justice in a Bob Woodward thread turning very quickly into a "Let me reminisce about gorgeous writing, thread.

I second every word of 3.

Argh, close quotation marks.

"

What about Didion's politics irritated you, Witt? (I'm not doubting you or challenging you; I'm genuinely curious.)

I think I am old; all I can think of in terms of non-fiction writers are old people and dead people. I must say that Annie Dillard's Pilgrim at Tinker Creek was an absolute revelation to me when I first read it, and I have somewhat enjoyed some of her other stuff.

Ron Rosenbaum is another. Old.

As best I can remember (and it was a few years ago), it was a combination of:

1. An off-putting snobbishness about people who weren't the right kind of literate, mannered (I felt like she was thinking "civilized") readers/writers.

2. A weird tendency to overgeneralize about the representativeness of her own experience and/or perspective and/or social circle. I say "weird" because anyone so obviously intelligent and talented (and of a certain age) might reasonably be expected to have had such assumptions jarred by encounters with real life. She didn't seem to have.

I was also irritated by how the moderator kept harping on authenticity, as though even her more personal writings were not carefully crafted slices of her "authentic" life. But even I can't blame the author for the moderator's sins!

I guess what I'm trying to get at in the above is a kind of world-wearyness, a patronizing tone that implies that if you haven't come to the same conclusions she has about the world, you are just young, or misguided, or idealistic -- or all three.

It's like the person next to you at a dinner party who quotes the line about "If you're not a liberal when you're twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative when you're fifty you have no brain...." blah blah and thinks they are being Deeply Insightful.

Didion is way too smart (and talented) to think anything that shallow, but her general attitude didn't come off that differently, at least to me.

But even I can't blame the author for the moderator's sins!

If the Old Testament god can do it, why can't you?

Weariness. Good grief, I have to go to bed.

The Deltoid Pumpkin Seed and Oranges are pretty great too. I'd say that Annals of the Former World and The Control of Nature are masterpieces, but that Coming into the Country was long and draggy.

I have to say I've really liked what nonfiction of Steinbeck's I've read.

A Russian Journal is terrifically entertaining, especially the bit where Robert Capa takes over and rants.

68: I do think you've hit the nail on the head with the aspects of Didion that can irritate. The first is certainly on display in her review of The Getty Museum and her discussion of the California governor's mansions. An excerpt I'd posted previously on Unfogged.

In the entire house there are only enough bookshelves for a set of the World Book and some Books of the Month, plus maybe three Royal Doulton figurines and a back file of Connoissuer. ... I have seldom seen a house so evocative of the unspeakable.

I saw the headline of the OP when I was reading this, stupid Facebook math problem, less stupid than most post-Kinsley Slatisms.

--------------------------------------------

6 ÷ 2(1+2) has only one right answer, but hear me out. The problem isn't the mathematical operations. It's knowing what operations the author of the problem wants you to do, and in what order. Simple, right? We use an "order of operations" rule we memorized in childhood: "Please excuse my dear Aunt Sally," or PEMDAS, which stands for Parentheses Exponents Multiplication Division Addition Subtraction.* This handy acronym should settle any debate--except it doesn't, because it's not a rule at all. It's a convention, a customary way of doing things we've developed only recently, and like other customs, it has evolved over time. (And even math teachers argue over order of operations.) "In earlier times, the conventions didn't seem as rigid and people were supposed to just figure it out if they were mathematically competent," says Judy Grabiner, a historian of mathematics at Pitzer College in Claremont, Calif.

Mathematicians generally began their written work with a list of the conventions they were using, but the rise of mass math education and the textbook industry, as well as the subsequent development of computer programming languages, required something more codified. That codification occurred somewhere around the turn of the last century. The first reference to PEMDAS is hard to pin down. Even a short list of what different early algebra texts taught reveals how inconsistently the order of operations was applied.

I am convinced by the chatter here, and also by a quick review of its contents, that Coming Into the Country is actually pretty bloated, and that at least one of its three acts should have been cut entirely. I retract that recommendation.

Yeah, I think it would have been much stronger as two books, one containing the first two sections and the other the third. Since they were all originally separate magazine articles there's no particular reason to include them in the same book except the common location.

And by the New Yorker profile disease I basically meant that he has a tendency to go on and on giving lots of details that aren't particularly relevant but also aren't nearly as interesting as he seems to think. This is especially true in the third part of CitC. We don't need to know the life story of every single person in Eagle! It doesn't add anything to the picture he paints of the community to pile on all this additional description.

Speaking of Slate, I've never watched Girls and have no intention of starting but I thought this was a good discussion of an issue I've been thinking about a lot lately.

In general I've found the XX Factor blog to be quite good despite its terrible name. It even has Amanda Marcotte! (Remember her?)

77: I had totally forgotten the part about Eagle, and you're absolutely right that it's filled with too much detail about people who aren't interesting enough. That's McPhee's method, mostly, and it works really well when the character in question is, on her or his own terms, riveting or, failing that, at least engaged in some activity that's genuinely interesting. If neither of those things are true, it's just boring, which has been the case for most of McPhee's writing for the last decade.

Didion doesn't hang nearly as much of her work on character development, does she? I'm not sure what she does instead, though. Mood, maybe? Thick description of some kind?

I had totally forgotten the part about Eagle

Really? It's half of the book! I guess this is good evidence that it's the less interesting half.

That's McPhee's method, mostly, and it works really well when the character in question is, on her or his own terms, riveting or, failing that, at least engaged in some activity that's genuinely interesting.

Yeah, it works really well when he's talking about Willie Hensley or Joe Vogler, or even some of the more interesting people in Eagle like John Borg. The historical narratives are also good, and were probably my favorite parts.

I have seldom seen a house so evocative of the unspeakable.

Someone's been peeking at my Martha Stewart/HP Lovecraft fic again.

Completely endorse everything Ned said re. Quammen. I quite like Kingsolver's non-fic, but that probably marks me as a person of no taste. But most of the best non-fiction these days appears on line and maybe gets collected two or three years after you read it, so it's a different world to that in which one first encountered people like Didion. Exceptions of course for long form stuff like that Kelman guy.

||

Mark my words, people, one day pain perdu will be remembered as a political prophet on par with Kevin Phillips.

|>

There's a great anecdote about Woodward in one of Al Franken's books, which I am paraphrasing here. Woodward is interviewing Franken for Wired. He asks, "Did you ever see John Belushi snort cocaine?" Franken answers truthfully: "Only once. With Carl Bernstein."

84: And 8 comments later, that same perdu fellow made the following predictions:

The theory in 281 yields at least three testable predictions:
Rush Limbaugh will adopt a "fat pride" stance.
Haley Barbour will do better than Mike Huckabee in the 2012 GOP primary
Jonah Goldberg will replace Rich Lowry as editor of the National Review.

Has Limbaugh weighed in yet?

Maybe Root Boy Slim will expropriated as a before his time conservative hero.

I try not to think about Didion's politics, since it's enough, for me, that she's such a genius at description and style, but Witt has them exactly right. There's a Burkean conservatism, which secretly I sometimes sympathize with, overlain with just what Witt captures, the usually vulgar and always maddening stance of treating leftism as something one outgrows.

But damn you, Witt, for putting that into words--now I have to like Didion less!

I couldn't quite put my complaint about Didion into words, but then Witt did it better than I ever could.

And 68.2 gets at a lot of what made Salvador infuriating (I don't think I actually finished it). She pops into Salvador for a very short visit and voilà "Clarissa Joan Explains It All." I recall a Robert White (ambassador to Salvador at the time before he was run out by the hard-core Reaganoids) article (or letter to the editor) taking great issue with her "Robert White thinks X" constructions.

Witt Explains It All.

Didion's latest book about her daughter's death and life really hinges on all the points Witt mentions and is also just muddled (as I suppose writing through grief almost has to be) so that it makes all the characters more shallow than they really should have been in troubling ways. I advise against reading it.

Has Limbaugh weighed in yet?

To my knowledge, Rush hasn't yet declared "fat is good" in so many words, but he did vocally oppose the healthy school lunch initiative and the "Let's Move" campaign to combat childhood obesity. Presumably these stances were taken more on the theory that "If the Obamas are for it, I must be against it" than any deliberate strategic positioning. But it's not unheard of for positions taken for convenience or by happenstance to harden into party dogma.

The experiment to test the second prediction was never conducted, and the data is not yet available to test the third prediction.

92: The problem with the theory is that it strikes at the core conservative argument against Obamacare: health care costs are rising because lazy poor people are fat.

93: Seriously, that's a trifling obstacle for the party that simultaneously ran on support for the Ryan budget and opposition to Obama's Medicare cuts. Just wait until they can tell fat people that Obamacare specifically permits their employers charge them a higher deductible* if they refuse to work out at the company gym before work or to choose their lunch from the cafeteria options marked "heart healthy". I guarantee this will be the Fox News Outrage of the Week ™ at least once by 2015.

*Technically, they can't charge you a higher deductible for refusing. They can merely refund part of your deductible for assenting. The difference will be scarcely perceptible in practice.

86: I would like to repost this comment from the same thread, for egotistical reasons:

Another prediction: the right wing will either gradually ease off on Michael Moore or will condemn him as a lipotraitor, a fat man doing the thin man's dirty work. An Uncle Tum.

I liked the Slate article about Woodward too. It wasn't surprising, because I had already read about the "threatening" e-mail, and I have the impression that Woodward's books during the Bush years were fairly stenographic. (On checking, I find that I can't call them "hagiographic," not when one was titled "State of Denial." Still, though, that wasn't until late 2006. They were within the conventional wisdom, even if leaning to the correct side of it.) The Slate article was still a bit depressing anyway, that a guy like this has been and remains so influential.

Periodically I've been curious about "and Bernstein." I had just kind of assumed that he died or got a job out of the public eye. It seemed the most logical explanation for why he is in the news so much less than Woodward. But now that I simply go to Carl Bernstein's Wikipedia page, I see that no, he's fine and still in business, but he's not nearly as much of a Washington insider as Woodward.

That Slate article makes him sound like the reporter in the Simpsons who edits Homer to sound sexually harassing- "I wanted some of that sweet... sweet... can."

94.1: There is a hint that at least some part of the media have finally "noticed" how utterly inconsistent the Repubs have gotten on things like this in their election posturing. But it is still incredibly infuriating that during this period of all out elite attack* on the "deficit" and "entitlements" that there is so little acknowledgement that Obamacare, flawed though it might be, is an attempt to address the most significant area which is potentially leading to a debt (and broader societal) crisis. Ah, not really worth mentioning out loud here, but periods of elevated elite "insanity" are so infuriating. Off to swim read "Nightfall."

*They are so fucking desperate that the economy might improve a bit and take away the urgency before they get a chance to really fuck things up. So many similarities to the run-up to Iraq.

There is a hint that at least some part of the media have finally "noticed" how utterly inconsistent the Repubs have gotten on things like this in their election posturing.

The problem is, the basic structure of the political media is what's responsible for the "not noticing," and that structure hasn't changed. "Ignorance" will continue.

They are so fucking desperate that the economy might improve a bit and take away the urgency before they get a chance to really fuck things up.

Fortunately, that's not a problem their counterparts in the UK have. NEISR now reckons that we won't be back at 2008 levels of prosperity until 2018, and that idiot Cameron is reduced to outright lying about what his own Office of Budget Responsibility is telling him about the deficit (and the OBR is calling him on it publicly, good for them).

96.1: There was an article or post somewhere saying that he tracks CW very closely in his books - that he wrote a near-hagiography of Bush in 2003, Plan of Attack, and then a few years later State of Denial, which used much of the same material slanted differently.

4: To go back to the OP -- I think Tweety is right that Woodward's problem was not an inability to grasp nuance, but a consistent bias towards presenting Belushi negatively. I'm guessing this was a reflection of the times -- during the height of the Drug War, Woodward may have felt like he was doing good, by refusing to portray a drug addict as larger-than-life or even likable.

101: You probably mean this Rick Perlstein item in The Nation where he goes through the three books comparing how Woodward covers the same material. Call it [2004] the middle volume in a Goldilocks series: not too fulsome, not too mean, just something a little bit in between--just right: after all, his presidential approval ratings were hovering all that year right around 50 percent.

...

That is to say, he is utterly useless in explaining how Washington works. But he is almost uniquely useful as an object lesson in displaying how Washington works--especially its elite punditry division.

This is a slatepitch, but it's also my actual opinion: Of course Sperling threatened Woodward.

Woodward's entire shtick is access journalism - he prints what people want him to print. That's all he's got. If Sperling says Woodward is going to regret printing something, he's pointing out that Woodward relies on the good will of people like Sperling.

I suppose it's possible that Sperling didn't intend it as a threat, but it's easy to see why Woodward took it that way. As he told Politico:

"I've tangled with lots of these people. But suppose there's a young reporter who's only had a couple of years -- or 10 years' -- experience and the White House is sending him an email saying, 'You're going to regret this.' You know, tremble, tremble. I don't think it's the way to operate."

Right. He's not saying that Sperling made him nervous about being the target of a drone strike. He's saying that he was threatened with losing access.

Woodwardism is why I find it hard to lament the death of journalism.

Slatepitchslatepitch- Good, Sperling should have threatened him. If a journalist is printing lies, either for self-profit or for ideological reasons, he doesn't deserve to keep the access that he relies on. I know there are members of the clan of the pundits who argue it's unfair not to give access to people like Jeff Gannon and Breitbart, but fuck them.

Personal to peep: Your email address I have is now sending out daily heating spam, just FYI. I suppose it could actually be you, but I certainly haven't clicked through to check.

106.last: For instance, future Fox News employee, Jake Tapper:

It's escaped none of our notice that the White House has decided in the last few weeks to declare one of our sister organizations "not a news organization" and to tell the rest of us not to treat them like a news organization. Can you explain why it's appropriate for the White House to decide that a news organization is not one. ... But that's a pretty sweeping declaration that they are "not a news organization." How are they any different from, say - ABC. MSNBC. Univision. I mean how are they any different?

There's a Burkean conservatism, which secretly I sometimes sympathize with, overlain with just what Witt captures, the usually vulgar and always maddening stance of treating leftism as something one outgrows.

Think, "Burkean conservatism" is a good description, but it doesn't make me appreciate Didion any less. Most of what I've read by her (Bethlehem, White Album, Political Fictions) has an element of carefully controlled scorn as part of the tone.

I can't imagine, for example, basing a policy position on something I read by Didion, but I appreciate it as being completely unapologetic in arguing for a certain world view (and a certain tone).

||

Department of WTF?

[Dennis] Rodman was said to be in Rome to help Cardinal Peter Turkson of Ghana become the first black pope. But the Associated Press reported that he did not seem to be sure exactly who he was promoting. "From Africa, right?" Rodman asked. But he said he was sure the next pope would be black, and he said he would like to meet him in Africa on his mission to promote world peace.

||

WTFD #2:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/559914737/the-veronica-mars-movie-project

|>

My #slatepitch# is that the Slate article is singularly unpersuasive. It criticizes Woodward for writing the book he wrote instead of the book the author wrote (about Belushi's entire life, not his last few years). The underlying criticism is that sure, he's a celebrity who killed himself at a young age with cocaine, but that's no reason to write a book about the guy killing himself at a young age with cocaine. It describes several episodes where Belushi acted like an asshole, and claims that 20 yers later, someone or other didn't really mind Belushi acting like an asshole. Bascially, it's the widow's perspectie, which isn't Woodward's perspective, and isn't any more reliable.

The underlying criticism is that sure, he's a celebrity who killed himself at a young age with cocaine, but that's no reason to write a book about the guy killing himself at a young age with cocaine.

This isn't exactly the criticism. The criticism is that he dwells exhaustively on the stats and technical details of Belushi's drug binges, while simultaneously mis-portraying him as a lazy, undisciplined asshole.

111: Goddammit, Rob Thomas, stop fucking with us.

Also, wow, at least one person has given $10k and three people have given $6.5k? I no longer feel like a very committed VM fan.

I would have thought that if Rob Thomas and Kristen Bell are "on board", they might have access to actual, like, investors or something. What a travesty.

Back-of-the-envelope, based on refreshing the webpage several times, they'll reach their goal by tomorrow. $2 million is really all they need? Kristen Bell doesn't have that just sitting in her checking account or something?

Bialystock's first rule of producing, essear: never put your own money in the show. And the second rule? NEVER PUT YOUR OWN MONEY IN THE SHOW!

I guess Kickstarter can be used by people who don't actually need money, for something they were going to do anyway, as a good way of starting a fan club. Nobody wants to join an email list.

$2 million is really all they need? Kristen Bell doesn't have that just sitting in her checking account or something?

Perhaps the studio has committed to further funding if they can get $2M in outside money. Note, for example, that backers will get, "behind the scene scoops throughout the fundraising and movie-making process."

Of course, Warner Bros. still owns Veronica Mars and we would need their blessing and cooperation to pull this off. Kristen and I met with the Warner Bros. brass, and they agreed to allow us to take this shot. They were extremely cool about it, as a matter of fact. Their reaction was, if you can show there's enough fan interest to warrant a movie, we're on board.

My understanding of this is that the actual money isn't the point -- being able to raise the money is supposed to be proof that there is enough fan interest to justify making the movie.

If I paid enough money, I could get Kristen Bell to follow my Twitter account, if I had a Twitter account.

Once Kristen Bell knows that you're engaged to Denise Milani, she'll coming running, essear.

Surprisingly, what physicists use Twitter for is advertising that they've just been named to a "Top 25 Most Stylish" list in one magazine or a "Top 50 Sexiest" list in another magazine.

Essear -- if I name you to my list of Top 50 Sexiest Physicists that Comment on Unfogged List, will you join Twitter to advertise it?

108: future Fox News employee, Jake Tapper

What's that? Tapper just moved to CNN and is going to have his own show (since he was (stupidly) dissed in favor of Stephanopoulos to replace Amanpour on that Sunday talk show), and he just wrote a book about how fucked up the war in Afghanistan is and has been, which book has apparently been fairly well-received.

Now, the CNN show might suck and the book might suck -- I don't know -- and it's true that the passage quoted in 108 looks for all the world like a circling of the journalistic wagons, but on the ranking scale of journalists assigned to the White House beat, which I think is a pretty sucky beat overall, he's not scum level, I don't think.

125: Pointing out to your physicist friends that there are 48 spots on that list wide open? (I think.)

||

Habemus pappam. Not clear who yet.

|>

Oh good. I need to know whom to start hating.

129: Don't hate me just because I'm Pope!

(I suppose they might have chosen someone else, but why?)

128: it's a boy!

128: Heh, I was just coming back here to mention: the radio is going bananas: Breaking news, breaking news, we interrupt this broadcast .... We'll be staying with this story throughout the afternoon until we know who he is .... What's the mood there in Rome?

(I am afraid I couldn't care less, but the thought that billions of people worldwide are presumably throwing up their hands in joy and/or piety, or whatever exactly it is, is, hm, I feel like I'm watching a cargo cult or something, like an anthropologist struggling to keep bemusement from morphing into amusement.)

131 made me laugh out loud.

130: Because the Church, qua global misogynist, homophoboic, greedy, corrupt monarchy, sucks. I have a general hatred for monarchs, though as least Elizabeth II doesn't con poor women into having more babies than they have to money or health to afford.

to s/b the

129. I'm sure you hated him already, assuming you've ever heard of him.

134: I agree with all that except it's not a monarchy, is it?

But that will be changing soon with the peep papacy!

I decided my unfogged name will also serve as my papal name.

True enough, but I'm really bad at the "Potential Pontiffs" category in Jeopardy.

126: My read on Tapper is that he's managing his career in a way to keep open the possibility of becoming the future Fox News gravitas loss-leader in the style of Brit Hume (who is scum).

Not that long ago, people thought the Pope had to be Italian, and then John Paul II was the most popular Pope ever.

Now, the cardinals realize the time has come for a non-Catholic Pope.

138: Who are people who have never been in your kitchen?

I assume I'm not the only person who keeps reading "Habemus papam" as "We have a potato".

except it's not a monarchy, is it?

Technically, the pope is the king of Vatican City and in previous times was the king of much of Italy. Regardless, the Church operates as a monarchy in many ways, including the divine, infallible rule of its sovereign.

Full set of pope's titles: Sovereign of the State of Vatican City, Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Servant of the Servants of God.

Pope Peep Pops Persistent Pontiff Precedent.

143: Ok, you're right. I thought hereditary succession was essential for something to be called a monarchy.

139: I wouldn't go so far as to mention Brit Hume in the same breath, but yes, I do understand that read on Tapper. Fair enough.

145: I can admit I'm wrong for now. Soon I'm expecting to be infallible.

It'd be funny if the new name was "Pope Snose".

I assume I'm not the only person who keeps reading "Habemus papam" as "We have a potato".

You are. But I read 128 as "We have a lentil wafer!"

145. That would exclude the Holy Roman Empire for a start. Elective monarchies are quite common (elective monarchies on the basis of one subject, one vote are, in contrast, unknown.)

Agreed on the Papacy being an effective monarchy. (We were told by NPR a short while ago that we have to wait because the new pope, whoever he is, will be ushered into some private chambers where he will select his raiments and especially his shoes (!) and have them sized, and of course he's also selecting his name, but he's presumably already done that.)

I find it very difficult not to find this archaic in the extreme.

My understanding was that the choice for pope was down to an insider guy (European) who knows the ins and outs of the curiae, and an outsider guy (maybe he was from Brazil?) who does not, and who might or might not shake things up.

That is actually of interest. I'm going to bet on the insider guy.

I find it very difficult not to find this archaic in the extreme.

Oh gosh no it's terribly modern. All brushed aluminum and black marble and TVs showing max headroom, pope tearing off his Vuarnets and pointing to his chosen shoes as Information Society plays on the Bang and Olufsen built-ins.

I understand that Wry Cooter is still available as a pope name.

151: We prefer retro to archaic. And retro is in.

I am trying to be respectful, Sifu. We have self-identifying Catholics among the Unfoggedtariat. 'course, I don't know how they feel about any of this; they might be some of those who have heretical ideas about the Vatican's direction.

The sentence "I feel like I'm watching a cargo cult or something, like an anthropologist struggling to keep bemusement from morphing into amusement." doesn't LOOK like it's trying to be respectful.

I find it very difficult not to find this archaic in the extreme.

Speaking of archaic, I hear the pope shits in the woods.

I understand that Hastings-on-Hudson is available as a new improved location for the Holy See.

It's the Argentine.

If there are any practicing catholics who find cheeseball '80s brand references enormously disrespectful... well, that is sort of weird. Honestly, straw caricature catholic person, I was tempted by some Vuarnets on ebay not that long ago. No need to worry your imaginary head.

159: damn, now 152 seems disrespectful as hell.

He's calling himself Francis? Why Francis?

159: What!? What?!

Wow. I'm sort of impressed.

156: Ned, the operative word was "trying", unfortunately.

162: Maybe he likes birds.

Since we've already had 2 John Pauls, I hope the next pope considers George Ringo the first as a papal title.

As long as he steers clear of John Ringo.

I wonder if there's going to be a signal whether Francis means that he's the PETA pope or the Jesuit pope.

166: OH NO

Aw. Francis is a good choice.

All-beef popefranks!

He is Jesuit.

162: I assume he's signalling that he'll spend every day preaching and then begging for bread outside St. Peter's Basilica.

As Cardinal, Bergoglio became known for personal humility, doctrinal conservatism and a commitment to social justice. A simple lifestyle has contributed to his reputation for humility. He lives in a small apartment, rather than in the palatial bishop's residence. He gave up his chauffeured limousine in favor of public transportation, and he reportedly cooks his own meals.

I'm thinking the papal chefs are a little nervous now.

Dope pope steaks make chefs chaff, Vat fat

173: THIS IS NOT THE TIME FOR PAPAL AUSTERITY.

I guess they chose him over me, because he cooks his meals from scratch.

173: Yep, it's Bread and Jam for Francis.

177 is the best ever!

162: After the Talking Mule?

The Spanish-language press is referring to him as "Papa Francisco I", which sounds way cooler than "Pope Francis".

I laughed at 175.

175.
Dear Prof. Krugman,

"Rather than preventing that, it seems they have opted for making inequalities even greater," he said. "Human rights are not only violated by terrorism, repression or assassination, but also by unfair economic structures that creates huge inequalities," he said at the time.

180: Wikipedia said Pope Francisco, which prompted me to make an obligatory Love and Death joke, and then I deleted it when it seemed to be Francis everywhere else.

The Guardian article says he is " A champion of liberation theology". The wikipedia article on him says, "Bergoglio is an accomplished theologian who distanced himself from liberation theology early in his career. He is thought to be close to Comunione e Liberazione, a conservative lay movement."

I have a strong hunch the wikipedia article is closer to the truth.

173: doctrinal conservatism

Oh no.

I am trying to be respectful

Catholics are up there with Joe Paterno boosters as people I'm not going to waste one moment on worrying that I'm being sufficiently respectful.

Well, from the perspective of a non-Christian, here's what I'd like: for the Church to embrace women in the priesthood, artificial forms of birth control, tolerance of homosexuality and condemnation of those places that render it a crime, and acceptance of the wisdom of elective abortion.

Fat chance of that happening, but a Vatican III would be welcome.

I foresee many "lighten up Francis" jokes in our future.

Someone whom I don't know, but who is a FB friend of a FB friend and therefore extremely reliable sez her Argentinian friends say Francis has an uncomfortable history re: the military dictatorship.

Oh, tell me they didn't elect two fascists in a row?

Vatican III: Revenge of the Sith

Pope Franky Knuckles
Pope Fran Tarkenton
Pope Franks 'n' Beans
Pope Francisco Franco
Pope Franking Privilege
Pope Frank Talk
Pope Francie Brady
Pope Francis The Talking Mule

187: for the Church to embrace women in the priesthood
Well, better that than altar boys, I suppose. ZING!

On 15 April 2005, a human rights lawyer filed a criminal complaint against Bergoglio, as superior in the Society of Jesus of Argentina, accusing him of involvement in the kidnapping by the Navy in May 1976 (during the military dictatorship) of two Jesuit priests. The priests, Orlando Yorio and Francisco Jalics, were found alive five months later, drugged and semi-nude. The complaint did not specify the nature of Bergoglio's alleged involvement, and Bergoglio's spokesman flatly denied the allegations. Under Argentine law such accusations can be made on little evidence, to be investigated by a court

"Franky" Knuckles?

Is it with an "ie"? I'm not familiar with all of the groups you young people listen to nowadays.

http://www.argentinaindependent.com/currentaffairs/newsroundups/roundupsargentina/cardinal-bergoglio-to-testify-for-crimes-committed-in-the-esma/

Well, from the perspective of a non-Christian, here's what I'd like

What I'd like if for the Church to respond to scandal just like Joe P did, by weeping bitter tears, promptly dying, and having its monuments taken down out of the public eye.

Jesuit jokes, to assist in the transition to the new regime.

Eh. The more I hear about this, the more I think they've actually gone old-school. Doctrinally conservative, champion of the poor. Those two things don't actually result in consistent policy in my view, but my grasp (possibly a stereotype) of South American Catholicism is that it's way old-school with respect to, say, women.

The Guardian article says he is " A champion of liberation theology". The wikipedia article on him says, "Bergoglio is an accomplished theologian who distanced himself from liberation theology early in his career. He is thought to be close to Comunione e Liberazione, a conservative lay movement."

I have a strong hunch the wikipedia article is closer to the truth.

Rather.

191: Pope Frankie Goes to Hollywood

The Italians win, sort of.

||
Orange post title?
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/559914737/the-veronica-mars-movie-project
|>

Hey, a little credit people, they picked a South American! Sure he's an Italian born in the whitest country on that continent that also just happens to be a former Axis country but come on, they're really branching out.

200: Maybe so. Just saw a comment at Balloon Juice to the same effect.

Correction, Uruguay is the whitest country on the continent.

gswift, we're talking about a seriously hampered people in the first place. The Catholics here can say something in its defense if they want to, but I don't think the world at large expects much anyway.

An overview from Echidne of the Snakes.

201: Minivet already pointed it out in 111 of this very thread! Looks like they're easily going to meet their $2 million goal.

gswift, we're talking about a seriously hampered people in the first place.

By tradition maybe. Not so much by "laws" and "ethics".

"seriously hampered" = lots of dirty laundry

208: I think they argue about that a lot, don't they? Some Catholics think that they very much do, by laws and ethics, have to be firmly against the autonomy of women (for example), because the scriptures said so. Or something. God said so.

Less glibly, I don't know what the source of the discrepancy between Vatican policy and the actual moral compass employed by many actually practicing Catholics is. If the Vatican weren't living on Mars or something, it would take that question seriously.

Nworb Werdna.

Mars, Rome, who can keep track?

211: I guess we'll see, then. It sure doesn't sound to me like Francis is a moderate conservative.

He's already being fingered for collaborating with the dictatorship over the disappeared. If that has legs, this was a seriously bad choice.

What one did not hear from any senior member of the Argentine hierarchy was any expression of regret for the church's collaboration and in these crimes. The extent of the church's complicity in the dark deeds was excellently set out by Horacio Verbitsky, one of Argentina's most notable journalists, in his book El Silencio (Silence). He recounts how the Argentine navy with the connivance of Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, now the Jesuit archbishop of Buenos Aires, hid from a visiting delegation of the Inter-American Human Rights Commission the dictatorship's political prisoners. Bergoglio was hiding them in nothing less than his holiday home in an island called El Silencio in the River Plate. The most shaming thing for the church is that in such circumstances Bergoglio's name was allowed to go forward in the ballot to chose the successor of John Paul II. What scandal would not have ensued if the first pope ever to be elected from the continent of America had been revealed as an accessory to murder and false imprisonment.

214.last: Not for some people.

Given the current climate, just the fact that he's a Jesuit (first Jesuit pope!)alone seems like a reason to be pretty happy.

This was really encouraging:

"In our ecclesiastical region there are priests who don't baptize the children of single mothers because they weren't conceived in the sanctity of marriage," Bergoglio told his priests. "These are today's hypocrites. Those who clericalize the church. Those who separate the people of God from salvation. And this poor girl who, rather than returning the child to sender, had the courage to carry it into the world, must wander from parish to parish so that it's baptized!"

Bergoglio compared this concept of Catholicism to the Pharisees of Christ's time: people who congratulate themselves while condemning others.

"Jesus teaches us another way: Go out. Go out and share your testimony, go out and interact with your brothers, go out and share, go out and ask. Become the Word in body as well as spirit," Bergoglio said.

Also this:

As economic problems buffeted Argentina at the turn of the century, Cardinal Bergoglio spoke forcefully for the poor and against neo-Liberalism and the International Monetary Fund. "We cannot permit ourselves to be overcome by inertia, to act as if we were impotent or to be frightened by threats," he said in a sermon.

I mean, my understanding is that basically the current arrangement is that the Jesuits are the sane/intellectual/liberal wing of the Catholic church and have been taking it on the chin for the past 30 years. So maybe as good as you could hope for given the current college of cardinals?

I really think it's going to take me out of the movie to see the waiter deliver the check and think, "That guy paid ten grand to say that line."

Where does the new Pope stand on the issue of child molestation? For or against?

What on EARTH? (From the Nworb link.)

The reluctance of the Vatican bank to sign up to European money-laundering protocols means that it is currently unable to offer any cash machines inside the city state.

Back when I was still able to be whimsical about my inherited faith, I would joke that Catholicism demanded obedience to one's conscience, and that therefore, as a sincere atheist, all I'd need to do is retain a sharp Jesuit lawyer to argue my case for passage into heaven.

I suppose the Jesuits are somewhat less repugnant than the rest of the Church, but Holy Jesus (as they say) that's a low standard.

The VM fundraising already hit its $2M goal!

222: so what are you going to name your characters?

Ah sorry, I knew there would be a VM sub thread somewhere.

I have a friend of a friend who says that Francis told his mom to chill out on the ex-gay therapy.

223: I didn't go that overboard. I had just about talked myself into shelling out enough for one of the lesser personalized prizes, but then refreshed the page to learn it had already sold out.

Wow, only one of the rewards for donations $500 and over is left. Like, only one as in only for one individual.

Anyhow, essear, I'm excited you're getting a theater rented to show the movie here and would happily accept your invitation to attend.

I don't understand this:

The election of a Jesuit is significant here. Priests in religious orders, unlike the "secular" parish clergy, take deliberate vows of celibacy. It is not offered as part of a package deal with their vocation. So they are better placed to see the effects of the discipline on those who less willingly accept it.

Is he saying that celibacy is optional for religious-order priests? That seems odd. Or is it just that the vow is taken separately from the other undertakings?

222: so what are you going to name your characters?

"Craig Ferguson", obviously.

That's kind of brilliant, nosflow. Hopefully you dropped $8k on the naming rights.

Would that I could.

You could have started a Kickstarter to raise $8k to use to pay the VM Kickstarter. What could go wrong?

Kickstarters upon kickstarters! That's how we'll finance cultural production in the post-copyright era.

I have a kickstarter to set up a kickstarter options market. Hedge against kickstarter failure!

I sold a tranche of that and similarly risky kickstarters to Bjartur of Summerhouses as a hedge against a bad year for his sheep.

Etiquette question: I haven't received an honorarium check for a gig that happened about 3.5 weeks ago. When is it appropriate to send a very polite "What gives?" e-mail?

Adding to 236: it's not just an honorarium, but also a reimbursement. I paid for my airfare out of pocket.

With 237, the answer is "yesterday." You don't even have to mention the freaking honorarium--total win self-imagewise and you'll get your money.

238: you really are married to a Jew, aren't you? Anyway, I'll wait til Monday to send a nice "WTF?" note.

Also, my tax refund is taking for-fucking-ever.

Anyone have a few bucks they can spare?

235: are you flirting with me, JP?

240: What kind of a Jew gets a tax refund? Is the government paying you interest?

Not sure. What are you wearing?

What kind of a Jew gets a tax refund?

Not this one.

236: I'm used to reimbursements taking anywhere from 1 to 3 months, but maybe you deal with more efficient people than I do. (Also, this reminds me I've been forgetting to send receipts to one of those cash-strapped UC schools we've been discussing so I can steal some of their precious dollars.)

220: The Vatican Bank is a rat's nest of criminality, although it's apparently a different sort of criminality than the previous rat's nest of criminality involving the Vatican and banks, the Banco Ambrosiano/Roberto Calvi scandal of the '80s (which touched on not just the Vatican and Opus Dei but also the right-wing Masonic lodge Propaganda Due and thus the Italian intelligence services).

The banker's body was found hanging under Blackfriars Bridge, his feet dangling in the River Thames in the heart of London, on June 18, 1982; he wore two pairs of underwear, had five bricks in his pockets, about $14,00-worth of three different currencies and the business card of a Mafia figure.

See, that's what you get when you let Catholics run the banks.

Shit, the terrorists have won.

My sister and I both read the Didion book on her husband's death independently after our mum died -- ie didn't know the other was reading it -- and both got a lot from it. Our closest shared friend, who I thought would like it a lot, in fact hated it, and didn't get very far into it before crossly giving it back to me. iirc she adduced that Didion was extremely controlling (of family and reader) and took a dislike to this: I think this is a correct observation but to me it's more of a demonstration of a characteristic and a symptom very relevant to the story Didion was telling. I think I might go read it again.

(If it hasn't been pointed out already, the Guardian rowed back its story at 215 somewhat: "Although Verbitsky makes other allegations about Bergoglio's complicity in human rights abuses, he does not make this claim. The original article also wrongly described El Silencio as Bergoglio's 'holiday home'." [It's the name of Verbitsky's book.])