The Wild Wordsmith of Wasilla
Written by Dick Cavett, published on the NYTimes websiteBio: [The host of “The Dick Cavett Show” — which aired on ABC from 1968 to 1975 and on public television from 1977 to 1982 — Dick Cavett is also the coauthor of two books, “Cavett” (1974) and “Eye on Cavett” (1983). He has appeared on Broadway in “Otherwise Engaged” “Into the Woods” and as narrator in “The Rocky Horror Show,” and has made guest appearances in movies and on TV shows including “Forrest Gump” and “The Simpsons.” Mr. Cavett lives in New York City and Montauk, N.Y.]
Edited by Phillip Bunker
Bio:[The guy sitting at his computer - which was ordered from Dell, and has traveled with Phillip to many places. The computer was sent to Phillip's address, the box itself opened by Phillip's wife, and the words that were typed into the computer were produced in Phillip's brain - with little reference to the cultural elite and broadcast media of the United States. Mr. Bunker has appeared consistently in Real Life for upwards of thirty years now and has been an invaluable asset in the lives of many ordinary and extraordinary people. Also, Mr. Bunker has consistently and systematically thought critically about life and the things he hears and says. Mr. Bunker lives in Alaska, though is content with only choosing to live in one city at a time.]
Hi,
I'd like to think I'm a wordsmith of some sort - not which sort, which isn't sorted out yet. Not Wasilla-an either. I'm a robust Anchorage and Eugene hybrid, with a little Corvallis, Albany, and a dose of Washington from the epicenter of Seattle tossed in for good health.
Anyway, I was reading this guy's article in the NYT (word up to my homey Vinny in Brooklyn), and through the miracle of technology I can just go ahead and reply like he were here in front of me.
He talks of Sarah Palin, which is a subject I've been interested in. Too bad she's so popular in the media. I, like my silly friend Dick Cavett, the writer of "The Wild Wordsmith of Wasilla," am convinced that anything the media likes is most likely something I shouldn't like - the media and I serve different masters. My master is the ideals represented in my own heart, applied to the world through my actions and intentions. To put it broadly (albeit vaguely), I believe that I work for a cause of goodness and justice. The media, on the other hand is mostly a lot of self-serving commercial crap. Even the good shows are full of pithy content complacent in the dumber-ing down of America. If you don't believe me, and need more persuading than that, well, you wade through your own bullshit while the rest of us trek for somewhere with greener grass.
The subject of Governor Palin has given me pause lately. The pause is for the inward battle. One side says, "surely this woman is lacking in intellect, surely this is a bad sign for our society." The other says, "listen to your friends in Alaska, many of whom aren't sending a good woman down the river." Neither side is easy to ferret out, mainly because celebrity is more complex than politics, which is more convoluted than the truth. I only listen to critics of Palin - or anyone for that matter - if they have legitimate, logical analysis with historical or scientific evidence. I suck at it, but that's what I try to do. I'm the first to admit that I've been conditioned to fall into every trap they (being Status Quo proponents) decided to set for me. Over time though, like the Philosophers of antiquity, I chide myself for speaking or listening without careful consideration. Gradually I hope for more truth and less monkey-babble pseudo-meritocracy propaganda war nonsense.
But wordsmiths make wordswords, and so these words I offer are merely advocates of balance in the wordweapon war. The printed black is the article, titled above from the New York Times, and the orange writing is my response.
Electronic devices dislike me. There is never a day when something isn’t ailing. Three out of these five implements — answering machine, fax machine, printer, phone and electric can-opener — all dropped dead on me in the past few days.
I suggest technology is too large a part of your life, debilitating your efforts to be in a good mood.
Now something has gone wrong with all three television sets. They will only get Sarah Palin.
As you may have anticipated, I suggest television is taking up too much attention in the lives of everyone. Fortunately, those so enlightened stay away from anything with too many commercials. But, you're right, all three or five major networks are probably in love with Sarah. She gets ratings - why? Well, she appeals to soccer moms and hockey moms for obvious reasons, and she has that whole "God is important" thing, which is important to most people even though most people don't share her precise views on the matter. She appeals to people because she's attractive, composed, traditional, and has an honest face. Most of all, I posit, there is plenty of leftover negative energy from the last two years of campaigning, and much of it is going to Sarah while the media transitions into its next iteration.
I can play a kind of Alaskan roulette. Any random channel clicked on by the remote brings up that eager face, with its continuing assaults on the English Lang.
... eager and hopeful face, with its continuing assaults on the stereotypical image of popular politics. Before all the national attention came, Sarah was a fairly simple story of small town success, imperfect though she is. Some measure of attention must be given to the good parts of her rise - that there is no reason any woman or man in America can't achieve what she has achieved and that such a level in politics could be so accessible to someone with old fashioned small town pride (albeit a bit backwards here and there). Aside from claiming the intrinsic value of snobbery, it is worthless to attack someone's character by criticizing their speech patterns, albethey contrived or albethey genuine. You never know when the next Franklin or Jefferson may show up with a caterwauling calling card, and our society won't survive if we rely on people who all talk like news-reporters. Granted we should watch out for Grants and for Jacksons bearing similar small town pride.
There she is with Larry and Matt and just about everyone else but Dr. Phil (so far). If she is not yet on “Judge Judy,” I suspect it can’t be for lack of trying.
Once again, it is the wisdom of the folk, not the elite who are capable of, and to a large extent excited about the idea of changing this country. Oprah voted for Obama! We all agreed with her. I'm sure the Palin family is very excited to be etching some fame into their history, but I would probably be doing the same thing to some extent (though I wouldn't be caught dead in some of the company she's likely keeping, but that's me not her). But, if we want people to come together for change, if we want to create new leaders, we have to be willing to accept their observance of whatever demographics they choose to appeal to. Too bad there aren't more women in politics on the Dr. Phil show. Too bad we don't have more "freaks" for alternative party choices - say, Socialists, or Anarchists, or Populist-Farmers-United-For-Universal-Organic-Food-ists. Yeah, if Palin can get on Judge Judy, I bet your local P.F.U.F.U.O.F.s has a better shot. Hell, the less conformity, the better for anyone who really wants change.
What have we done to deserve this, this media blitz that the astute Andrea Mitchell has labeled “The Victory Tour”?
What we did to deserve this was repeatedly commit idolatry and gluttony with reference to the role media plays in our society; the object of our idolatry and gluttony was television. As it became the center of our living rooms, so did it become the center of commerce and power in our civilization (indeed the pervasiveness extends to practically all of humanity). I'd say that the Lion's share of the greatest writers of our time, the greatest minds, most entertaining, most compelling have been poured into advertising and media in the last, um...50 years or so, with far more attention paid to the dollars than the due diligence. We deserve whatever we wrought, but hopefully we can change that.
I suppose it will be recorded as among political history’s ironies that Palin was brought in to help John McCain. I can’t blame feminists who might draw amusement from the fact that a woman managed to both cripple the male she was supposed to help while gleaning an almost Elvis-sized following for herself. Mac loses, Sarah wins big-time was the gist of headlines.
First of all, she did help John McCain, if nothing else than with her (blindly recieved, stamped and delivered) rhetorical efforts aimed at striking fear into the base of the GOP, encouraging any loyal fanatics to do anything necessary to stop the Obama Revolution. They listented to her, but we of the Revolution had the higher hand.
Second, feminists are difficult to broadly categorize in any fair way. Some unknown percentage of feminists are against Palin for her support of Patriarchy, War, and Anti-Abortionism, but some are also glad the GOP finally turned to a woman to solve their problems. Either way, any person who believes women should comprise half the demographic of democracy (and therefore representative seats, etc.) should be delighted at the female presence in the candidate line-up for the '08 election. Moreover, women should probably be a bit weary of dismissing, without substantial non-superficial proof of negative demagoguery, a good role-model for their own children. Otherwise kids see a woman scorned in the attempt of something because she was on the losing side and had overstepped her capacity, was too ambitious. Maybe if there were more women like Sarah in the GOP, it wouldn't be such a bastard when it comes to Reagan-worship and big money politics. Maybe the Democratic party would respond by encouraging more of it's soccer moms to lead the way.
And, about McCain, he lost the '08 election as soon as Bush won the '04 election in my opinion. Bush did everything he needed to do to make sure progressives were going to take over for a while.
I feel a little sorry for John. He aimed low and missed.
Aiming low is something that most politicians are forced to do to pick up a low-brow audience - one we created through consumerism and our cultural efforts to encourage conformity and unity. We thought we had good reasons to say the pledge of allegiance and trust the government - Pearl Harbor, the Nazi Party, the threat of nuclear war. But, when fear strikes, the first thing that happens is we collectively forget that we created the bomb, sold IBM's to the Nazis, and took two of Japans populous cities away with nuclear bombs for their infraction of our territory. Thereby, our government takes steps to make sure it is overly capable of protecting us, starting with making sure we support all of its actions, no matter how stupid we have to be to accept them. It is only because our culture has yet to grow out of it's moral infancy and intellectual subjugation that John "aimed low." I mean heck, look at Bush. He aims low, acts low, even has low approval, but that didn't stop him from taking over our country, doing terrible things, and then getting away with it (back up, that last one TOTALLY remains to be seen).What will ambitious politicos learn from this? That frayed syntax, bungled grammar and run-on sentences that ramble on long after thought has given out completely are a candidate’s valuable traits?
Ambitious politicos won't mimic Sarah Palin, you tool. That "frayed" syntax, impure though it may be, could be a face of things to come. We could use another Lincoln. Oh, Sarah has a long way to go to be Lincoln, and we already have the best Lincoln in Obama. Thats why we didn't vote for Sarah as much as we voted for Obama. But, you notice I didn't say "we didn't vote for McCain." A symbolic triumph for the progressive agenda at the heart of most working class Americans is that old white guys will lose elections for a while. Sorry old white guys - you're not necessarily the problem, and we still love the best parts of you, but you certainly haven't been a part of the solution for a number of years. Time to let others have a turn. Call it utilitarianism.
I think the message most Americans are hearing right now, as Dick Cavett of the "Dick Cavett Show," co-author of "Cavett" and "Eye On Cavett" has so aptly demonstrated, is that if you aren't a genius or even an eloquent intellectual, or even if you don't sound like a news reporter, that you are BAD. BAD YOU. DON'T RAISE YOURSELF ABOVE YOUR STATION IN LIFE. OBEY!!!! OR YOU WILL BE SCORNED BY THE ALL SEEING POWERFUL EYE OF THE MEDIA. BEHOLD!!! THE EYE OF MORDOR IN SPACE, THE NEWS ROOM OF ST. PETER AND PAUL, BEHOLD THE EYE OF RA, AND YOU ALL BE IN AWE WHILE WE pass around these buckets for your donations. Please, can't you just picture him up there, you know, all powerful and completely aware of all your FLAWS. Just a penny in the bucket will earn you relief of all I'm threatening you with...
And how much more of all that lies in our future if God points her to those open-a-crack doors she refers to? The ones she resolves to splinter and bulldoze her way through upon glimpsing the opportunities, revealed from on high.
So what if talking about God gets the GOP base out to vote. We certainly refer to "change" and "Obama" and "hope" as if they were open-a-crack doors that we hope will splinter and bulldoze the opposition to opportunities for positive change in direction.
What on earth are our underpaid teachers, laboring in the vineyards of education, supposed to tell students about the following sentence, committed by the serial syntax-killer from Wasilla High and gleaned by my colleague Maureen Dowd for preservation for those who ask, “How was it she talked?”
My concern has been the atrocities there in Darfur and the relevance to me with that issue as we spoke about Africa and some of the countries there that were kind of the people succumbing to the dictators and the corruption of some collapsed governments on the continent, the relevance was Alaska’s investment in Darfur with some of our permanent fund dollars.
And, she concluded, “never, ever did I talk about, well, gee, is it a country or a continent, I just don’t know about this issue.”
Well, the decently paid (though is it ever enough, no matter how much you have) teacher in Alaska are probably telling their kids that they have to learn to write well, otherwise they'll have trouble going to college. They could be telling their kids to engage the world to make it better, because even though they don't look or sound like most of our Presidents and Senators and Congressmen and Rich People, and even though they may have a lisp or walk funny or spend too much money on clothes, that they CAN and MUST be involved if there is to be any hope of making this lauded and vaunted CHANGE happen. Of course our politicians should be informed, but why didn't the media respond to her interview with extensive coverage of the situation in Darfur? Wouldn't that satisfy the greivance. No. Not enough TV watchers truly care about Darfur to prevent them from voting for McPalin. Are we surprised that a cheerleader for this demographic wouldn't know it either? No. Could the media ever take the high road and not blast a newcomer for not being glued to the NPR dial?
It’s admittedly a rare gift to produce a paragraph in which whole clumps of words could be removed without noticeably affecting the sense, if any.
Yeah, well, dictation is rarely grammatically perfect, as it is verbatim from spoken word, not from a calculator of words. You see, colloquial stylings, which are compellingly accessible and attention getting against a bland backdrop, are representative of real communication between friends and neighbors. Unlike calculators of words, people often mumble or stumble, they grasp for words, often looking to their audience to supply a missing concept: "what is the word I'm looking for?" I'm convinced that humans engaged in conversation are using some form of telepathy to fill in all the blanks we leave out in the interest of time. I'm truly, truly sorry that Sarah never joined the debate team in school to become better versed in discussing relevent political issues. I'm even sorrier that the GOP was so desperate for an image makeover that they chose a woman who probably doesn't read the Newspaper very effectively or efficiently every day. How many of us actually do? Not many?
(A cynic might wonder if Wasilla High School’s English and geography departments are draped in black.)
To my knowledge Wasilla High School was never ashamed of its home-town daughter, despite her inability to sound high-falutin' on-air with all those cameras pointed at her. I imagine that Sarah has pretty good grammer when she isn't spin-doctressing. I think this paranthetical critique above would be better stated, a realist might wonder if America's education system is draped in somnambulence, and if so how do we pull that wool out of their eyes.
(How many contradictory and lying answers about The Empress’s New Clothes have you collected? I’ve got, so far, only four. Your additional ones welcome.)
Yes yes, you're very clever. You can count to four and laugh at people you're pointing fingers at. Well done intelligentsia. You really showed us commoners what-for this time. And well done on exposing that clothes thing. Brilliant addition to the national debate.
Matt Lauer asked her about her daughter’s pregnancy and what went into the decision about how to handle it. Her “answer” did not contain the words “daughter,” “pregnancy,” “what to do about it” or, in fact, any two consecutive words related to Lauer’s query.
Bill Clinton was asked about his blow job, and the words "blow" and "job" didn't appear in his answer. Neither did the word "penis" or "oval-office-face" and, quite frankly, I wish he'd avoided the question all together and we had all just moved on instead of focusing on a media culture bent on discussing the private parts of highest office of the country. I get it though, the GOP did it, why can't we? Well, that's my point you see.
I saw this as a brief clip, so I don’t know whether Lauer recovered sufficiently to follow up, or could only sit there, covered in disbelief. If it happens again, Matt, I bequeath you what I heard myself say once to an elusive guest who stiffed me that way: “Were you able to hear any part of my question?”
Niccccce.
At the risk of offending, well, you, for example, I worry about just what it is her hollering fans see in her that makes her the ideal choice to deal with the world’s problems: collapsed economies, global warming, hostile enemies and our current and far-flung twin battlefronts, either of which may prove to be the world’s second “30 Years’ War.”
No offense for asking such a simple loaded question. What makes anyone the "ideal" choice? Well for one thing, she apparently isn't afraid of dealing with collapsed economies, global warming, hostile... et al, all of which, if repeated frequently enough, will keep ordinary people too afraid to do anything. For another, no one is an "ideal" choice. That's what an "ideal" is - like Plato's Cave - we have to be content with flawed imperfect humans as leaders, even if they go to some crazy church you happen to be afraid of. Some people, who aren't afraid of her church (for whatever crazy reason) consider Sarah to be an illustrious example of change. Their voice counts, and superficially, they are correct. If that bothers you, I suggest you become a teacher or other influential member of society and try to change things to be more in line with your world view. It is within your right to do so, and some might say it is your obligation to do so.
Has there been a poll to see if the Sarah-ites are numbered among that baffling 26 percent of our population who, despite everything, still maintain that President George has done a heckuva job?
Hey, you're the one writing for the New York Times. I think you just needed a sentence to put "Sarah-ites" into print.
A woman in one of Palin’s crowds praised her for being “a mom like me … who thinks the way I do” and added, for ill measure, “That’s what I want in the White House.” Fine, but in what capacity?
Fine indeed. In the capacity of a person in touch with the common wisdom and values of the people, that is what people want in the White House - someone they can trust to see through the old ways into the new ways that support the people and put sanity and parental wisdom back into Washington.
Do this lady’s like-minded folk wonder how, say, Jefferson, Lincoln, the Roosevelts, et al (add your own favorites) managed so well without being soccer moms? Without being whizzes in the kitchen, whipping up moose soufflés? Without executing and wounding wolves from the air and without promoting that sad, threadbare hoax — sexual abstinence — as the answer to the sizzling loins of the young?
Well, frankly, some of these issues I feel some expertise on. Jefferson, Lincoln, and the Roosevelts probably wouldn't have hesitated to shoot a wolf, and if they were allowed to do this from an aircraft, they probably would have preferred to. But, seriously, Sarah-ites are not convinced soccer moms are the only people smart and tough enough to change Washington and begin the work of changing our culture. Instead, soccer moms are convinced that ambitious politicos and old white guys are definitely not the way to go. They just didn't know that Sarah is actually an ambitious politico and usually votes with the old white guys - that's why the GOP picked her.
(In passing, has anyone observed that hunting animals with high-powered guns could only be defined as sport if both sides were equally armed?)
Many say that hunting is a heritage (airborne or not) and anyone who has taken any entry level Humanities class has probably learned about the role hunting played in creating our species - the cooperation it takes, the skill, the agility, the exposure to the elements. Don't chide a connection to our past. If you're pissed off at zealous gun nuts, then say so. I'm sure they're not afraid to hear it. Maybe if you spend some time in Alaska, you'll meet people who regularly engage in the harvesting of animal resources to honor their ancestors and enjoy the fruits of their efforts. Once all those government subsidies run out up here, I'm sure we'll be glad we have lots of high powered guns and the animals don't.
I’d love to hear what you think has caused such an alarming number of our fellow Americans to fall into the Sarah Swoon.
Heard.
Could the willingness to crown one who seems to have no first language have anything to do with the oft-lamented fact that we seem to be alone among nations in having made the word “intellectual” an insult? (And yet…and yet…we did elect Obama. Surely not despite his brains.)
Indeed we did elect Obama, though I'd say more for his Spirit of Leadership than his brains, because too many intellectuals were insulted by Bush and his supporters. Sarah's colloquialisms are insulting to people who consider themselves "above" that; I rarely lament insulting an intellectual of that type, but only people on TV try to insult an intellectual by calling them "an intellectual." Needless to say, TV people are stupid and should be ignored.
Sorry about all of the foregoing, as if you didn’t get enough of the lady every day in every medium but smoke signals.
Every channel is a smoke signal, I posit.
I do not wish her ill. But I also don’t wish us ill. I hope she continues to find happiness in Alaska.
That will depend on how many GOP old guard toadies she brings with her.
May I confess that upon first seeing her, I liked her looks? With the sound off, she presents a not uncomely frontal appearance.
You fucking chauvinist pig - what do you think your afore mentioned feminists think about that tidy little phrase.
But now, as the Brits say, “I’ll be glad to see the back of her.”
Ibid.
**********
PS: Lagniappe for English mavens: A friend of mine has made you laugh greatly over the years. David Lloyd is a comic genius (I can hear you wince, David) who wrote for “The Mary Tyler Moore Show,” “Cheers,” “Taxi,” “Frasier,” Jack Paar, Johnny Carson and me, not necessarily in that order. As a language fan, he has preserved many gems for posterity in his prodigious memory bank. Here comes my favorite:
A Navy lecturer was talking about some directives on the blackboard that he said to do something about, “except for these here ones with the asteroids in back of.”
Even David couldn’t make that up.
