Accidental Blogger

A general interest blog

Recent posts

about

  • South Asian Reading List

    For many readers, familiarity with south Asian writers may go only as far as the works of Salman Rushdie and perhaps a bit of V.S. Naipaul. Naipaul is West Indian by birth and British by choice and his literary output encompasses subjects far beyond the Indian subcontinent. But because of his Indian heritage and several works about India, he is often included in this list. There is a robust crop of south Asian literature in English worth exploring beyond these two well known writers. Rather than review just one book at a time, I am posting  a few thumb nail reviews here. The featured books (except two) are of relatively recent vintage and the authors (except two) are of south Asian origin – from India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. All the books are in original English – not translations from the veranacular. I have assiduously avoided the "curry" literature which caters to the "snake charmer – yogi – spiritual mumbo jumbo" commonly and somewhat mistakenly associated with south Asia. First I had decided also to leave out the Raj period of British India but on second thoughts included two books from that era, both by British authors – the "two exceptions" I refer to above.

    Amitav Ghosh :  "Circle of Reason", "The Glass Palace", "The Hungry Tide", "In An Antique Land" (I have not yet read The Hungry Tide but I own a copy and will embark upon it soon – sooner if I don't blog so much) :  Amitav  Ghosh is a brilliant writer of well researched historical fiction whose style is reminiscent of Gabriel Garcia Marqez and E.L. Doctorow -the magical whimsy of the former and the historical precision of the latter.  The first three books are novels set in India, Burma and vicinity. They are intricately woven stories of families, political events and local lores which take you back and forth in time and place.  "In An Antique Land" is non fiction and is set in Egypt. It chronicles the ancient trade practices between India and the middle east – this book resulted from Ghosh's doctoral work in history.  (Stay away from The Calcutta Chromosome which is a bizarre book).                                                                                                                                                      
    Rohinton Mistry:  "Swimming Lessons and other stories from Firozsha Baag", "Such A Long Journey" : Mistry belongs to India's Parsee (Zoroastrian) community.  He is a gentle but astute observer of the lives, aspirations and eccentricities of this educated, wealthy and somewhat insular Indian community (rapidly dwindling in numbers) living  mostly in Bombay (Mumbai) and other western Indian cities. His eye for details – the mundane and the unusual, is keen and he writes with a laconic mixture of humor and pathos. (Avoid his better known book, A Fine Balance which became a big hit on the US market a few years ago, after Oprah Winfrey picked it for her book club.  Apparently, Oprah loved it but I thought the book was unnecessarily long and very depressing).

    Jhumpa Lahiri:  "Interpreter of Maladies": (short stories) : I am including Jhumpa Lahiri in this list only because she is the first south Asian woman to win the Pulitzer Prize. Despite a Pulitzer for this book, her very first, I am lukewarm about the collection. She is one of those writers described as possessing a "quiet, gentle and observant" style of writing (often compared to fine embroidery) ascribed most often to women writers.  The stories are mediocre with a few good insights but lacking  the kind of snap and crackle that make a good book really unforgettable.

    Bapsi Sidhwa:  "Cracking India".  A funny, yet terrifying story of the partition of India as told by a little girl recounting the  metamorphosis of one nation into two and its repercussions on her friends, family and neighbors.  The story is unique in that it is one of the few partition tales narrated in a child's voice and also because the little girl belongs to the Parsee community (Zoroastrian like Mistry above) whose civic minded members were not "uncomfortable" with the British rule. The Parsees did not for the most part, subscribe to the nationalistic aspirations of either the Hindus or the Muslims and they mostly escaped the mutual carnage that these two communities brought upon each other during the political partition of India in 1947. Although the book very cleverly depicts a precocious child observing the devastation around her, it suffers somewhat from an unrelenting lightheartedness which starts to grate towards the end, when the traumatic Hindu – Muslim communal violence turns grisly.  Sidhwa was born in what is now Pakistan and currently lives in Houston. 

    Mohsin Hamid: "Moth Smoke": Set in present day Pakistan, the novel describes the indolent and reckless pastimes of the self indulgent, decadent and amoral "hard as flint", super rich.  This contemporary tale is interesting, stylish and edgy. While the overwhelming majority of S. Asian writers in English are of Indian origin, Hamid, a Pakistani, compares very favorably with the best of them.

    Shyam Selvadurai: "Funny Boy": An unusual book by a South Asian author who does not treat homosexuality in the dismissive and casual context of eunuchs and debauchery. It is a touching and confusing  coming of age story of a sensitive young gay boy. The author is Sri Lankan Tamil, who at a young age, watched his country come apart at the cultural /religious seams during the 1980's, when hostilities between the Tamils and Sinhalese in Sri Lanka led to a prolonged civil war. The author astutely observes the underlying suspicions and snobbery that color the outwardly civil intercourse between two communities who have lived together for centuries but remain divided by religious and ethnic differences. The simmering  tensions erupt and give rise to bloody conflicts and terrorism – a common and tragic occurrence ravaging much of post-colonial India and surrounding regions.

    Arundhati Roy:  "God of Small Things": Winner of the 1997 Booker Prize . The book and the author, a peace activist, have been widely publicized in the western media. A beautiful, wrenching story of a pair of  boy -girl twins growing up in the patriarchal Syrian Christian community of Kerala in southern India.

    J.G.  Farrell: "The Siege of Krishnapur": I am indebted to my cousin, Sudip Bose (a book lover and literary critic) who alerted me to this obscure literary gem. J. G. Farrell, a British author, won the Booker Prize for this book in the early seventies. The novel is set in 1857, during the Sepoy Mutiny (soldiers' mutiny) – the first serious but poorly organized uprising against British rule in India. The story is essentially about the Brits – the Indian natives are in the background – shadowy figures, dying, fighting and occasionally striking terror in English hearts. It is a sharp analysis of the mindsets of conquerors and occupiers – each English man had a personal vision of what colonialism was all about.  The book is brilliant – a humorous and humane story, with the unlikely back drop of a desperate and bloody rebellion. The book goes well beyond the idea and ideals of the Raj.  It is more about man's understanding of man, machine, religion, science, politicial power, infectious disease and other age old conundrums. 

    George Orwell: "Burmese Days": An unusual work of Geroge Orwell – a far cry from Animal Farm. Although I was aware that Orwell was born in India, before I read this book I did not know that he had worked for the Indian Imperial Police for five years and was posted in Burma (Myanmar). Burmese Days is somewhat similar in its scope as Farrell's book above, except Orwell's tone is somber as opposed to Farell's irreverent humor. Both books are biting commentaries on colonialism's degrading effects on the occupier and the occupied. Unlike the ferocious mutiny in Farrell's story, the back drop of Orwell's book is a failed love story that unfolds in the langurous and stunted milieu of a colonial society trying to keep up its proper European stiff upper lip in the tropical jungle heat of the east.

    Most of the books are available on Amazon.com.  If you are interested, look them up, read the detailed reviews and pick up one or more for a change of flavor.

  • Purging Poetry in Pakistan

    I first saw this peculiar story more than two weeks ago, in a local South Asian publication while eating at an Indian restaurant. Pakistan’s notorious madrassas are breeding grounds of Islamic fundamentalism, its once vibrant universities are becoming more like those madrassas and there have been efforts to "Quranize" the college physics curriculum (attention, Kansas). Instead of correcting the alarming deterioration in their public education, Pakistan’s curriculum planners, like ignoramuses everywhere, spend their time and energy in paranoid pursuits. One example – looking for hidden messages buried inside prescribed poetry. The government is going to delete an objectionable poem from school text books. I agree that the poem should be removed but only because of its atrocious literary value. Also puzzling is the source of the anonymous poetic propaganda. Does the Pentagon employ bad poets? Or could this be part of Karen Hughes’ bumbling charm offensive in the Islamic world?

    "Pakistan’s government is to remove a poem from a school textbook after it emerged the first letters of each line spelt out "President George W Bush".

    The anonymous poem, called The Leader, appeared in a recent English-language course book for 16 year-olds. Critics say it praises Mr Bush. Its rhyming couplets describe someone "solid as steel, strong in his faith".

    Officials cannot explain how the poem entered the curriculum. Pupils are being told to ignore it.

    The textbook is due to be reprinted next year."

    Here is the offending verse:

    THE LEADER by anonymous
    Patient and steady with all he must bear,
    Ready to meet every challenge with care,
    Easy in manner, yet solid as steel,
    Strong in his faith, refreshingly real.
    Isn’t afraid to propose what is bold,
    Doesn’t conform to the usual mould,
    Eyes that have foresight, for hindsight won’t do,
    Never backs down when he sees what is true,
    Tells it all straight, and means it all too.
    Going forward and knowing he’s right,
    Even when doubted for why he would fight,
    Over and over he makes his case clear,
    Reaching to touch the ones who won’t hear.
    Growing in strength he won’t be unnerved,
    Ever assuring he’ll stand by his word.
    Wanting the world to join his firm stand,
    Bracing for war, but praying for peace,
    Using his power so evil will cease,
    So much a leader and worthy of trust,
    Here stands a man who will do what he must.

  • Blog Carnivals

    I recently decided to try and increase the exposure of Accidental Blogger by submitting blog entries to a couple of blog carnivals. I am happy to say that the entries were accepted for publication at both sites. Regular readers here may have already seen the two posts – "Tower of Babel – Not in Kansas"  and "Barefoot, Pregnant .. and Dead".   But please go and check out the other writers featured at the two carnivals currently under way – The Carnival of the Liberals # 2 and The Carnival of Feminists. You may find something you really like. With the holidays approaching, regular blogging will probably become more sparse at your favorite blogs. These carnivals will be up for two weeks and will provide reading material during the slow period. If any of the readers here are small bloggers like me, you should consider participating in order to highlight your blogging output at some of the carnivals – there is one for virtually every topic.

  • Cloak & Dagger or Just Dirty Politics?

    The story about Bush-Cheney-Rove, Inc. illegally snooping on Americans has exploded in the mainstream media and the blogging world. We are learning the minute details of the legal, political and psychological ramifications of this sordid affair.  What I have gathered so far is that Bush didn’t really have to do all this secret snooping. He didn’t have to go behind the FISA court’s back to set up wiretaps or electronic surveillance of suspicious characters. The FISA court has been termed a "rubber stamp" for the executive branch, having approved more than 19,000 requests for snooping and turned down just 4 since its inception.( And now a FISA court judge has resigned because Bush may have rendered even this "rubber stamp court" totally irrelevant !) Also, it allows retroactive authorization within 72 hours (fifteen days during war time) of the start of an eavesdropping operation. So, it is very easy for a US president to spy on American citizens whenever issues of national security are raised – which for this administration since 9/11, is all the time.  So why did Bush-Cheney not go through this easy and speedy authorization process? Many legal theories are floating around. Among them is that they were engaged in data mining — looking for needles in haystacks. I am not sure what that means but I would guess it is like reaching a conclusion first and working backwards. You suspect someone because he/she fits a certain profile but have no evidence against him/her on hand. You eavesdrop on that person and try to look for clues to connect him/her to the suspicion.  The FISA court suspects that the administration may have done this and then come back for authorization later, with evidence based on the illegally mined data to proceed with further eavesdropping – which would now be legal.  Whew! Sounds like money laundering to me.

    Some or all of the above may be true. But having seen this administration at work since 2001, my low tech, non legal and suspicious mind tells me that it may be something much simpler, more befitting this vindictive, in-your-face and conspiratorial White House. Remember this is the same bunch who smeared McCain during the 2000 primaries, swiftboated Kerry in 2004, outed Valerie Plame and took us to a war with manufactured evidence.  I fear that some of the illegal wiretaps may not have had anything to do with terrorism or national security. Bush &Co.(especially Cheney) may have used the 9/11 security concerns as cover for plain old Texas style hardball politics. They may have simply abused executive power to  spy on political enemies – people like Joe Wilson, Richard Clark, John Kerry, John Edwards, liberals, Iraq war critics and perhaps even the Dixie Chicks! They couldn’t have gone to FISA for authorization in these cases.  So they just did it ! Sounds just like Bush and Uncle Cheney to me.  I don’t know how the inept Dems are going to handle this one (impeachment anyone?) and if the Republican majority in congress will allow them to do anything. It is worthwhile to repeat something here that I had included in one of my earlier posts:

    "… this administration now has the smell of Vietnam and the odor of Watergate."

    Robert Dallek : Presidential Historian /Author

    Note: I am publishing this post as an answer to reader Marco’s comment on Republican 3R’s.

  • Republican 3 R’s – Recount, Redistrict and Reinvent

    Unnerved by sinking poll numbers, Republicans in congress pushed the isolated and imperious president George W. Bush to launch a media blitz to "explain" his side of the story on Iraq and national security to the American public – this time with a bit more humility and truthfulness. Bush has obliged with several public appearances before journalists, think tanks and from the Oval Office. The strategy is one of good cop, bad cop – good on admitting mistakes on Iraq and bad on domestic spying and snooping.  A recent up tick in presidential poll numbers after the Iraqi elections, indicate that the carefully choreographed charm offensive may be working.  But Cragg Hines, op-ed columnist for the Houston Chronicle isn’t buying into the "change of heart in the White House" theory. What he sees is an attempt at rewriting the Iraq debacle and ensuring a presidential legacy of national security and mature foreign policy. Hines writes:

    "In much of the civilized, democratized world, Bush would be a goner or at least facing a new election. He can thank the Founding Fathers for the constitutional insulation. With a bifurcated executive and legislature, we have a less instantly accountable, more forgiving system. And with the recent exception of self-righteous Republicans hounding Bill Clinton on the perjurious fallout from his serial randiness, the nation has little stomach for the rarely used impeachment mechanism."

    That George Bush still believes he is King George is apparent from the condescending attitude that shines through his attempts at humility. A few examples:

    After repeated questions on the legality of his order for warrantless eavesdropping at least partially within the United States, Bush finally grew a touch testy: "To suggest there’s unchecked power is not listening to what I’m telling you," Bush said, his noblesse oblige showing a bit more than perhaps he intended.

    Bush was most forthcoming in his news conference on a point that he had already finally acknowledged. Asked about the intelligence failure before Iraq, Bush said: "I hate to admit it, but that’s an excellent question."

    Bush was least convincing when he ventured into revisionism. "I hope I have been candid all along," he said.

  • An Intelligent Decision

    Dover, PA has escaped the fate of Kansas. Religious red necks will not for the time being, be allowed to turn back the clocks in Dover to the dark ages. See breaking news below.

    HARRISBURG, Pa. — "Intelligent design" cannot be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district, a federal judge said Tuesday, ruling in one of the biggest courtroom clashes on evolution since the 1925 Scopes trial.

    Dover Area School Board members violated the Constitution when they ordered that its biology curriculum must include the notion that life on Earth was produced by an unidentified intelligent cause, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III said. Several members repeatedly lied to cover their motives even while professing religious beliefs, he said.

    "The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy," Jones wrote….

    http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/technorati/Technorati.jshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/20/AR2005122000532_Technorati.js

    NOTE: The link in my post for some reason, is now leading to a different report in Washington Post on the same subject.

  • They All Look The Same – But I Stand Out

    A recent issue of Newsweek had an interesting article by Cathie Gandel in the My Turn section. She says that at 5′ 10" and as a fair haired foreigner in Japan, she felt as conspicuous as a "nail that stood out". Japanese society is quite homogeneous and conformity with tradition is highly valued. Children are admonished by elders not to be too eccentric or individualistic because as a popular Japanese saying goes – "the nail that stands out gets hammered down." Gandel’s analysis of this Japanese trait is mostly correct. But I found some of her other assertions a bit surprising. She says this of her experience at a women’s communal steam bath, the ofuro:

    I tiptoed into the small inner sanctum of the women’s ofuro (communal bath) at the small ryokan (inn) in the Japan Alps. Following custom, I had left my clothes in the outer dressing room, bringing only a small towel with me. The steam rising from the square wooden tub obscured the small window, hiding the tiny garden outside.

    Unfortunately, the steam did not hide me, a tall, fair-haired, light-skinned foreign woman. As I sat on the little plastic stool and turned on the wall tap to start the prewash cycle, I became aware of sidelong looks, gasps, muted giggles and a sudden exodus of the Japanese women and children. I must have resembled a gorilla in the mist, or the repulsive creature that was Sigourney Weaver’s nemesis in another of her movies. After all, that’s what I was to these women: an alien, a gaijin.

    Gandel makes much of her size and foreignness among the petite Japanese. I don’t want to sound unkind to her because I am sure that she is truthful in her assertions that she felt awkward – like Gulliver among the Lilliputs. She indeed describes her Japanese experience much like that of a bull in a delicate china shop. But I wonder how much of this awkwardness was caused by her own self-consciousness and not so much by the actual "gawking and giggling" of Japanese onlookers.

    I simply love traveling in Japan. At five foot nothing, I do not stand out in height but am definitely a "foreign" looking Asian among the Japanese. My own experience in several small and big cities of Japan was nothing like Gandel’s. I don’t speak any Japanese except the obligatory "Arigato gozai mas" (thank you). Yet I found the Japanese to be unfailingly polite, helpful and patient with my efforts at communication, using English and wild hand gestures. At some restaurants, the owner would stand by the table and guide me and my husband through an exotic meal. The taxi driver who drove us to the top of the volcanic Mount Unzen in Nagasaki, handed me a gift at the end of the trip – during the drive my husband had casually mentioned that it was my birthday. In trains, on the streets and in stores, I found the average Japanese to be very polite and welcoming.  Ms Gandel makes a few sweeping statements in her article. I will take the risk of making one of my own. Speaking as a person who was born in India, my experience is that Indians stare, the Japanese DO NOT. I have been to several of those communal hot spring baths in Japan – no women or children left upon my arrival. Also, unless there is overt hostility, why would we need to feel just like everyone else to enjoy a foreign experience? (Mind you, I am not talking about "living or settling down" in another country but visiting for a short or even a longish period).

    It is important to note that all Asians do not look or sound alike – so it is not just a westerner who "stands out" in Japan.  There was a lively discussion under way at Concurring Opinions a couple of days ago regarding the controversy that has erupted by the casting of Chinese actors in the new movie, Memoirs of a Geisha. Many would say, "What’s the big deal? I can not tell the difference." But the Japanese are not pleased as indeed they can tell the difference. Whether this should interfere with an enjoyable movie viewing experience, is another matter all together.

  • Real Football Coming to Houston

    Houston is set to become the home to another major league sports franchise.  The San Jose Earthquakes, a major league soccer team from California is relocating to Houston. Play begins in April of 2006- start of the kick off season for MLS. There is much talk of the large Hispanic population in Houston and certainly any professional soccer team will find a built in fan base here. But Houston is a very multicultural city and soccer fans come from all over the world. The city would do well to target the entire city in promoting the sport and choosing the location of the stadium for city wide convenience.

    With the introduction of professional soccer, Houston will be home to four major league sports – the Astro’s baseball, the Rockets’ basketball, the yet to be named soccer team and the Houston Texans’ football. (The last one we could do without). I hope the new soccer team does not choose a weather based name like the San Jose Earthquakes – although in Houston, "Hurricanes" will surely come up for consideration. How about a few suggestions here?

  • Holiday Greetings From Hugo

    With Saddam Hussein behind bars, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela has to be George Bush’s personal enemy number one.  The problem is that he is "democratically elected".  Mr. Chavez returns the favor – so he has taken it upon himself to challenge the Bush administration in its own backyard. Chavez’s novel strategy is to "kill with kindness" and he is using the only potent weapon in his arsenal – cheap oil.

    Concerned with the growing gap between the rich and the poor in the USA, Chavez is keeping his promise of providing cheap oil to the AMERICAN poor.  Citgo, the Venezuelan owned oil company is providing cheap heating oil to poor residents of Boston and New York and selling gasoline below market price to the city buses of Chicago.  The Bush adminstration must be seething but has made no comment so far.  Some other politicians are not looking this surprise gift horse in the mouth. Instead they are asking  US corporations for matching gifts. Here is an excerpt:

    Applause and cheers welcomed the Citgo truck as it pulled up at a South Bronx curbside one icy morning last week. The 9,500-gallon tanker was on a mission for one of the Bush administration’s most stubborn adversaries in the Western Hemisphere, but the crowd didn’t seem to mind. The big thing was that Venezuela’s leftist president, Hugo Chavez, was making good on his promise to help some of New York’s poorest residents get through a winter of record-setting oil prices. The Venezuelan firm Citgo has agreed to supply 8 million gallons of heating oil to 75 low-income apartment buildings at a 40 percent discount—and the nonprofit landlords have agreed to pass on the savings to their tenants.

    Chavez, a close personal friend of Fidel Castro’s, has spent the past five years trading insults with the Bush administration. Senior U.S. aides view him as a dictator in the making and warn that he could destabilize the region. In return, the Venezuelan leader takes Bush to task for the invasion of Iraq, for collateral damage in Afghanistan and—closer to home—for tacitly endorsing the failed coup that briefly removed Chavez from power in 2002. Pat Robertson hardly improved relations last August by declaring that "our Special Forces should take him out." (The "700 Club" televangelist later apologized.) Lately Chavez has discovered a resonant new theme: the growing gulf between rich and poor in the United States.

    Finding the right response to Chavez has always been tough for the Bush administration. "There has been a deer-in-the-headlights quality about it," says Michael Shifter of the Inter-American Dialogue, a D.C.-based policy-research group. "Sometimes confrontational, sometimes conciliatory. They’ve seemed at a loss." Career diplomat Donna Hrinak says Washington takes Chavez’s bluster too seriously. "We should consider the source and let it go," she says. At the same time, the administration ought to remember one thing about Chavez, says William Delahunt (D-MA), who has known him for years: "Whether we like it or not, he has been democratically elected."

    I wonder what Rev Pat Robertson will say next. After all, nothing can be more galling to a capitalist man of God than a godless communist interfering with the sacred cow of free market forces.

  • The Hammer and The Gavel

    Iraqis have gone to the polls today to begin their long march towards democracy . Whether the newly elected  government will be accepted as a fair representational model by all Iraqis, remains to be seen. Also, it comes as no surprise that Iran’s stake in the outcome of the Iraqi election may be as high as the Bush administration’s !

    Here at home though, some Republican politicians’ dedication to fair representation for US voters  falls short of the platitudes they mouth about Iraqi democracy and freedom. Cragg Hines, a columnist for Houston Chronicle has this to say about their hypocrisy and the danger to American democratic traditions at the hands of the current conservative government.

    "You don’t need to know much about the representational models, however imperfect, in the Iraqi elections this week to understand that they certainly are no more egregious than U.S. House districts in Texas.

    What hypocrites Republicans can be: All this breast-beating about representative government in Iraq while they continually try to jigger the vote at home.

    Is it more than a touch ironic that as ballots began to be cast in the first post-Saddam parliamentary elections in Iraq, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision to hear multiple challenges to the mid-decade, politically inspired redrawing of the 32 U.S. House districts in Texas as demanded in 2003 by then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land?

    And that it became clear that, against all precedent, nonpartisan staff attorneys at the Justice Department, having urged disapproval of Republican redistricting in Texas and having been overruled by their political masters, were then effectively cut out of the federal preclearance process altogether? ….. "

    Tom Delay is currently mired in legal wranglings in Texas and his name could surface in the federal courts in the Jack Abramoff case. Now the US Supreme Court has decided to examine the legalities of the 2003 Texas redistricting which Mr. DeLay merrily designed like his own private, partisan jig saw puzzle. Perhaps the judicial process will do what DeLay’s hapless Democratic challengers could not manage to do for more than twenty years – put an end to his powerful congressional tenure, best known for its arrogance, lack of finesse and vindictiveness. But a much more satisfactory scenario would be to see the Hammer learn a lesson in humility at the polls in his familiar stomping ground of Sugar Land, Texas, rather than in a courtroom in Austin or Washington D.C.

    Cartoon_1

    click here

    Update:

    And how is this for a presidential prerogative?  President Bush steadfastly refuses to comment on the investigation of Karl Rove by the Special Prosecutor because that "is an ongoing investigation and in our legal system everyone is presumed innocent until proven otherwise". Yet today when asked about Tom DeLay’s legal troubles, Bush said that "he is  confident that former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay is innocent of money-laundering charges, and he offered strong support for several top Republicans who have been battered by investigations or by rumors of fading clout inside the White House" reports say.  Maybe Iraq was a presidential prerogative too.

  • Masculinity, War & SUVs

    Here is a study that speaks volumes about aggression and the perception of masculinity.

    "A Cornell University study has demonstrated that men who feel their masculinity threatened overcompensate by adopting hypermasculine stances such as homophobia, support for the Iraq war, and a desire to buy a SUV:

    Willer administered a gender identity survey to a sample of male and female Cornell undergraduates in the fall of 2004. Participants were randomly assigned to receive feedback that their responses indicated either a masculine or a feminine identity. While women’s responses were unchanged regardless of the feedback they received, men’s reactions "were strongly affected by this feedback," Willer said.
    He questioned subjects about their political attitudes, including how they felt about a same-sex marriage ban and their support for President Bush’s handling of the Iraq War. "I created composites from subjects’ answers to these and other questions," he said. "I also gave subjects a car-buying vignette, presented as part of a study of purchasing a new car."

    With this in mind, perhaps SUV manufacturers will start running ads, with no brand names on them, impugning their audience’s masculinity. I can see them now: "Hey you," a crew-cut, neckless drill-sergeant type shouts from the TV, "you call yourself a man? You ain’t a man, you’re a big girl’s blouse!" Two ads later, a spot for the Hummer or the latest ultra-macho urban assault vehicle appears. Within the next week, sales go through the roof as office drones compensate for their perceived emasculation.

    Meanwhile the researchers in question next intend to measure respondents’ testosterone levels and also test their attitudes to violence against women."

    A more detailed report here.

    I have often heard media commentators assert that voters perceive the Democratic Party as the "touchy feely Mommy party" whereas the Republicans come across as the more muscular "Daddy" party.  Really?  Does Daddy hide in the closet while Mommy goes to fend off a dangerous intruder in the house, with a baseball bat in her hand?  I recently received an e- mail from a Democrat friend. The e-mail contains the service records of some Democrats and Republicans. It was sent out by  Illinois State Sen. Howard W. Carroll for circulation. If you examine this list even cursorily, the Cornell study appears valid and rather illuminating. 

    Some Democrats Who Served:

    Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71. * David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72. Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.  * Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an  army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.  * Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.  * Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.  * John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, Purple Hearts.  * Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.  * Max Cleland: Captain, army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star,Vietnam Paraplegic from war injuries.  * Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.  * Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74. * Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.  * Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons. * Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit. * Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.  * Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze  Star with Combat V.  * Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.  * Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57  * Chuck Robb: Vietnam  * George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.  * Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.  * Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953  * John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and AirMedal with 18 Clusters. * John Murtha (35 years in the Marines and Marine Reserves, Bronze Star, two Purple Hearts – Vietnam).

    Republicans who did not serve at all or avoided combat:

    Dick Cheney:  (Several deferments, the last by marriage). * Dennis Hastert: * Tom De Lay: * Roy Blunt:  * Bill Frist: * Mitch McConnell:  * Rick Santorum:  * Trent Lott:  * John Ashcroft: (Seven deferments to teach business).  * Jeb Bush: * Karl Rove: * Saxby Chambliss: (Bad knee. This is the man who attacked Max Cleland’s patriotism). * Paul Wolfowitz: * Vin Weber:  * Richard Perle:  * Douglas Feith:  * Eliot Abrams: * Richard Shelby: * Jon! Kyl:  * Tim Hutchison: * Christopher Cox: * Newt Gingrich:  * Don Rumsfeld: (served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor. No combat experience)  * Ronald Reagan:(due to poor eyesight, served in a non- combat role making movies).  * B-1 Bob Dornan: (Intentionally enlisted after fighting was over in Korea). * Phil Gramm:  * Dana Rohrabacher:  * John M McHugh: * JC Watts:  * Jack Kemp: (Knee problem,  although he continued in the NFL for 8 years as quarterback) * Dan Quayle: (Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard). * Rudy Giuliani:  * George Pataki:  * Spencer Abraham:  * John Engler: * Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer. * Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base. And…. * George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National Guard duty; got assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for U.S. Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, disappeared from duty.

    Right Wing Pundits, Preachers & Icons who DID NOT serve:

    * Sean Hannity:  * Rush Limbaugh: (did not serve (4-F with a pilonidal cyst.) * Bill O’Reilly:  * Michael Savage:  * George Will:  * Chris Matthews:  * Paul Gigot:  * Bill Bennett:  * Pat Buchanan:  * John Wayne:  * Bill Kristol:  * Kenneth Starr:  * Antonin Scalia:  * Clarence Thomas:  * Ralph Reed: * Michael Medved:  * Ted Nugent: (He only shoots at things that don’t shoot back.)

  • A Man and His Measure

    We know our watts, volts and ohms. Some even know their curies, faradays and fermis. But how many know our "smoots" ? Perhaps only some denizens of Cambridge, MA do. 

    This story is so funny that I am posting it without further commentary.

  • A Fine Balance In Iraq

    Paul Gowder’s post, "End of Paranoia?", one of the featured articles at the Carnival of the Liberals, makes the amusing and accurate claim that the Bush administration has cured us of paranoid fantasies by enacting every shenanigan that we could only have dreamed up in our worst nightmare. Gowder forgot to mention the cure of one paranoid delusion that many of us thought we were suffering from – that Bush believes his presidency is a mission from God. The occasional messianic glint in his eyes and the crusading tone of his speech were not audio-visual illusions after all.

    Abu Mazen, Palestinian Prime Minister, and Nabil Shaath, his Foreign Minister, describe their first meeting with President Bush in June 2003.

    Nabil Shaath says: "President Bush said to all of us: ‘I’m driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, "George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan." And I did, and then God would tell me, "George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq !" And I did. And now, again, I feel God’s words coming to me, "Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East." And by God I’m gonna do it.”

    But that was in private. In public now, George Bush is approaching the Iraq issue with a more sober voice although he still will not acknowledge that much of the devastation requiring reconstruction is the result of his own reckless and ill advised adventure. ( Dick Cheney, the bad cop to Bush’s good one, maintains a much harder stance).

    "Reconstruction has not always gone as well as we had hoped, primarily because of the security challenges on the ground," Bush said in a speech to foreign policy veterans. "Rebuilding a nation devastated by a dictator is a large undertaking. It’s even harder when terrorists are trying to blow up that which the Iraqis are trying to build. The terrorists and Saddamists have been able to slow progress, but they haven’t been able to stop it."

    Some Democrats, meanwhile are terrified that being too critical of Bush’s mistakes will cost them votes and are unnerved by comments made by Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi. They can not decide which play book on Iraq they ought to follow – so with pathetic predictability, they are  quibbling with each other.  Hillary Clinton has wrapped herself in the flag.  Sen Joe Lieberman, currently the most popular senator among Republican partisans is scolding his Democratic colleagues for criticizing President Bush. Congressman Jack Murtha steadfastly continues to call for a troop withdrawal. I fervently hope that the Democratic Party will come out with a coherent and firm message on Iraq about budget, timetable, milestones and a demand that the Bush administration award most of the reconstruction contracts to middle eastern companies (the gesture will be far more reassuring to the Arab heartland than Karen Hughes’ clumsy blunderings through Islamic countries and the Pentagon planting paid "good news" stories in the Arab press). But at no time should the Dems stop reminding Americans about the hideous mistakes made by this bully administration – even if that strikes some as unpatriotic and churlish.

    I am not one to quote poetry with flourish. But the bleak and exhausting story unfolding in Iraq calls for poetic validation. Thanks to one of  Maurice Leiter’s Friday Poems (Had I Only) on Leiter Reports,  I recently discovered the writings of C.P. Cavafy and these apt sentiments in one of his poems.

    For some people the day comes
    when they have to declare the great Yes
    or the great No. It’s clear at once who has the Yes
    ready within him; and saying it,

    he goes forward in honor and self-assurance.
    He who refuses does not repent. Asked again, 
    he would still say no. Yet that no – the right no – 
    undermines him all his life.

  • Big Red On My Mind

    Can one apply the dictum, "Hate the sin but love the sinner" to sports?"

    The UT Longhorns (12 -0) are on their way to the Rose Bowl for the national title game against USC on Janurary 4. They beat Colorado 70 – 3 in the Big 12 Championship game in Houston last Saturday. With its two professional football teams not in contention for anything (the Dallas Cowboys {7-5} and the Houston Texans predictably with the worst NFL standing {1-11}), Texas has been watching its flagship college team with breathless anticipation all year. My neighbors are gleeful.  Burnt orange jackets, hats, shirts and "Hook’em Horns" logos are everywhere. Even some postal workers don Longhorn smocks over their uniform these days. 2005 has been a banner year (UT has never had a 12-0 season before) for the University of Texas. UT basketball is ranked number 1. With the 2005 collegiate baseball championship under their belt earlier this year, the Longhorns are at the top of their game in three NCAA sports. The UT football team is deemed "unstoppable", "impregnable" and most famously, "inVinceable" – after its stellar performer Quarter Back Vince Young, on whom rests much of the hope of a national championship.  The UT football squad has been described as comprising "one extra-terrestrial (Vince Young) and ten average earthlings."

    I am a Longhorn parent – my son graduated from UT. I am a diehard sports fan.  I will probably watch the Rose Bowl game on TV and root for Texas. But I am hardly terribly excited. Why not?  I don’t like football.  I grew up around soccer (the real football) and cricket. The highlight of my two year stay in Germany was watching European League soccer. I love tennis (the only sport I follow faithfully nowadays). I watch baseball and basketball when the play off and championship seasons come around. I don’t watch much TV except for news and documentary shows. But when I do, I would rather watch sports than sitcoms. I read the sports page of the newspaper at least cursorily every day even when nothing very exciting is going on. 

    So what’s wrong with football?  It’s a misnomer for one thing –  "football" to the rest of the world evokes an entirely different, more elegant sport.  I have never understood why a  game where only one lonely player can kick the ball should have this misleading name. The brutal way the game is played and by the ridiculous shape and size of the participants, one would think that "Sumo in Space Suits" would be more appropriate. It is somewhat of a surprise that given my interest in almost any kind of athletic activity and the places I have lived in, I never did learn to appreciate American Football.

    I have lived in Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas – can you think of any more football friendly places in the country than these three?  My first exposure to football in the US was in Oklahoma during the glory days of Barry Switzer. I watched with bemusement as Oklahomans descended into mass insanity every Saturday in the fall. When the Sooners beat Penn State at the Orange Bowl in 1985, the state erupted into uncontrollable hysteria which took a while to subside. I lived for eleven years in Husker Heaven Nebraska, when Tom Osborne was God. I saw first hand the ecstasy brought forth by the back to back national titles of 1994 – 95, to be repeated shortly thereafter, in 1997.  For the last seven years, I have lived in Texas where football fever begins with Friday evening’s high school games followed by Saturday’s college football and ends with Sunday’s NFL matches. 

    But football in Nebraska was different from what I have seen anywhere else. It went beyond fanatic fan following – it was more like organized religion. Everyone knew the prescribed ritual and every Nebraskan was a true believer.   At the end of summer when the corn was in the silo and the schools reopened, the entire state of Nebraska shifted gears and all eyes turned to the "boys in red" starting practice in Lincoln. Conversations began and ended with the prospects of the Huskers and what Coach Osborne might do to ensure bringing home the National Championship trophy that Nebraskans all through the 1990’s, believed was rightfully theirs. "Go Big Red" signs and paraphernelia flooded stores everywhere. Come snow, ice and the worst inclement weather, fans would faithfully head for Lincoln to see the Huskers play.  All eleven years that we lived in Nebraska, every home game at Memorial Stadium was sold out. The bleak snowy and icy days from late October onwards were brightened by the bold red of the home team, favored by citizens. Yet, for all their dogged devotion, Nebraska fans were distinctive in their decency and gentle demeanor. Perhaps they were channeling their beloved Coach Osborne – a thorough gentleman whose midwestern reserve and sobriety were legendary.  There was very little public hooliganism associated with the Huskers’ wins and losses. Disappointment at Bowl games was shrugged off and Nebraskans stoically went about their business until September came around again … and hearts began beating faster once more.  We left Nebraska around the same time that Tom Osborne retired. It has been a downhill slide for Husker football ever since.

    Except for its brutal winters, my memories of Nebraska are very pleasant. My children grew up and graduated from high school there. We have many good Nebraskan friends.  Life was almost bucolic and quite peaceful.  And some time during those eleven years, I suspect, a subliminal message about Husker Football must have lodged itself in my brain. It is more than seven years since we left Nebraska and I still do not like the game of football.  But when fall comes around, the air turns cooler (even in Houston) and the football season begins, I find myself scouring the sports pages with a vague sense of nostalgia – looking up Big 12 game scores and wishing that the Nebraska Cornhuskers would once again be the kings of college football.

    University_of_nebraska_nu20_large

    Click on photo