Sunday, May 23, 2010

Kagan, Dowd and me



3. Me:

I only listened to the first bit of this on Elena Kagan, because her nomination interests me--as in, as a Canadian lawyer, I'll take some time off from my work to watch her confirmation hearing, which will be for me a holiday doing something I like. And I read Dowd's piece, which, unlike Mr. Laarman, I didn't find hilarious, but, rather, irritating.

I agree with Ms Butler, and contra some like Andrew Sullivan, who is public intellectual creep number one, that Kagan's sexuality ought to be relevant to nothing public. And so I found Dowd's little column virtually prurient. Her twitting those concerned with Kagan's sexuality serves to do nothing so much as feed this particular irrelevant beast.

For Dowd's column to have resonance she has to privilege, and thus give meaning and legitimacy to, the very vapidities, irrelevancies and sexual obsessiveness, she means to deride. If these things weren't the butt of her failed attempt at withering irony, they could be more easily be shuffled off certain centre stages—like the Times.
Dowd is precis
ely a discredit to the very point she pretends she wants to make; and I contend she does not know herself

No comments:

Post a Comment