Blogroll

Weekend marginalia

It’s just been too nice to spend time staring at a computer screen so linkage has been sparse here lately. But there’s been various, perhaps rather eclectic, items recently I thought worth passing along:

  • One thing that didn’t make me happy this week was learning that the first major art gallery exhibit by Bob Dylan closes in London three days before I will be there — and part of the exhibit is just a couple blocks from where we’re staying.
  • I never knew Kafka was a work comp attorney.
  • Saving books in the Iowa floods. (Via.)
  • And The Big Picture collects several of the amazing photographs from the flooding. (PSA: If your haven’t subscribed to The Big Picture in your RSS reader, you’re often missing extraordinary photos.)
  • What he said.
  • Asinine idea meet asinine idea: After announcing a copyright stance on bloggers quoting its stories, the Associated Press says it plans to meet with something called the Media Bloggers Association to help form guidelines. My prior comments about that organization pale in comparison to updated information about its founder (and only member?).
  • To celebrate the supposed discovery of ice on Mars, The Big Picture (yes, that site again) gives us Martian Skies.
  • Best South Dakota blog name? The new “The ‘F’ Word: Feminists in South Dakota.”
  • A twist on the “best of” idea. Critics and authors pick their “most-loathed books.” (Via.)
  • Continuing its run in various SF awards, Michael Chabon’s The Yiddish Policemen’s Union won the Locus Award for best SF novel. Having read the book, I think some of the attention is coming from the fact another “mainstream” author has ventured into genre fiction.

[T]he line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago: 1918-1956

How to combat the announcer gap

Because the National Endowment for the Arts believes the number of working writers and authors in South Dakota dropped from 222 in 1990 to 190 in 2000, the NYT book blog asks, “Who is killing the writers of South Dakota?” But perhaps the real question is, “Who’s killing the announcers of South Dakota?”

According to a recent research report, Artists in the Workforce 1990-2005, at least the state is tied for fifth in the nation in “announcers” per 10,000 people. That’s right. In 2000, we had more announcers (“radio, television, public address systems, events”) employed in the state — 220 — than writers and authors. (In perhaps an indirect slam on my former profession, the term “writers and authors” does not include “technical writers, editors, or journalists.”)

Yet while the NYT is evidently worried about the 14 percent drop in writers, the study shows we experienced a 40 percent reduction in announcers (from 367 in 1990). And perhaps of even more concern to any self-respecting South Dakotan is that North Dakota ranks first in the nation in announcers per 10,000 people. Plainly, we are facing a critical announcer gap.

Some of our other rankings also leave cause for concern. We saw a 90 percent reduction in employed actors, from 44 to 4. But that’s better than the announcer bastion to the north. North Dakota dropped from 44 to 0 — that’s right, z-e-r-o — paid actors. (Of course, if you look closer, the NEA report says that when you take the margin of error into account there could be anywhere from zero to 227 paid actors in each state.)

In terms of percent of the workforce, here’s how South Dakota ranked as of 2000: photographers (9th); entertainers and performers (12th); fine artists, art directors and animators (28th); producers and directors (31st); musicians and singers (44th); all artists (45th); architects (47th); writers and authors (47th); actors (48th); designers (49th); and dancers and choreographers (50th).

Of course, as I consider the ramifications of the announcer gap I can’t help but wonder if there’s a better option. Perhaps we should help North Dakota keep its number one ranking and trade it a few announcers in exchange for some writers and authors.


[A]rtists constitute one of the largest classes of workers in the nation…. Artists represent a larger group than the legal profession (lawyers, judges, and paralegals), medical doctors (physicians, surgeons, and dentists), or agricultural workers (farmers, ranchers, foresters, and fishers).

Artists in the Workforce 1990-2005

What about those who aren’t residents of planet Earth?

Reading one of the longer books I’ve undertaken in a while and a string of enjoyable weather has kept me from the blogging world. I think favoring a book and good weather over the electronic world is more than justifiable. And if a recent Random House/Zogby poll is any indication, I’m not alone in at least part of that view.

According to the poll, which has only a 1.1 percent margin of error, 80 percent of the respondents don’t plan to buy an e-book reader and 82 percent would rather curl up with a printed book than one in electronic format, whether online, with an e-book reader or a PDF file. That isn’t the only sign book readers don’t necessarily view the electronic world as conducive. Eighty-five percent have never purchased an e-book and 95 percent have never participated in an online book chat with an author or belonged to an online book group. Nearly a third, however, depend on online book reviews for recommendations and 77 percent buy books online and that is where respondents buy books most often.

Other items I found of interest are that 78 percent buy the books they read while 19 percent borrow them from the library. Half buy fewer than 10 books a year for themselves but more than half buy 1-5 books a year they never get around to reading. Sixty-four percent don’t regularly shop at independent bookstores (which may well be a reflection of availability) but Democrats (40%) and independents (33%) are more likely than Republicans (20%) to regularly do so. More than three-quarters make unplanned book purchases when they go into a book store for a specific book.

And while this may not reflect actual sales, only five percent say Oprah Winfrey makes them want to buy a book whereas eight percent say the same of Jon Stewart. In addition, investors and frequent Wal-Mart shoppers (27% each) are more likely than their counterparts (18% each) to say talk radio makes them want to buy books.

And a finding that is perhaps more puzzling for what it asks rather than what it says: “Respondents who identify themselves as residents of planet earth (62%) are more likely than those who self identify as residents of America or their city or town to agree that book reviews make them want to buy a book.”


A book is a membership card to a secret society — a society of minds, with manifold interpretations and moods and intentions. You enter that society, the book’s lines imprint on your retinas, and your brain will never be the same.

Paul Verhaeghen, Omega Minor

Impeachment politics and the Bar

Politics are undoubtedly a primary topic of debate in bars around the country. It is extremely rare, though, when a political issue becomes a formal topic of debate and discussion for the South Dakota Bar Association. Yet that will be the case when a resolution dealing with the impeachment of Bush and Cheney will be discussed at the Bar’s annual meeting next week in Rapid City.

The Bar Association by-laws allow members to present resolutions at the annual meeting for consideration by the membership. This year, an attorney in Rapid City proposed a resolution that the State Bar recommend Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin “immediately initiate impeachment proceedings” against Bush and Cheney. The rationale? Members of the State Bar are required by law to take an oath to support the U.S. Constitution and the president and vice-president have committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” justifying impeachment proceedings. The specific grounds asserted in the resolution are:

  • spying on U.S. citizens without judicial warrant;
  • authorizing rendition and “systematic torture” of human beings;
  • leading the country “into an illegal war of aggression” in Iraq “on false pretenses”;
  • arresting and imprisoning American citizens without charges; and
  • using “defiant signing statements to declare that the President, in his unbridled discretion, is the law.’

In the 20+ years I’ve been a lawyer, this is the first resolution on such a hot button political issue that I can recall (although calling my memory poor is to praise it excessively). I have somewhat mixed feelings as to whether it is an appropriate topic for the state Bar. Despite that, while I’m not going to the bar convention, I probably would vote for the resolution if I were there.

There’s two things I’m fairly certain of, though. One is it takes a lot of mettle and courage of conviction to propose the resolution. The second is that it stands as much chance of success as Congress actually initiating impeachment proceedings against this administration.


[Impeachment proceedings] will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and …. will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will inlist all their animosities, partialities, influence and interest on one side, or on the other[.]

Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 65

Book Review: The Great Derangement by Matt Taibbi

As you can tell from the tone of some of the political posts here, I’m fed up. I’m tired of politics and politicians and revolted by how they elevate self-interest over public interest. It can be therapeutic to see you’re not alone. And Matt Taibbi’s The Great Derangement, also indicates there’s a lot of people out there who feel the same way. It’s just that the disaffection manifests itself in different, at times somewhat deranged, ways.

Often scathing, frequently humorous and usually insightful, Taibbi sees Americans as becoming deranged by the state of political and national affairs. He explores this derangement but what he views as analogous counterparts at either end of the political spectrum — the end times-tinged evangelical movement and the 9/11 Truth Movement. To him, they are prime examples of the factionalization of the so-called blue-red divide stemming from an underlying and growing distrust of politics and government.

The main storyline here is Taibbi joining Cornerstone Church, founded by Pastor John Hagee, the evangelical minister whose endorsement John McCain so proudly trumpeted and then distanced himself from. We follow Taibbi to a church “encounter weekend” which culminates in participants vomiting out the demons that possess them, prayer groups with leaders who make sure to incorporate the church’s political viewpoints, and even street (actually shopping mall) evangelism. While The Great Derangement provides insight to such activities, equally fascinating is Taibbi’s discovery of how he adapts to the culture. He begins to grasp how and why the feelings it creates in members has helped churches like this grow and succeed, politics aside.

Taibbi also joins a meet up group of the 9/11 Truth Movement, which believes the Bush Administration was involved in — or at least aware of and did not stop — the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Although classifying the movement as “a narcissistic pipe dream for a dingbat, sheeplike population,” Taibbi casts it here as a left wing counterpart to the ideas of Hagee and similar evangelicals on the right.

Interspersed with these focal points are trips behind the scenes of the budget process in Washington (which should be required reading for every American) and time Taibbi spent with American troops patrolling the streets of Baghdad. And while Taibbi is no fan of the evangelical right or the Bush Administration, he is an equal opportunity critic. Both parties and the media are frequently excoriated. For example, here’s part of his take on when, nine days after September 11, Bush said America was attacked because of its democracy:

“They hate our freedoms” was possibly the dumbest, most insulting piece of bullshit ever to escape the lips of an American president. As an explanation for the appalling tragedy of 9/11, … it was insufficient even as a calculated effort to snow an uneducated public — it was too stupid even to hold up as that. And yet when he said it, Bush was not savaged by the mainstream media for blowing off the biggest security question of our time. …. Instead, he was cheered as a hero by members of both parties and virtually all the country’s commercial media, which engaged in a kind of frantic race to see who could more enthusiastically compare Bush’s speechmaking to that of Winston Churchill.

Taibbi recognizes that this, sadly, may be par for the course in today’s America. He points out that although the Democrats swept into office in 2006 in response to the Iraq War, Hurricane Katrina and other Bush policies, they have done little or nothing with (or to keep) that mandate. He notes those midterm elections simply produced “a period where the Democrats would prove absolutely that it is possible in America to govern entirely on the appearance of principle — while changing absolutely nothing.” And the key word there is “appearance.” The Democrats have done nothing to change things. Their positions on Iraq, post-9/11 civil liberties and the like were nothing more than hollow rhetoric masquerading as principles. Instead, it remained politics as usual.

While Taibbi ultimately wants to offer at least a ray of hope, I fear the subtitle’s reference to “the Twilight of the American Empire” may be too accurate. And although I share his disgust and dismay, this isn’t going to be the quintessential work for the disaffected. It at times feels somewhat cobbled together from a variety of subjects Taibbi explored as possible book topics and as national affairs correspondent for Rolling Stone magazine. Likewise, while Taibbi decimates the ideas of the 9/11 Truth Movement with his account of an imaginary conspiracy meeting led by Dick Cheney, his reason for categorizing it as a faction on the left seems to go no further than its hatred of Bush. Closer examination of what factors other than disaffection with government gives rise to the popularity of this movement yields to his recounting of arguments with movement proponents.

It may be unlikely The Great Derangement will find a significant audience beyond those already in the choir. (It reached No. 25 on the NYT nonfiction list before disappearing in the latest rankings.) But what the book illustrates is that there is a very large choir out there. It’s just that some are using an evangelical hymnbook, others are singing of grandiose conspiracies and many just go home to watch TV. Unfortunately, the twilight represented by our deranged and broken political system may just become darker and darker.


If there’s one thing you can always count on, it’s that a lefty political activist will find a way to convince himself that he’s changing the world by watching a movie.

Matt Taibbi, The Great Derangement