Catfish 35
Andrew Bushard
Welcome Readers. As I write this I am very close to the finish of my first year of graduate school. At year's end, I shall be half done with grad school, which is exciting.
Send me lots of cool mail. Few pleasures in life are as sweet as good mail.
If you want to trade me zines, that would be swell. I want no zines which compliment Howard Stern in anyway. Copies of my zines are free! Yes, free and still better than many mainstream magazines.
Dig the issue and have a fabulous day.
Reviews
Books
Perfect Crimes, Marvin J. Wolf, Katherine Mader, Ballantine Books, 1995.
I didn't get into to it right away, but then I really got into it. The print was a bit small, but we can forgive them because they probably wanted the space to fill with their wonderful words.
Hate Crime: The Story of a Dragging in Jasper, Texas, Joyce King, Pantheon Books, 2002.
Incredible book. I was intensely engrossed in this fabulous tome. She has the writing skills to pay the bills. She made personal reflections, but not too many to detract from the main story. She was really effective in describing the humanity of those involved in the ordeal. Her prose is talented indeed. She has created a book that I invested an entertaining and thoughtful night reading.
In the Belly of the Beast: Letters from Prison, Jack Abbott, Vintage Books, 1981.
Heavy. He's angry, though from the sounds of it, it is very justified. He seems insightful in the same way that Mumia Abu Jamal is insightful, and naturally so, because they have similar plights. The author is intelligent and races some very thoughtful points. He furthers the idea many people have that prison is scary.
America and the World Liquor Problem, Ernest Cherrington, American Issue Publishing, 1922.
The margins are tight and the pages are small, thus not many words are on a page. It gives you almost a roller coaster feeling, the pages go by so fast. I've seen other books written in that era, which are not formatted in the same way, thus time period is no excuse. Ernest Cherrington seems to have done alot of good work and I am glad I read another book written by a prohibitionist.
Napoleon and Hitler, Desmond Seward. Viking, 1988.
Although I have read quite a bit of material about Hitler and little about Napoleon, I found the material about Hitler more fascinating. I may never cease to find Hitler and the Nazis fascinating. These types of synthesises are very valuable because the author must demonstrate knowledge about two different subject matters rather than just one. Just one is hard enough the way it is. I imagine he could have been more detailed in his comparisons and contrasts, but perfect detail would have likely required more pages. The author illustrates not only how he drew parallels but how Hitler himself drew parallels.
I Was the Nuremburg Jailer, Colonel Burton C. Andrus, U.S. Army, retired, Coward-McCann, Inc, 1969.
I just can't get enough of reading about the Nazis. I haven't read all that much about this part of the Nazi issue. I am beginning to really love these first person accounts because they seem to be so engrossing. Some swell pictures, but since I like pictures there does not seem to be enough of them. In this book, he mentioned how most of the defendants stayed away from Ley and Streicher, but I wonder why more didn't stay away from Hess, since the Nazis deemed him to have betrayed the country. Maybe they thought, overall, "we're all in this together." A number of authors mention how many if not most Nazis abandoned their convictions when the times were tough. Thus maybe since most of them did anyways, Hess's transgressions weren't all that much in retrospect.
The Nazi Olympics: Berlin 1936. Susan D. Bachrach, Little Brown and Company, 2000.
I find this Olympiad to be one of the most interesting aspects of the Third Reich and that is coming from someone who finds virtually any aspect of the Third Reich interesting. In our library card catalog, this is listed as "juvenile", which certainly could explain why the style was at a lower level. But it was still swell. I did learn a little more, especially about the people they highlighted. I dug the emphasis on pictures. The books mentioned how the Germans yelled cheerfully for Jesse Owens. I'm surprised that Hitler would permit that or even that they would do that.
The Hitler of History, John Lukas, Knopf, 1997.
I thought I was too overwhelmed to finish this book, but I was wrong, it was just too interesting to pass up. I love how the different authors take their different angles and write about different aspects about the Third Reich which is perhaps why the Third Reich is endlessly fascinating. John Lukas describes his book as "A history of the history of Hitler not the history of Hitler" which is good because it is a new take for me. Although I wish he would have covered some areas which I find superbly interesting, I must commend him for providing dialogue on a great number of provocative themes. It was quite interesting, when he proclaimed "We're all national socialists" (which must of course be viewed in the appropriate context), referring to how he believed that the fusion of nationalism and socialism has entered virtually every type of political thinking. He even has the decency to write some words about the font the book uses. Besides me, reviewers and writers are keen to do this.
Farewell to Spandau, Tony Le Tissier, Ashford, Buchan and Enright Publishers, 1994.
I was disappointed with both the thinness of the book and the content of it. Through reading the descriptions on the websites, I thought there would be more about Rudolf Hess, but there wasn't that much, just seemingly as much as the author felt was needed. My friend Amy once remarked that probation officers write in a much more technical format than others. Thus I wonder if the same phenomenon is occurring here. I wonder if the author's military experience is influencing his matter of fact writing style. It seemed almost as if the book was more about the authorities and the ending of the prison than about Hess and the other prisoners. I really wanted more about Hess and the other prisoners, thus the book did not meet my expectations.
Inside the Third Reich, Memoirs by Albert Speer, Macmillan Company, 1970.
I have come across lots of books about Hitler which mention this work, thus I finally felt compelled to tackle it. Tackling was a long job, but I did it. From the page counts, of references and abstracts, I saw how long the book was, thus was deterred, when I got the book, I found out that not only did it have lots of pages, but there were lots of words on each page. I enjoyed how there were 3 different photo sections. In the book, the introduction, mentions how Speer had to "Smuggle out notes for this book." I wonder why he had to. Apparently either there was some official or maybe de facto force causing him to not be upfront about it. In some ways, my estimate of Hitler got a bit better, in other ways, it got worse. Speer seemed to suggest Hitler was incompetent. I thought it was especially cruel when Speer told how Hitler's adjutants were taken away when Hess did his famous act of disobedience, because the adjutants told Hitler the truth. That just seemed beyond horrible for me. I found it odd that as forceful of his beliefs as Hitler was, he seemed more live and let live in regards to alcohol. Due to his temperament and also considering how as suggested by many, he was opposed to alcohol, it is surprisingly almost, that he did not embrace prohibition of alcohol. Thomas Childers suggested that this work may not always be truthful, which I didn't like to hear at first. Then I thought, such a suggestion is good, because I naively assumed without question, that it would be the truth. If someone has done bad deeds like the Nazis, as folks say, they will probably lie too, since lying is far worse the Nazi crimes.
Holocaust Denial, Kenneth S. Stern, American Jewish Committee, 1993.
I wonder if the author is in any way related to the scumbag, Howard Stern. The author tries to appear that he is the sensible one, but his language is quite categorical and emotionally charged, even inflammatory. He gets real cl
ose to writing off anyone who is opposed to Israel as "anti-Semitic" He with one sweep, marginalizes anyone who denies the holocaust. On page 70, the author tries to show how holocaust victims testimony have great value, but even Michael Shremer refuted this idea by suggesting that historical writers take their reports with a grain of salt. The author's bias prevents him from understanding the essence of Holocaust denial. Although the book was enjoyable to read, it was a disappointment in the intellectual understanding department.
How to Screw the Post Office, Mr. UnZip, Loompanics, 2000.
The premise is as radly interesting as can be, but the book is much too short. It is more appropriately called a pamphlet rather than a book. It's so short, it was almost not justified to get it by interlibrary loan. The suggestions in here seem to be too much work, too much risk, for too little gain. In my younger days, I in jest, wrote a poem about "defrauding the post office", but I respect the Post Office too much to want to cheat it. His main rationalization for "screwing the post office" is the old "two wrongs make a right.", since he believes it's okay to defraud the Post Office because the Post Office does wrong too. The cover is rather obscene: a middle aged man with his pants around his ankles, buck naked, humping a mail box. This image although attention getting, maybe should have been replaced by another image. His complaints about the postal service are banal and unfair. As my dad suggested, "the Post Office is efficient because where else can you mail a letter across the country for just 37 cents?" I found it a bit funny, that some dude named "Bert Elwert" generously donated this highly provocative, intellectual, artistic masterpiece to a library, according to a label on the inside of the book. I was wondering what the library clerk and the interlibrary loan people thought about ordering this book for me. That wondering caused me to laugh.
101 Ideas to Do Until the Revolution, Claire Wolfe, Loompanics Unlimited, 1996.
The author clearly stated her libertarian political leanings and how the book was oriented in that direction, it disappointed me to find that out. It figures because a couple of years ago, the person who recommended this book had a reputation in Stevens Point as an arch libertarian. I don't expect to implement many of these ideas. A good number of ideas didn't seem all that useful or original. The author's insight about refusing to "debate others" may sound good as I am finding it draining to engage in debate these days. I use to not relish it, but I felt compelled to do it. If you want a more useful book for subverting the system, then read Out of Business also available from the same publisher. But of course, the books have different targets and your preference may all depend on whether you detest government or capitalism more.
Tenant's Revenge: How to Tame Your Landlord, Andy Kane, illustrations by Steve Soeffing, Paladin Press, 1983.
I ordered this book via interlibrary loan through our school library, but then I found out the ILL came from our public library in town. I'm impressed because this is an awfully cool book for a library to have. He ends most chapters with the phrase "God Bless America". He explicitly states that since he is in the pro-landlord camp. His humor is sharp, but it is a nice addition in a genre (apartment renting_ where other books are often dry as dirt. An example of his abrasive terms, though funny terms, is his use of "brats" to categorically describe young children. Not really necessary for the main premise, but definitely necessary for interesting reading, was his "anatomy of a landlord" where he basically described himself in a humorous fashion. On the back cover, it says "Kane is a real estate mogul in the city where he lives." Before, I have certainly seen the use of pen names or the phrase" by anonymous" when someone for some reason or another, wanted to conceal their identity. In this case, he gives his name, but not his city. Perhaps, most abrasive of all, is his general contempt for tenants (whether hyperbole for the sake of writing or real) .
New I.D. in America: How to Create a Foolproof New Identity, Anonymous, Paladin Press, 1983.
I like the author's tone and style/ Some new info here, some common sense. He talks about how it is difficult to get credit cards. Times sure have changed. Today it is way too easy to get one, just ask any college student. Folks who read these types of books often ask, "in 20 years, how much in this book is still valid?" It looks like at least a fair amount.
Audio
Abuse of Power: The New Nixon Tapes, Edited by Stanley I. Cutler, Dove Audio, 1997.
Just when I thought I had check out all the good audio books at our school library, I came across this one.
Taking Charge: The Johnson White House Tapes: 1963-1964, Michael R. Beschloss, Simon and Schuster Audio, 1997.
Relatively speaking, behind the scenes, Johnson looked like a fairly decent person. He seemed to love his wife alot and was otherwise nice to other folks. These political tapes are very enriching to hear. I hope I can hear Beschloss's tape about the later years of Johnson’s reign.
Reaching for Glory: Lyndon Johnson's Secret White House Tapes: 1964-1965, Michael Beschloss, Simon and Schuster Audio, 2001.
The author was a bit more blunt and critical of Johnson on this tape, than on the first, it seemed. Surely, in a good number of cases, it may have been justified. I thought it was interesting when Johnson gave credit to an idea of Hitler while ironically talking to Martin Luther King, Jr. From the first tape to this tape, my impressions of Johnson went downhill some. Beschloss has done something commendable by going through the hard work of sifting through Johnson's tapes to provide us with the highlights. Since people's tastes are different, I wonder if anything cut from here I would have found interesting.
Crash, Jerry Spinelli. narrated by Jeff Woodman, Recorded Books, 1996.
The author describes one of the main characters as an activist who jogs. I sure can relate to that! There are parts in the book that will really get at your heart. I was impressed how the narrating character's sister became an activist at the very young age of 10.
Napalm and Silly Putty, George Carlin, HighBridge Company, 2001.
I must admit he makes some very clever observations and he is a master at word play. His piece on terrorism was wonderful. I wonder if this was before or after September 11th, knowing him, I doubt if he would have toned down the offensiveness even if it was. Unfortunately, these positives get obscured in some negatives. He is too crude. He is too harsh. He has too much negative thinking in his head. He sure swears alot which can get really hard to listen to. He is too coarse. If he could remove these negatives and retain his cleverness, he would have himself a good product.
Mussolini, Jasper Ridley, read by Nadia May, Blackstone Audio Books, 1998.
Little can beat a well written biography about a fascinating person. In the past, I have been apprehensive to check out long audio books, because they seemed too much to get through. This audio book is probably one of the longest, if not the longest audio book, I ever listened. It contains 11 tapes of 1 1/2 hours long they tell you. Not only was it not too long to get through, but ironically, it seemed almost too short, as when the end came, I wish it hadn't. I believe this is the 3rd biography I have read or listened about this man. This author explained how for quite a long time, Mussolini avoided alliances with Germany, even being adversaries with Germany. I found it marvelous that the author took the care to refute other historian's versions of Mussolini's lives, which as historians tell you is a demonstration of how dynamic history is. When the author refuted an alternative point of view, he used great logic and evidence to argue for his case. A compliment for Nadia May is also in order: she had a good reading voice and read it as not to be overly enthusiastic and also not overly monotonous. I can't help but thinking that after reading for 17 hours, her voice really must get sore. Too bad, there are not more wonderful biographies on audio tape. I love enriching my knowledge about people like
Mussolini.
First Things First, Stephen R. Covey, A. Roger Merrill, Rebecca R. Merrill, read by Stephen R. Covey. Simon and Schuster, Inc, 1994.
Why is Stephen's name printed larger on the cover than the others? He says he has a "Covey Leadership Institute" isn't that egotistical to name one after yourself? Zig Ziglar also talks about naming an organization after himself. You have to wonder about these psychological people sometimes. Since, I am increasingly wary of the dogmas of modern psychology, I found some of Covey's suggestions dubious. I did implement one good idea he had. I did like how he concisely explained some of the thoughtful and wise discoveries of his original book, particularly his main idea. Covey has good intentions, to be sure, but his thinking can be a little off.
The Diary of a Napoleonic Foot Solider, Jakob Walter, unabridged narration by Patrick Tull, Recorded Books, 1992.
Diaries seem to be one of the most readable formats for books. The last tape in the set played almost the way W.C. Fields talked (voice wavering from loud to soft). I feel sorry for the writer after he described all he had to go through.
Rumpole on Trial, John Mortimer, read by Timothy West, Chivers Audio Books, 1992.
When I worked at that rotten summer camp, Camp Menominee, Chris from Liverpool, taught me that even garage tools differed from Britain to the US. I observed how this audio book's cassette holder was different from the American standard. If only I got a dollar for everytime someone in exasperation, anger, frustration or annoyance, exclaimed "Rumpole", or "Mr. Rumpole", I could buy a good amount of groceries. Rumpole has a sassy mouth which often sputters sarcastic words. He even expressed dislike for the social work profession, a profession many consider to be too benevolent to be criticized. On the back cover, it gave me the information that Rumpole enjoyed pubs. Thus I expected to hear about it, much to my distaste. I hope the British government boards up his favorite pub. Underneath his sass, seemed to be noble doings. I learned a bit about the British legal system by hearing a portrayal of it.
Bismarck and Germany, Geoffrey Barraclough, Sussex Publications, 1972.
I wish it would have been full of a bit more information. Two professors discussed Bismarck in not always the most exciting manner, but I have heard more dry discussions. At least, I know a little more about Bismarck now.
Stalin, Robert Conquest, read by Frederick Davidson, Blackstone Audio Books, 1992.
It seems as if Blackstone uses readers with accents. That is good for variety purposes. I have a rough rule about doing reviews. If possible, I try to read or listen to every main part (appendices and other supplementary parts are not thus required). Maybe about 90% of the total should be read to be fair to the writer of the material. Unfortunately, tape six of the set, didn't run well, it sounded garbled and thus I couldn't listen to it, at least to gain any information about Stalin. It's funny how I can't get enough of Hitler books, but one book about Stalin might just be enough. I didn't feel he brought out the gory details enough, and as odd as it may sound, Stalin seemed a little less bad from this book. It's great that this was an audio book, because I don't think I could have trotted through the whole hard book. It's probably more against Stalin than against Conquest, because I believe Conquest did an adequate job writing.
Alexander the Great: A Concise Biography, E.E. Rice, read by Martyn Reed, Isis Audio Books, 1997.
Not terribly exciting, but I've seen duller. I am glad to learn some more about Alexander, whom before I have not read all that much about.
For the New Intellectual, Ayn Rand, read by Anna Fields, Blackstone Audio Books, 2000.
Although I am no objectivist, I love how Rand attempts to create absolute morality from a secular framework. Very rarely is this attempted. Lots of secularists don't believe strongly enough in absolute morality. I love how throughout, Rand disparages the habit of liquor using, because it truly deserves it. However, I also know she would not like prohibition of alcohol at all. I was expecting a bit more than the reprinting of diatribes from other of her books, but it was alright. I must admit that she as an objectivist does occasionally make points which seriously must be thought of by others. There is romance and nobility in objectivism, but I don't believe it is the best philosophy out there. After having been exposed to this work, I am really getting to be well read in Rand's work as I have either read or listened to The Fountainhead, Anthem, The Romantic Manifesto and the Virtue of Selfishness.
The History of Hitler's Empire, Thomas Childers, The Teaching Company, 1990.
Although, this work is general, I able to add extra knowledge to my third Reich knowledge based and I still enjoyed it immensely. Although, Childers's style is straightforward, he presents material well, though Toastmasters International would surely criticize some aspects of his delivery. Since the work was so good, I wish it was a bit longer.
Living Biographies of Famous Rulers, Henry Thomas and Dana Lee Thomas, Blackstone Audio Books, 1995.
My type of book all the way! Since they covered a lot of different leaders, each one was given only a little time, but the time was sufficient enough to give a good overview. None of the descriptions were dull and virtually all were tremendously fascinating, which is quite the compliment since other writers who have written about some of the same subjects have made the subjects appear not that interesting. It was interesting to hear their analysis of 3 leaders who were still alive at the time of the book writing: Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler. Though their analysis didn't seem radically different than most writers who wrote after the fact. They seemed critical of the leaders, especially Hitler and to a lesser extent, Mussolini.
Berlin Diaries: 1940-1945, Marie Vassiltchitkov, read by Alexandra O'Karma, Recorded Books, 1989.
It was helpful how they supplemented the text with asides to help the reader understand what was going on and what the author was referring to. I like diaries. After awhile, it got a little monotonous, but the pace picked up after time. The diary writer was a likable character and it was swell to get her perspective on Hitler's Reich.
Visionary Activist Astrology, Caroline W. Casey, Sounds True, 1996.
The "Activist" part of the title is a misnomer because, there is only scant talk about "activism". It seemed like any other introductory astrology work, maybe with a few more anecdotes, often with a New Age twist. She used some analogies and descriptions, I did not hear before, and this is good. Sadly, tape six went haywire. She seems slightly too mellow.
The Big Reward, John Stauffer, World Records, 1995.
Much too short. Although, I am perhaps one of the passionate sXe folks around, AA, which this tape is inspired by, does not seem to thrill me too much. Maybe it's at least partially due to Charles Bufe's book Alcoholics Anonymous: Cult or Cure? The music wasn't too great nor were the words, but I must admire the motivation behind this, even if the art wasn't to my liking.
How Could You Do That?: The Abdication of Character, Courage and Conscience, Dr. Laura Schlesinger, Narrated by Barbara Caruso, Recorded Books, 1996.
Dr. Laura is speaking much truth here, I love her condemnation of perilous hedonism and support for what she deems, "the 3 C's: Conscience, Courage and Conviction." Apparently, Barbara did a good job narrating, because I thought it was Dr. Laura herself. Dr. Laura is a very denigrated figure. After listening to this, I wonder why. She seemed awfully sensible to me. I don't know how anyone who honestly listens to this could in a good mind object to most of what she says. One of the big criticisms against her are that she is supposedly a huge homophobe. But on this audio book, homosexuality was only mentioned a scant few times, and then it was not as radically disparagingly as those opponents seem to suggest. Perhaps, her two biggest gems of wisdom we
re "A few moments of sexual freedom can deny one of a lifetime of freedom" which is so very true and "Any movement which emphasis rights without responsibilities is an unbalanced movement." She didn't even seem overzealous with her religious views. Surely, it was apparent she was Jewish, but she did not talk about religion constantly. Folks say "She has a framework of Judaism". Maybe where the values emanate from, is not as important as the end result of what the values are. For example, I may disagree with Christianity as a foundation for values, but I applaud anti war folks who derive their anti war views from Christianity. From the two audio books I've listened to from Dr. Laura, at this point, I must conclude that her opponents seem more off base than she does.
Libertarianism: A Primer, David Boaz, read by Jeff Riggenbach, Blackstone Audio Books, 1997.
I knew most of these arguments, but there was some new ground covered. The book is persuasive, but I don't agree with it. I understand Libertarian arguments, but I don't buy. Although there are noble aspects of their vision, I find it lacking some essential romance. I believe, in a sense, these Libertarians want power too, after all, they want to you to follow their ways, which is indeed power. If you are not familiar with Libertarianism, it is good to learn, and this book can teach you.
What It is to be a Libertarian: A Personal Interpretation: Charles Murray, Bantam Doubleday Dell Audio, 1997.
This book is not nearly as long as the other reviewed piece about libertarianism, thus also consequently not as exhaustive. Some of the same arguments are used in here. As Murray himself mentions, he isn't as purist as some libertarians are. I like that, but I don't really dig his vision.
Forge of Union, Anvil of Liberty: A Correspondent's Report on the First Federal Elections, the First Federal Congress and the Creation of the First Bill of Rights, Jeffery St. John, read by Jeff Riggenbach, Blackstone Audio Books, 1999.
I couldn't get into it right away. I sluggishly trodded through, but I made it. My initial disinterest gave way to eventual interest. I was first a bit put off by the official air the book had, but in the end it was all good. Even to the extent, that I decided to check out other books on the American Revolution by the same author.
Holding On: Dreamers, Visionaries, Eccentrics and Other American Heroes, stories by David Isay, Hosted by Susan Stramberg, Shanachie Entertainment Corp, 1995.
Good premise to be sure. In fact, before I was able to get my new cd player (after my old one was stolen), I yearned to listen to this cd, but I couldn't. I totally echoed the sentiments of one man profiled who created this wonderful architectural masterpiece and in his view did not get adequate acclaim for it, in response he said something to the effect "Joey Buttafocco, David Letterman are newsworthy, but this is not?" It wasn't quite as interesting as it could be, but it was still worthwhile.
Men are from Mars, Women are From Venus, John Gray, Ph.D. Narrated by George Guidall, Recorded Books, 1994.
Everyone talks about this book. Lots of good talk, some bad. For awhile I felt resisted to such a notion, but now I could listen to it, but I don't believe it all. I don't want to live my life exactly the way John Gray proposes. I learned some new ideas, but the book isn't all that great. Astrology folks should applaud his use of astrology derived metaphors. I wonder to what degree Gray thinks astrology is good.
Let Go, Avril Lavigne, Arista Records, 2002.
All I want to say is good. I don't want to say bad about her. I decided I just had to listen to her. "Skater Boy" is the strongest track on the album. It's very catchy. I relate to it. Also early on, I also noticed the coolness of "Nobody's Fool", then a little later I discovered the radness of "My World", a great song. I noticed her voice has an uncanny resemblance to Alanis Morrisette, but Avril's music is a bit rawer. It might be a Canadian deal. The other songs grew on me with time, thus the whole album was ultra rad. I read articles which the writers mention pt her against Brittany Spears. I personally find Avril more attractive than Brittany. Brittany looks like a 16 year old plastic doll. Avril has some spunk and edge. I read some about Avril, thus it was really good I got a chance to listen. I wish she would join the Autonomy Party Revolution. Though I would be cautious to push her too hard to mold her in my ideal since she expressed dislike of partners forcing their agenda on her in "Nobody's Fools" It seems like a lot of love and romance themes, which is good. Her essence seems fab. I haven't wanted to really buy a cd in quite a while, but I am getting tempted to buy this. I am starting to adore her. The songs are memorable, often sad, but touch you emotionally. She seems to be a very balanced type of female, which I pick up from both this album and her interviews, thus she is all the more appealing. I don't really care what people say, I think this album has wonderful music on it written by someone who has good amounts of realness and nifty spunk. I am beginning to think she is great.
The Onion's Finest News Reporting: Volume One, hosted by Doyle Redland (P.S. Mueller), Random House Audio, 2000.
I remember one of my last stands with television. Since I loved Mad Magazine, I was naturally interested in its television program. I thought the cool magazine would be enhanced by television. But the magazine did not translate well to the television medium. I was utterly disappointed and thus was propelled even deeper into my anti television ways. But the Onion is different. The Onion translated beautifully from newspaper to audio, in fact, it seems even better on the audio medium. Some of the satire in here was real, real good. I laughed at the funny bits. Probably the only substantial complaints I have against this otherwise very fine tape are 1) the greatness was too short in length and 2) The introduction and conclusion "This is Doyle Redland, read the Onion or visit our website" played at the start and end of every piece, even the small ones got very redundant and I wish it weren't there. I liked how they mixed editorials when short news pieces. Very good.
I played a joke. One day in the office Mike made an observation of our Sociological theory textbook written by George Ritzer, he said "Ritzer says every theorist is 'arguably the most influential theorist of the time'" I also noted "Ritzer did a profile of himself in his book." (Ritzer does profiles for the major sociologists discussed in the book which obviously includes himself) Mike replied "He would." Lately I have been joking about Mike starting up a George Ritzer fan club and I also said "You should do your paper on the George Ritzer movement, George Ritzer for President campaign Mike asked "Would he even want that job?, it's a tough job."
I checked out the book from the library with his mug in it and made 3 photocopies of his face of various sizes. Too bad, the resolution wasn't better, but the smallest picture was halfway decent. I taped these pictures along with the following note to a piece of paper which I slid under Mike's apartment door [My comments to explain certain points are in brackets]:
"To Mike C:
I though you would enjoy these pics of me. You are arguably my number one fan and I love you for it. I hope the McDonalidization of Society is not getting you down ["McDonalidization of Society is his term for his view of our society] I love how you exalt me above all theorists because I truly believe I deserve it! I enjoy reading your sociological essays. May I include your upcoming term paper on "anti globalization movements" in my upcoming book The WalMartization of Society? It sure would make the book rock! You have a bright future in sociological theory.
I'm flattered you seek to start a club at MSU-Mankato to honor and exalt me. In my wildest dreams, I never could have imagined such a wonderful gesture by someone who is arguably my #1 fan. I wish you the best of luck in the club. It sure makes an old theorist feel good. Pat yourself on the back. My only concern is this: Do you have a meeting room large enough to fit all interested persons? Your decision to start this club is arguably the wisest decision in your entire life. I better ge
t going-- all these female fans are mobbing me. They can't resist someone like me who is arguably the #1 sociological theorist in history. Keep the faith, bro.
Yours ever truly
Continuing my joke, I created this which I delivered to Mike's doorstep. I used my rubber stamp to stamp the words "inmate mail" on the envelope. I had to stamp it several times to finally get a readable print:
Mike C:
This is your hero.
Sadly, I've got some crummy news. Right now, I'm currently in custody at the Hoover Correctional Institution in the state of Maryland.
You probably shocked, wondering what, arguably the number one sociological theorist, is doing in custody here. No, sadly, I am not doing a study, I am behind bars and have gotten a bum deal.
Unfortunately, I could not notify you earlier, but everything happened like a blink of the eye. I have been handed down a death penalty. Yes, the death penalty by firing squad.
What is especially cruel is I have had a phobia since birth about firing squad. This proves how sadistic our government is.
Maryland has this odd quirky law, where if you commit two crimes at the same time, you can face the death penalty. Mike, they charged me with 15 counts of simultaneously committing bigamy and forgery. Worse yet, my family has disowned me, thus all I have is you.
You are probably wondering if I am guilty or innocent. That question is irrelevant, what is really important is that I need to be freed. I still have lots of theory to write. I absolutely cannot die without completing my upcoming book the Walmartization of Society which will arguably be one of the best sociological books in history.
Mike, as someone who is arguably, my number one fan, can you start a Free George Ritzer movement? I am now, arguably, the most oppressed political prisoner in the history of the world. I swear McDonald's might be behind this! Mike, rally your classmates to support arguably the most important issue of the current day, freeing me.
Activism will work great for ordinary folks, but if you want to impress the Sociological community, you need to do a research article. Although you're already several weeks through in your social movements class, as your professor says, you can still change topics. Can you change your topic to the new Free George Ritzer movement? It sure would help. The top sociological journals are sure to come knocking at your door for it. Additionally, it will arguably influence sociologists to fight to free me. There is nothing more powerful than sociologists working for liberation.
Mike, it is my conviction, that if C. Wright Mills [C Wright Mills is a famous dead sociologist who ever sociologist today always notes he was rebellious and iconoclastic within sociology] ere alive today, he on his motorcycle would want you to dedicate all your energy to Free George Ritzer.
I've already got Zsa Zsa Gabor to support my cause. Mike, arguably, nothing you could do in life could be more important that freeing George Ritzer. Mike, I may be old, but I'm still too young to be executed. I arguably need your help.
Free George Ritzer!
Ever sincerely yours,
George Ritzer
I made up an email account with George Ritzer's name on it and sent this out to Mike.
Hello Mike, This is George Ritzer
I got my secretary to write you an email which I obviously cannot do
from Hoover Correctional Institution
Mike, Last week in New Ulm, MN, 250 million people marched to demand
freedom for "George Ritzer". (not to mention 3 billion marching in
various cities around the world) How can this government call it self a democracy,
when after 250 million people have spoken and it stills confines me on
death row?
Mike, furthermore, the treatment here is horrendous. All they feed
me is lima bean puree. Nothing more.
Help me, organize a march in Mankato. This time get 300 million
people to march on behalf of the arguably, most important sociologist in
History.
Yours in freedom,
The latest in the prank epistles
Dearest Mike:
Arguably, this is George Ritzer. I arguably hope you got my last correspondence about the big march of 250 million people for me in New Ulm, MN. It's arguably difficult sometimes to send correspondence when tyrants run the prison.
Mike, prison, arguably, sucks. They are, arguably, very cruel and wretched to me. They have, arguably, stopped feeding me just lima bean puree. You may say, "This is, arguably, good." But it is arguably not good because they are now force feeding me Chicken McNuggets, Big Macs and happy meals. This is why I say McDonald's is arguably behind this.
Mike, 250 million people marched in New Ulm for me, which is arguably a lot of people and the one mainstream media outlet said "Only 3 people showed up for the Free George Ritzer march in New Ulm, MN, thus the cause is without any merit whatsoever." That arguably was hurtful to hear. Mike, the mainstream media is, arguably, biased and it arguably distorts the truth. .Mike, 250 million people at one demonstration is arguably the most people to ever attend a march, even more then some of those father's rights marches which arguably attract 100 million people.
Mike, I arguably still have dreams. For example, I arguably desire to become President of the American Association of Theorists. What is arguably the most cruel aspect of my imprisonment is that the evil guards absolutely refuse to allow me to read or write any theory. Mike, a theorist without theory is arguably a paradox.
Mike, during the arguably long days in my cell, I reflect upon the good old days when I was not treated like a subhuman inmate. I arguably, ponder my good times in my band called "the Theorists" where I was the lead singer. We arguably sung both Beatles songs and original compositions. The female fans, arguably, went a million times more crazy for us (especially me) than the original Beatles band. Arguably, some of the names of our original compositions are "Arguably", "Theorists Rule", "Theory is All Important" and "George Ritzer -- the Number One Theorist".
Mike, what is also arguably very bad is that they are threatening to take away all my degrees. Mike, it's arguably hard to find a job writing theory, when you have no degrees.
Mike you arguably, must galvanize folks at your grassroots activism conference. My cause is arguably the most important cause facing America today. My life is arguably very precious. I arguably have more theory to write down to share my wisdom with the world. You must arguably devote every waking hour to freeing me.
Arguably,
George Ritzer
ja (Janet Allison, Dr. Ritzer's assistant)
Mike, It's your hero, George Ritzer again.
Mike, just when I thought it was as bad as it can get, it has just got worse.
Remember hearing about all those newspaper articles about how the Beef Industry took Oprah Winfrey to court? A similar circumstance has happened to me. McDonald's is taking me to court for my great book, "The McDonalidization of Society". They want to sue for 300 billion dollars. Mike, I've sold alot of books, but I cannot afford that.
Death row is getting me down. I'm getting lonely after since Doris, my wife, disowned me.
They still won't let me read or write theory.
In order to protect my assets, I have decided to put everything into my will. 99% of my assets will be sent to you, you lucky dog. However, there are a couple of assets, which I cannot allow you to inherit. One is my signed copy of Talicott Parson's [famous sociologist] first book, that goes as a charitable gift to The Talicott Parisons Library in Nashville, Tennessee, also my extensive beanie baby collection (over 150,000 different dolls) must go to the Association to Give Beanie Babies to the Needy, and finally, all the golden busts of me are willed to the Karl Marx Sociological Museum to be preserved for posterity.
Your loyalty to me has paid off, as
I am giving you 99% of my assets upon my death, which I hope is not soon. I dream of being free so I can continue writing in theory. Don't forget to devote all your energy to freeing me. Remember, the upcoming conference in Chicago is a grand opportunity to recruit for my very noble cause. If you can't trust your fellow theorists, then who can you trust?
Yours in Theory,
George Ritzer
ja
In Defense of Ex Governor George Ryan
On January 16th I wrote this:
George Ryan did something great, something very touching! I can't help but be touched by his act of compassion.
Opponents of the death penalty often argue that an innocent person may be mistakenly executed. Even if the court system in Illinois is 90% right, which recent news reports suggest otherwise, out of 100 people on death row, that would be 10 who were there wrongly executed.
George Ryan has saved life. I've heard The Koran says "Those who save one life save the eternal world."
George Ryan doing this is quite the statement. He's a Republican, not some liberal democrat.
I wrote Ryan a letter praising his wonderful deed.
Maybe George Ryan should be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. What he did was so beautiful. It makes me almost cry.
Then I came across Eric Zorn's page recently. On it he also suggested George Ryan be nominated for a Peace Prize. Alone, his acts of halting the death penalty are noble enough for this award. Then I found out on Mr. Zorn's page that Ryan goes to Cuba to provide relief and he wants "the U.S. Embargo against Cuba" stopped. By finding out about his actions towards Cuba, I really think George Ryan should be honored, maybe even with a Nobel Prize. Alone the death penalty actions are nothing short of stellar, and the Cuba actions propels him into a very wonderful category.
Certainly, people are going to criticize me for praising Ryan. On Zorn's webpage, their are some rather nasty comments about George Ryan. Since I don't make it a habit of highly praising Republicans in power, I seek to explain why George Ryan is worthy of honor. Yes, the saying "Politics makes strange bedfellows" rings very true here. I am filled with intense dislike of the current Republicans currently leading our nation, but towards George Ryan, I feel much differently.
Federation Without Television is even sponsoring a rally to honor him.
Opponents of George Ryan are sure to bring up the their talk of the corruption issues. One of my family members said "he is the most corrupt governor in Illinois History". The Corruption issue is one that deserves to be addressed, especially as it relates to his acts.
On Zorn's page and a couple of other places, I have seen some criticism of Ryan's actions. Some of these people believe he only has done the act of commuting death penalty inmates to feebly attempt to salvage his name in the face of great public disapproval. They believe there is an ulterior motive behind his good deeds. One article I came across even had a telling title "Cowardice masquerading as courage."
I got news for you. I have learned from people about a philosopher named Thomas Hobbes who believed there were no truly selfless acts, thus every act is one done with ulterior motives. I believe less than noble motivations can still be used for noble ends. My friend Tim has claimed I only do activism to "get attention for yourself". Even if this was entirely true, my activist deeds are still noble. I may be using a non-noble motivation for a greater good. Indeed, I am motivated by getting positive attention, but this drive for positive attention can be used to do good deeds. Just as George Ryan may have not so noble intentions for doing what he is doing, the deeds are still noble. They are deeds I see few if any other major political figures doing, thus he deserves to be highly commended. Even a bad motivation does not necessarily negate a good deed. In this case, providing relief to needy Cubans is still a good deed even if the motivation behind it is less than noble. A good deed, that needs to be recognized.
Cynics claim "Politicians are all power hungry egotistical crooks." If so, why does society lash out at some but not others. Why not lash out at Cheney and Bush? At least George Ryan has done good, while those bums are pushing forward disaster. There are some people I know who if entered politics would be corrupt and dishonest, but in regards to affirming human life, they would be wonderfully kind and decent. I'd rather have people like that in office than non corrupt but life destroying or non corrupt by outright evil doers in office.
Corruption is not the greatest evil. I am surely not one to justify or overlook corruption. I plan to enter politics and I seek to be as full of integrity as possible. We must realize there are worse evils than corruption. For example what Bush is doing now. Hitler's genocide is generally considered to be the worst crime in history, but I do not believe Hitler's regime was the most corrupt in history. I would rather have a politician who saves lives and does good deeds yet happens to be corrupt, than a politician who is not corrupt but is a death monger.
We also need some perspective about other great figures in history. Reputable sources have demonstrated that the greatest of the great, Martin Luther King Jr. plagiarized large portions of his seminary school dissertation and also this man loved having sex with hookers. Somehow, our society overlooks all this about King, not to mention the well reported by journalists, communist leanings of his. These are just some of his more well established failings, I have even read other strikes against him. Why should we selectively overlook King's faults, but not George Ryan's faults? Both men have done great deeds. In perspective, the critics can be silenced, because Ryan looks good.
If Ryan is sincere about his acts, then he is truly an exemplary person. If he is not, his character may be open to question, but his deeds are still great and deserve praise and recognition. His acts are examples of using power justly. Few forces in the universe are as magnificent and inspiring, not to mention empowering as using power justly.
It has been said "We all have our soft spots." Maybe corruption is George Ryan's soft spot. If we all have a soft spot, shouldn't we forgive him for his? In my mind, he has at least partially made up for any alleged corruption by doing his good deeds.
There is something I don't understand by Ryan's opponents arguments. They claim he did this to get himself out of hot water? What? Commuting death sentences of committed criminals and traveling to Cuba are surely controversial acts. I believe there would be strong public sympathy against these acts regardless of the motive behind them or who did them. Thus it would seem, these acts would get him further in hot water. It would seem that these acts would get him in more trouble. Thus if he really wanted to save his hide, why not do something that is not controversial at all, something everyone would love, such as a major project to help the handicapped. His Cuba and death penalty actions sound like the actions of a very liberal politician, but Ryan is a Republican. This criticism of Ryan leaves me wondering.
George Ryan is doing good deeds that few others are doing. His acts have touched my heart.
I thus believe George Ryan should receive a Nobel Peace Prize and other honorable awards. No George Ryan is not perfect, but when we look at this man with honest and clear sighted perspective, we can conclude he has done noble.
Catfish Volumes 31-35 Page 9
