Archive for June 9, 2008

Contra Human Events #5

Consistency means nothing to Ann Coulter.

Wait, I take that back. Her pieces are actually remarkably consistent, in that they all follow the same structure. Begin with a nasty little lie, so mean as to be comical – in her latest piece, it’s “words mean nothing to liberals” – transition to the main part of the article, and close with an attempt at a literary coda. Her writing is so repetitive as to be puerile, and I stand by that adjective choice.

So, rather, what I mean to say is that logical consistency means nothing to Ann Coulter. She’s taken to repeating Hillary’s talking point – that, in the democratic primary, she won the popular vote, even if Obama won the delegates – and has construed Obama’s victory, regardless of this fact, as proof that liberals only selectively care about the popular vote.

Coulter bases her critique on an embrace of the rules of the game. After all, the rules of the Constitution, she reminds us, mean that the popular vote doesn’t matter in the presidential election. But here’s the thing. According to the rules of the game – the rules by which Florida and Michigan had their delegates pulled, or halved, the rules by which Barack Obama wasn’t even on one of the ballots, because he decided to play by the rules – Hillary didn’t win the popular vote (skip to the 3 PM post).  Nor did she win the delegates, the polling system that the rules of the Democratic Party appointed.

All Ann is trying to do is tear the Democrats apart; and not with very good arguments either.  We can’t let her, or McCain, or even Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, do that.  Because at the end of the day, we’ve always been at war with people like Ann Coulter.  And we – like all good Americans – always will be.

Tangled Bank #118 Will Be Here!

Who’s excited? I am. For those of you who don’t know, “Tangled Bank” is PZ Myers’ biweekly compendium of blog posts on science – especially biology and evolutionary biology – and society. We’ve been featured on it once or twice, and now we’ll be hosting the first Tangled Bank after the election.

Be excited.

Speaking of evolution, science, and politics, our friend at The Big Stick has an excellent post on evangelism & politics.  What he proves – and this ought to be uncontroversial – is that people across the political spectrum can agree that religious zealotry, turned politics, is something to be wary of.

I Have a Dream: Ripping Off Jeff Koons

Let’s profit off someone who thinks that profit is part of the problem.

Jeff Koons is a well-known artist, made famous by his attempts to use overblown glitzy sculptures of everyday scenes to draw a new meaning from objects we see on a daily basis.  The piece to the right, “Balloon Dog,” now on the roof of the Met, is both a child’s toy made horrifyingly large, and apparently (if the New York Times is to be believed), a sexual twist on the innocent clown creation.

In short, Koons appropriates - he takes something we know, duplicates it in a subtly different way, and asks us to draw a new conclusion about something we feel comfortable looking at.  Sometimes the “subtly different” presentation can be disturbing – look at his “String of Puppies” piece (look halfway down the page), which takes an idyllic, pastoral image of a happy farming couple and their new puppy brood, and turns it on its head by discoloring the participants, and rendering the farmer and wife with vacant, empty eyes.  The scene is meant to comment on the commercialization of emotion, and I think the message comes across loud & clear.

Koons also doesn’t care about copyright.  He got himself into hot water with the “String of Puppies” piece – the puppy picture had been a popular greeting card picture, and the creator didn’t appreciate having his picture turned into a mockery of itself - but his art and his message often require theft to convey the themes of the dangers of commercialized emotion.  So I say, let’s go one better.  Let’s rip off Jeff Koons.

Here’s what I’m thinking.  “Balloon Dog,” above, and “Sacred Heart,” its companion piece (left; a commentary on commercialism, emotion, and religion), are iconic Koons images, made more so because of their prominent placement on the patio at the Met Museum.  They’re also being presented in a way that completely strips them bare of their menacing message (I agree with the Times on this one), and in their decontextualized sense, they’re ripe for commentary.  I accept the challenge.

Let’s mass-market desktop replicas of Balloon Dog & Sacred Heart.  It’s clear copyright infringement, but if Koons is who he says he is, he’ll appreciate the message, won’t sue, and may actually like it.  Now who do I call to create miniature steel statuettes?