It is wrong to mock… November 9, 2012
Posted by WorldbyStorm in US Politics.trackback
…but really, what was John Waters thinking of when he apparently entirely seriously wrote the following in today’s Irish Times.
As president, untested by any significant crisis or event, he managed to convey the impression of the elasticity of these ideas in the modern world, whereas the evidence all around is of their terminal failure.
So let’s get this straight… he and the US have faced no significant crisis or event in the period 2008 to 2012?
Okay.
The Cedar Lounge Revolution 
Waters’ political insanity, that’s the only term for it, has been much in evidence this week. His performace on ‘The Frontline’ was unbelievably off. He lied and lied and lied and when he was called on it he kept on lying. The IT, by keeping him on its books, are signalling their tolerance of an individual who has absolutely nothing to say. It’s not a question of disagreeing with him, but he seems determined to paint a fantasy world for himself and then condemn others for not seeing any discernible reality in that world.
LikeLike
There’s something in what you say.
I can’t help but feel though, and I say this as one who is not antagonistic to religion per se, that he’s travelled into a sort of pseudo-mysticism and never returned. It’s all baroque stuff about meaning which is fine to a point but after a while begins to sound solipsistic in the extreme. And it’s fed back into his writing big time. Today’s article was full of unreferenced stuff and vague this and nebulous that.
Personally I find it incredibly depressing that the guy who wrote the rather fine ‘Intelligent Person’s Guide to Modern Ireland’ which resides on a bookshelf two foot from where I’m writing turned into a hollow shell of his former self.
LikeLike
He’s the Peggy Noonan of the Irish Times (with added hobo).
LikeLike
“that he’s travelled into a sort of pseudo-mysticism and never returned. ”
🙂 Brilliant way of putting it and I laughed when I read it. Yes, when Waters was writing in the early to mid-90s he was interesting enough. I read JK Galbraith and John Ralston Saul based on references he made to their work. He was coherent and he seemed to have some level of intellectual engagement. It is sad to see him degenerating so publicly. I can’t see a way back for him at this stage.
LikeLike
Simon McGarr summed it up recently ..
When John Waters started in the Irish Times, his shtick was saying FFers were decent sorts. Then he switched to assuring Irish Times readers that people down the country had their own, countryish ways. Then he started on complaining about how women had life so much easier than men. This led to a new shtick strand- God bothering. Though shaking his fist-Abe Simpson like- at the Internet may appear to be a new departure it is simply a new form of his old shtick. He picks an entrenched power structure which is facing criticism. (FF, patriarchy, the Church, media) and presents it as plucky underdog. Then presents himself as sole brave voice willing to attack the critics of the powerful.
It’ll be defending billionaires against taxation yet.
*
The last two points in particular there are otm I think. The same Myers, Mel Phillips school of shit stirring. His antics during the debates was clear provocation. Blowing the head off children or whatever he was saying on Frontline. The reaction is then held up as evidence of ‘the mob’, PC etc
David Quinn & Breda O’Brien can afford to be far more subtle as they don’t crave the same level of attention Waters trades on.
LikeLike
Not the same as Myers and Mad Mel, I think. The latter two wouldn’t bother with the underdog schtick and concern trolling, but outright proudly tell you whatever crazy is rattling around their brains at that moment.
LikeLike
He picks an entrenched power structure which is facing criticism. (FF, patriarchy, the Church, media) and presents it as plucky underdog.
Wasn’t this the Cruiser’s modus operandi, too, in the years of his decline?
LikeLike