Conference 7.286::sports_90

    Right on John, nice message, I quit reading my favorite note N.D.
    football note, because it really wasn't about N.D. football anymore,
    but more towards I hate Lou Holtz or N.D. note. If you don't like
    a certain team you shouldn't be in the note. I don't like the Lakers
    so I don't go in the Lakers note.
    
                                               dc
    

>    What the hell difference does it make to
>    the people of the Big Ten that Dean Smith has only won one title?  It
>    makes all the more titles available for the Big Ten to win.  He runs a
>    clean program with lots of integrity.  What the hell difference does it
>    make to the people of the ACC that Bob Knight scares some potential
>    recruits away?  It makes that much more talent available to the ACC. 
>    He also runs a clean program with lots of integrity.
    
    You obviously weren't hitting NEXT UNSEEN as much as I was.
    
    	--dan'l

Amen, John.  If people like you are being driven away from participation,
there's something seriously wrong with the file.  

It got to the point recently that I removed myself as a moderator, partly out
of fear of some of the ramifications of the attacks but mostly because I wasn't
reading the conference any more.  One day, I had 318 new notes.  I ended up
reading 7 of the notes and next unseening the rest.  This conference basically
just isn't any fun to read any more.  I hope your note opens up some (of the
right) eyes.

j.

    I agree John, and I apologize if I've turned people away from notes. 
    It's difficult for me to read the constant bashing of the program and
    coach that I've held dear to my heart for decades and not respond. 
    It's also difficult for me to have my work ethic questioned and not
    respond.  
    
    Maybe I need to just get away from all of this for awhile ...
    
    
    - ACC Chris

    
    I second the personal attacks motion, but I don't want to see serious
    debate go away.  I know that when I was defending the run-and-shoot, I
    wasn't looking to bust anybody's chops.  Maybe that's still taking
    sport too seriously, but if the file turns into a information-only
    forum on the individual teams, my own opinion is it won't be worth
    participating in.  I think there's room for both, including the ethical 
    discussions that go on in "Sports Theory" (there is plenty of "bad" in 
    sport and it shouldn't be ignored), without having to direct opinions 
    at a personal level.
    
    glenn
    

    Thanks John for saying something which needed to be said. I don't
    know why but, something's happened to the comradarie (sp?) which
    used to be here years ago.
    
    Guys like CRUNCHIE, the (former) dInZ, et al would blast folks
    with nerf balls and it was all in fun.  Lately, REAL explosives
    are being used.
    
    Now that college BBall is here, I hope to shed the mostly_RON
    status and root for my team, tweak (all in fun) a few noses
    while remembering that this is "ALL IN FUN" with no seriousness
    intended or implied.
    
    I really like your idea as long as we don't start swappin' spit!
    
    ;^)
    
    Kev

    And I thought I was the only one next-unseeing at almost every note!
    
    I used to read just about every single note, word for word.  Now, I
    find myself either skimming or n/u-ing almost all the time.
    
    I still can't live without this conference, however.......
    
    Hawk

    Glenn, there's no reason for serious debating to go away.  It's just
    that in many cases it turned into personal insults and extremely
    lengthy replies.  
    
    A few years ago, I was getting too damn serious about sports.  It got
    to the point where I wrote something to Hoot that I really shouldn't
    have.  He was big about it, and it became a running joke between us.
    I know how easy it can turn from fun to insults.  Since that time,
    I've tried not to get that deep into any of these discussions. 
    Sometimes I feel like teeing off, but I usually end up not entering the
    reply in question.  Typing it makes me feel better, I just don't enter
    it.
    
    Anyway, thanks to John Hendry for starting this.  I've really been
    skipping in and out of here because of this situation.  It's to the
    point where even just being a RON isn't fun.  If it was informative
    before, it's less so now because I can't find the damn info.  Too many
    personal opinions cover the details.  I don't mind when someone states
    there opinion, it's when someone else then attacks that opinion, rather
    than stating their own and letting it go.  I can't blame someone for
    retaliating when their opinion is blasted.  But, that just leads to
    round 2, and we're off to the races.
    
    I like the Pats.  Right now, they are the worst team in football. 
    Someone can give me facts and figures till they are blue in the face,
    but I'll still be a Pats fan.  I can't brag about them, I can't even
    write nasty notes to Wardle about how they are better than his Jests.
    But, they are *still* my team.  I liked them before Kiam, before Rust,
    before any of the present squad was on the team.  And, unless they
    move, I'll like them in the future.  So, any attacks on them and their
    owner isn't going to sway my alligiance.  It will only start another
    rathole.
    
    Let's all get back to sports, and at least attempt to display some
    sportsmanship in here.  You know, fair-play and all.
    
    Lee

Excellent point John.

It was funny, I was going to enter a Christmas/Hanukah essay, since today
is the start of Hanukah.  But for now this seems more important.

I too am next unseening a lot.  And John has hit the nail on the
head.

Sports is something that should be enjoyed.  When I sit back to
watch a game I really don't care if qb A is better than qb X because
of someone's convuluted statistical arguments or proving this or 
proving that.  I watch the game to root for my team, to see the
athletic competition and see the beauty that is sport.
I don't watch it to gather ammo for the latest round of SPORTSbashing
going on.

I never really knew what the word fanatic meant until I came into this
file.  This file defines fanaticism, almost to a point where it
gets sickening in some cases.

If medical research had a microscope as powerful as the one some in 
here use on a sport or personages connected with sport, there would be
cures for all kinds of diseases....

And the funniest thing is that in the whole scheme of things SPORTS
just (to quote a classic movie) doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

Everyone jumped all over me when I wanted to do something that was
good, and would make another human being feel good.  What did I hear?
I heard all this debate over whether or not the person deserved the
jersey, even getting as petty as questioning where he lived and
his socioeconomic status....I mean, c'mon.   I don't remember the
whole story, but I know that the guy the Samaratan helped in the
Bible was one of his enemies, for gosh sakes.  Have we forgotten
what it's like to be human?


I've seen the amount of personal bashing go up in here, and while
I don't read a lot of other leisure files, I know that none of
that would be tolerated in any of the business conferences.
We've likened this file to a tavern, and that's true in a lot
of cases.  But remember who the landlord of the tavern is,
and remember some of the rules that the landlord lays down.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to be evicted so close to Christmas...

On a lighter note, I will still put in a Christmas essay, but
for now, Happy Holidays...

'Saw

    1.  I agree with 'Saw.  I don't watch games with a copy of the Elias
    Baseball Analyst in one hand and a calculator in another.  I watch the
    games for fun.  The only time I go off and do the research I do is when
    there's a question that needs to be answered or a debate resolved.  An
    individual game is relatively insignificant in the perspective of a
    season, a career, a lifetime.  Just because a team loses once, it
    doesn't mean the whole organization and the people in it are no good.
    
    2.  Glen, I wasn't trying to shut off serious debate either.  I think
    the run and shoot is well worth talking about.  I would like to see
    opinions given rather than criticize the person giving the opinion.
    
    3.  Chris, please don't leave.  You add a lot to college basketball
    discussions with your input about what's going on down South and about
    recruiting.  If I can give you some friendly advice, however, it's to
    ignore the attacks on Dean and the Heels.  I know it will be tough to
    do, but I think one of the reasons the rathole has gotten deeper is
    because people know they can get your goat by insulting Dean and the
    Heels.  In your fandom of the Heels, you've got nothing to be ashamed
    of and lots to be proud of.  Ignore it and it will go away eventually.
    
    In the overall scheme of things, sports is an important part of all of
    lives but I think things have gotten a bit out of perspective.  We
    don't really have a personal stake in what happens to our particular
    teams.  Regardless of what happens, the sun will still come up
    tomorrow.  I've learned that this year.  I've learned not to be
    defensive about how the Patriots are doing (though I don't like to see
    the individuals involved get bashed) because I still have a job to do
    and no matter how well or badly I do it, the team will still stink.  If
    I worried about it, I'd either have an ulcer or be a basket case by
    now.
    
    I'm very thankful for this conference because it's valuable to me.  I
    don't like it when it's not as good as it can be.  Thanks for taking
    what I wrote seriously and I hope noone thinks I've been preaching.
    
    John

	It's good to see the "Next Unseeners" come out of the closet, so to
speak. It's been fairly evident that this has been happening, because many
topics are becoming 2-3 person discussions, when they used to contain many
more "voices". As a moderator, I try to read every note, but it is becoming
more than I can bear, or I have time for. I'm basically a RON now, because
the time to write isn't there. If the content stuck to a sports subject,
it would be one thing, but too often the degeneration into name-calling 
and team-bashing takes precedence, and I'll tell you, it get's depressing.
I look at moderating SPORTS as a chore now, not a privelege. That isn't the
way it should be. 

	However, I still believe in the premise of SPORTS, and it's reason
for existence. It's just that it's all hidden beneath all the bravado and
posturing. Some of it may come from the tough times we are all experiencing,
both in the workplace and in daily life, and that is certainly understandable.
I know I don't have a true answer, because I believe that people have a right
to say what they want(within the boundaries set by NOTES), and many people
in here have the admirable quality of wanting to stretch the boundaries.

	Maybe we're trying to say - accentuate the positive when possible.
You don't have to sacrifice your personal beliefs and ideals to do that, at
least I don't think so.

	Jim M

John `Ninja-We Own The Night' Hendry has done it again!

I've been just scanning & skipping a lot , also. But to tell the truth,
I think a lot of that is just because everyone is busier than hell.

Anyway, in the spirit of things:

If the scumbag, braindead, Raiders make it to the Superbowl, I will
cheer for them to win (as long as they are not playing the Giants or the
Bears).

Also, I agree with John Hendry that Dean Smith is really a pretty crummy
coach.

Mike `piece on earth' JN

    Lately, I've only opened this conference to make sure I defend the 
    Suns and NEXT UNSEENing the rest.  If you try to focus on CELTICS,
    where the real basketball discussions are, you're called a wagon jumper
    because certain people don't read that conference.
    
    Mike

    
    	Merry Christmas John!  and Thanks!
    
    B.A.

    Sorry, but I don't buy the basenote.
    
    Ratholes are appropriate in a sports file, which by its very 
    definition is a total waste of time.  It doesn't take a rocket
    scientist to recognize the dividing line between calling someone's
    argument stupid and calling them stupid (or in Dan's Schneider's
    case calling someone a liar).
    
    Does John's sentiment affect me in the least?  No.  I'm out of this
    file for month's at a time and upon each return the first thing I
    notice is that the same ratholing and bashing and appeals for info
    only noting takes place on the same cycle without me.
    
    Maybe I'm less sensitive than some cuz I touch down only in 3 topics
    permanently and maybe one or more temporal ones.  If somebody is 
    trying to read and enjoy every topic (moderators disincluded) then
    maybe his/her approach to noting needs rethinking.
    
    I've said it before and I'll say it again: This file is policed by
    market-like forces, whereby if somebody is a bore (or a boor) he'll
    get no action and will fade.  As for the arcane ratholes, Earnhardt
    vs. whomever in 65 for instance, they have their place and tend to
    develop information and perspectives that would otherwise never come
    out, even in the media.  This is the case with the Earnhardt rathole
    even, which I RON.  (Rathole's conclusion: Dale is God.)
    
    My suggestion is if you don't like the aciton in a particular note
    then stay out of it.  That's what I do, and it's always worked for
    me.
    
    Anyway, the Great Bob vs. 'Snuffy Debate was closed two weeks ago,
    with the conclusion to my satisfaction.
    
    re: CRUNCH::CATALANO
    
    A perfect example of hypocrisy.  I started noting the same day he did
    and he was outrageous on sports content, yet endured so many unbelievable
    uncalled for personal insults and attacks that the hypocrites who were
    working over finally created a monster in him.
    
    Same thing happened to me, though I chose to limit myself where Crunchie
    didn't.  I ain't complaining, and neither did he.  So why should anybody
    else?
    
    Big10 Ultra Bigot Tom

    "scuse me Mr. big 10 bigot but I think I remember one major
    significant difference between you and CRUNCHIE::
    
    
    
    T'was about a 200 line difference in every reply although I gotta
    admit, that you DID limit yourself to the amount of <FLAME ON>'s
    compared to him, even if I never read past the second screen.
    
    
    
    ;^)  <-monster wink to the max
    
    
    
    Kev
    

Well folks as usual SPORTS has become too large and because of 428 topics times 
100+ noters and 98 Bronco , Dean Smith, Bob Knight, LAker, Celtic, Bruins 
BASHERS. 


If I get enough time I'll start Sports 91. 

Jeff

    Ratholes are OK, in and of themselves.  They can even provide lots of
    entertainment.  When ratholes encourage personal attacks, that's when I
    think they should end.
    
    I've said my piece,
    
    John

    T, I think you should read *ALL* of John's basenote.  In fact I think
    both of you are trying for the same thing.  Afterall, aren't you the
    champion of substance over style?  Ratholes aren't a problem until they
    get personal.

    >T, I think you should read *ALL* of John's basenote.
    
    I read all of what John said, but take another look.  It starts out
    decrying personal attacks (with which I agree), but then the body
    of the note dwells on what perhaps is its primary thrust: debates
    that go on too long, debates that exhibit fanaticism instead of pure
    enjoyment of things for what they are, overlong notes, etc. - nothing
    of which even remotely relates to personal attacks.
    
    So I'm confused, is the complaint about perceived personal attacks, or
    is it about the nature of sports-related content in the more infamous
    never-ending ratholes?  Seemed to me it was largely about the latter,
    and I don't see where arguing about talent, winning percentages, theories
    of what constitutes Greatness, game coaching, player development, or what
    types of wins is most important, etc. is in the least bit inappropriate.
    
    As for the attacks, there's a fine line - a tongue in cheek line - that
    is often walked in arguments over issues that are intense enough to
    sustain never-ending ratholes.  From what I've, I'm the target of personal
    attacks more than anybody else.  I don't take them seriously.  If I did,
    I'd just fade away and not complain to the moderators or whatever.
    
    Sheet happens.  Take the thing with Dan.  I claim that he "proclaimed"
    something that he apparently feels he only "implied," so he calls me a
    liar.  Am I upset?  No, I'm laughing.  I don't like it, but I know that
    his long overdue loss on the Grate Debate weighs on him heavily and as
    Dan's old bud I must show patience...
    
    MrT
    

    So MrT, why the hail did you even bother (#1) to get into the Matt
    Sewell note last summer, then lay a viscious personal assault (#2) on a
    kid, no less, who couldn't even defend himself?  From your 2 replies in
    this note, these are 2 "rules" that you stand by, but yet have broken
    real bad.........
    
    Hawk

    
    I think John's intnet was that there are people in this file that
    would get into a heated debate over Stove Top stuffing or mash 
    potatoes for dinner. What's the point of it all? Personally I'd
    rather have mashed potatoes, but there are those that would call
    me biased towards the potatoe farmer's of america, even though I
    am quite fond of stuffing.
    
    
    Steve

    >why the hail did you even bother (#1) to get into the Matt
    >Sewell note...
    
    Is getting into a note some sort of infraction now?  News to me, I
    thought that they existed for the express purpose of being used by
    all comers.
    
    >... then lay a viscious personal assault (#2) on a kid, no less,
    >who couldn't even defend himself?
    
    What "vicious personal assault?"  Saying that the didn't deserve a
    uniform he didn't earn according to the rules is a_infraction now?
    
    And anyway you miss the point.  The personal attacks talked about in
    here are upon other noters.  Matt Sewell was in the public domain,
    by his own choice, btw.  He laid himself open to criticism by pushing
    his case through the media and when you do that by American tradition
    you become fair game for criticism.  The limit there is set at the
    threshold of slander and libel, and Matt-the-Mooch don't qualify for
    either of those by mile.  The kid is a mooch, IMNSHO.
    
    Hawk makes my point: The real complaint here is about ratholes, unliked
    opinions, value-judgement debate... what's being called for here is
    prosaic conformity.
    
    I dunno why *I* am rebutting this.  The personal attacks and ratholes
    being referred by and large don't even involve me.  I only work one or
    two ratholes.  I cain think of several others who maintain a half dozen
    at least.  And I cain also name several others who are much more prone
    to getting personal than I.  
    
    I ain't dinging John, and I don't think he was primarily referring to 
    me.  What he said would best fit Rolly's most recent input, for instance.
    
    As I said, the same rathole/appeal cycle happened before I came on the
    scene, it happens largely on this scene without my involvement, and
    it'll continue long after I go away.
    
    And so it should be.  Bravo.     
    
    MrT

 Well I'm with T on this one all the way. I find ratholes appealing, inform-
 ative and funny. While I try to stay away from personal attacks, I have
 been the subject of a few and find them for the most part no big deal.
 I've argue with friends lots of times over sports and have been called 
 alot worst than in here. I've had garbage thrown at me (by my friends) at
 Patriot's game cause I've rooted against them again no big deal and we're
 all still friends. I'd like to think we're all friends in here, course
 it's easier for me to assume that as I've met so many of you. I mean it's
 only sports man it ain't like this is the middle east crisis or paying
 the mortgage...

 lighten up and enjoy...

 mike

    MrT, you missed my point.  If I was technoweenie a_nough, I'd pull out
    the quote in your 1st reply about not engaging yourself in a note not
    to your liking.  That's why I axed you why you bothered getting into
    the Matt note, much less start the Matt_is_moochy movement/rathole. 
    And, you're right, Matt was "public" game, but he's just a kid who
    didn't deserve a public spanking, much like a Don Kingor a Brent
    Mussberger.....  :-)
    
    But, as you said, and I agree, you're free to say what you will in 
    any note.....
    
    Hawk

    >your 1st reply about not engaging yourself in a note not to your
    >liking.  That's why I axed you why you bothered getting into the
    >Matt note,
    
    You imply that one must agree with the prevailing opinion in a note 
    in order to "like" it.  I violently disagreed witht the prevailing
    (misguided) opinion in that note... and I LOVED it.  That was one a
    the most rewarding notes I ever did, and was very much to my liking.
    Misguided self-congratulary maudlinism is perhaps my favorite target.
    
    >much less start the Matt_is_moochy movement rathole.
    
    Doug Ross was the moral and inspirational leader of Matt revisionism.
    He also, in that Marx/Engel manner a his, laid out the theoretical 
    blueprints that mere acolytes such as myself followed.  
    
    So there ya have it: This note ain't about personal attacks.  It's 
    about the Thought Police!
    
    MrT

    Point taken, and I'm sorry I brought it up!
    
    I never did mail you Matt's address, did I T?  Keep waiting though! :-)
    
    Hawk
    

    
    I feel a big problem with notesfiles in particular is that is a 
    literary medium. Some people (such as myself) are not as schooled
    in compisition and verb as others and find it difficult to write
    a note that contains enough substance to appease those who are 
    wanting of such replies. I find that it takes me some time to enter
    such a note(of which I don't have) so I note on the fly so to speak.
    Maybe I will over look a few things or say things that I mean one way
    and they are taken another. But how is one to know what one means
    unless they take the time to proofread and edit thier replies/notes
    so that everyone can easily comprehend what is implied. I know I find
    it quite frustrating at times. Just my .02
    
    
    
    Steve

    What do you mean, Steve?          :*)   :*)
    
    Really, Steve, maybe you and I think alike, because I never have a
    problem with your replies.  As a matter of fact, I really enjoy them
    because you don't often hide your emotions in them!  See, I'm not
    knocking those noters who have the ability to put their thoughts in a
    clear, organized and easily understood format.  But, I don't have a lot
    of time to spend in here so I find that I enjoy shorter,
    more-to-the-point notes and replies, such as yours usually are.  There
    are many noters who write with your style, and I get a kick out of
    them, even if I disagree with their point.
    
    I don't want to list those noters, because I don't have the time to
    compile a list which would include them all.
    
    For those noters who do have the ability to enter compositions, I read
    them when the subject matter is of some importance to me.  Ratholes can
    be fun, until personal attacks begin to show up.  If I don't care for
    the subject, I hit my old "Next Unseen".  In the old days, I referred
    to is as the "Next Obscene", which pretty well described the writing
    style of that period.  If I am interested in the subject, I'll read
    most of them as long as I can get some information from them.  Not just
    facts, but also personal opinions.  Both can be informative and
    interesting.  
    
    Boy, I'm getting too long with this, time for coffee.
    
    Lee

    Lee, 28 lines?  Geez, I almost had to next_unseen your long reply!  :-)
    
    I just have to add one comment here concerning the latest write-locking
    of a note, which, by the way, I agree with (the write-locking) because
    it could've turned real ugly.  And I hope that by saying this, it won't
    continue here, thus write-locking this one.  But, I'm really shocked by
    the lack of a "value difference" exibited by a particular noter who has
    shown one of the most liberal valuing differences tolerances since he
    started noting in ::SPORTS.  I mean, I've seen this person defend the
    characters that were mercilessly trashed by the majority in here. 
    Then, given the tone of the note, and of the season, well, you all saw
    what I did.  I'm not a religious fanatic, and I certainly don't
    tolerate Bible-thumping wallet grabbers, but the story written was one
    noter's sincere feelings and beliefs, which he was free to do, and
    especially since it fit with again, the tone of the note and season.
    That was an attack that was totally unnecessary, totally lacked
    difference of value, and totally lacked any forethought, IMHO.
    
    And please, DON'T put any replies here, especially the negative ones,
    because I'd hate to feel responsible for this note being write-locked. 
    And, if ::SPORTS is still active, I hope the mod's would unlock that
    note while it's still the holiday season.
    
    There, now I feel much better!  :-)
    
    Hawk

    Folks, I thought about what I had said in my hastey not last night and
    was prepared to write an apology to all this morning.  But I couldn't
    and I just dropped it.  Thanks for opening up the opportunity here,
    Hawk.
    
    Carlos is right.  I should have just hit NEXT UNSEEN.  I hope the Mods
    will choose to UNwritelock that note and trust that it will get back
    to its true path.
    
    FWIW, religion is a very touchy subject for me.  I've had a strange
    journey that's not worth getting into.  Living here in Charlotte has
    really turned me off on religion because of our Bible-thumping mayor
    whose latest exploit was threatening to shut down a highly acclaimed
    play last week because it contained a few seconds of below-the-waiste
    nudity.  And Jesse Helms homophobia in the name of HIS god has
    certainly done little to help my opinion.
    
    I make no excuses, but this moronic city and state I live in does
    little to help me give any religios testimony very much credit.
    
    	--dan'l

    I kinda figger'd you probably had a bad experience since moving to the
    Bible belt, dan'l.......  And don't take what I said personally, cause
    I tried to be as general as I could, knowing that it could've easily
    been someone else writing that reply.......
    
    Now, can I still come down for that male bonding NBA allstar weekend?
    
    :-)
    
    Hawk

    No, problem.  Come on down.  But be warned that another thing that our
    Bible-thumping mayor wants to do is shut down the topless bars.  Since
    she's been unable to touch the Paper Doll (it's pretty classy and
    upstanding as far as these places go), she wants to pass a law that
    would not allow alcohol at adult entertainment establishments.  
    
    	--dan'l

    --dan'l, always remember that there are "bad apples" in all walks of
    life.  Some people, that call themselves Christians, give real
    Christians a bad name.
    
    When will people learn that you can't legislate morality and
    righteousness?  People have to make their own decisions in those areas.
    
    Mike

Actually the whole effort locally to legislate morality has sort of
backfired. Instead of closing down all undesired businesses, they've
gotten themselves in court and guidelines have been established for
topless bars and things like blue movies, plus or minus alcohol. Now it's
very straightforward how to serve likker and dance naked and the better
businessmen are playing it straight in accordance to the local laws.

An example of this is that they passed a law outlawing Penthouse and the
like in 7-11s (actually around here they got bought out by Circle K). It
went to court and the court ruled that all they had to do was to provide
reasonable assurance that children couldn't get to these mags. So they've
reappeared behind the counter.

Same way with strip joints. They're private clubs within the prevailing
laws for serving alcohol and especially around granting admission.

TTom

    
    
    	A poet's work is to name the unnameable, to point
    	out frauds, to take sides, to start arguments, to
    	shape the world and stop it from going to sleep.
        And if rivers of blood flow from the cuts his verses
        inflict, then they will nourish him.
    
    				         _The_Satanic_Verses_
    					  
    					 by Salman Rushdie			
    		

    I was going to put in a reply to .35, but decided not to.
    
    Just hope everyone enjoys the time off, and uses them in whatever
    ways they see fit.
    
    JD

    Re: -1
    
    I know JD, I've been guilty of the same.  In the heat of "battle",
    things that are close to your heart can blur your mind.
    
    Mike

    "Pay attention to the poet, you need him and you know it."
    
    - Bruce Cockburn

    Here's something I read while over in France.  I felt it so difinitive
    I copied it into my directory.  It's worth reading.
    
    	--dan'l
    
E.L. Doctorow on Rushdie and the Perils to Today's Writers
==========================================================

*As Salman Rushdie appeared on British TV for the first time since going 
into hiding in February 1989, one of his earliest defenders, E.L. Doctorow,
discussed concerns facing modern writers with Barry James of the International
Herald Tribune.  Mr. Doctorow is in Europe to promote translations of his 
novel "Billy Bathgate."*

Q: Can the writer's imagination be a dangerous place?

A: Yes, writing is probably riskier than high-speed automobile racing in many 
parts of the world.  Writers are put in jail, exiled, tortured, censored.  

Q: Like Salman Rushdie?  You were one of the first American writers to
spring to his defense.

A: The entire American literary community came out in defense of freedom
of expression as an absolute and inalienable right.  The American PEN center 
held a meeting at which one after another got up and affirmed the terrible
importance of a writer's being able to write without a contract being put out
on him.  Interestingly, that view is not as clear-cut or unanimous in Europe, 
where many writers have faulted Rushdie for his spirit of arch mischief.

Q: And the blasphemy argument?

A: I'm prepared to accept the fact that to find something blasphemous is
legitimate on the part of one whose deepest, most profoundly held religious
views are offended.  But to go from that to an act of violence against the
writer seems not to express the basic religious spirit of compassion.

				---

Q: There are a lot of people who think a photograph of a crucifix in a tank
of urine is blasphemous.  Many find the photographs of Robert Mapplethorpe
deeply disturbing.  Shouldn't they have the right to say, "Hey, not with my
taxes?"

A: American taxpayers generally do not have control over how their money is 
spent.  If people holding a political view I find abhorrent -- fascists or 
skinheads or the Ku Klux Klan -- decide to have a provocative march and they
get a police permit, then my tax dollars will go toward the security that the 
police department has to provide and to the sanitation department for cleaning
up the rubble and detritus afterwards.

I have no control over the government's decision to bail out the savings and
loan associations, nor the government's decision to build a weapon of this
or that kind.  If I have no say over the way my tax dollars should be spent
in any other area, why should I have any say over this particular one?  That's
false reasoning.

For people to say the artist can paint or write anything he wants, but then
go on to ask why the government should have to pay for it, is to isolate him 
and to decide he is marginal.  This view implies that the artist is someone 
who lives at the sufferance of everyone else, and who doesn't really make 
any significant contribution to American culture or life.

The whole point about art is that it does disturb if it's any good.  It does
make people think.  It does challenge them.  It does keep them alive and it
keeps their minds open.  If you are offended by something, you can picket, you
can write against it, you can march, you can shout, you can do a lot of things
before you do what Jesse Helms wants us to do.

Q: Then there should be no restrictions on grants to the arts?

A: If they end up putting any kind of restrictive language on grants, then
I think the National Endowment for the Arts ought to be disbanded entirely.
I cannot imagine any self-respecting writer or artist agreeing to accept
money with provisions about what he or she can or cannot write or paint.

				---

Q: Does America take its writers seriously enough?

A: There is a large part of the population that does not think about writing
at all, but for those people who do read and pay attention, writers do have
a standing.  In America we writers are like opera singers or ice-skating stars.
We have a devoted following, but very proscribed.

Q: How do you judge the state of language in America today?

A: I'm not sure that I subscribe to the view that language is in bad shape.
But literacy is an increasing problem, and the number of people who can seem 
to get along without reading a book seems to be rising.  That's shocking to
me.

Q: Why are you so fascinated with the '30s, the Depression age?

A: It seemed to be a kind of critical time in our life.  Maybe it is as simple
as the fact that I was a boy in the '30s.

Q: And is this another critical time?  Are there parallels?

A: There are, of course. But in the '30s, writers were tremendously engaged in
what was going on in the world whether they were Southern agrarians, or 
Marxists or whatever.  They argued passionately about what we had and what
we didn't have and what was wrong and what right.  By contrast, we are very
quiet in American literature now.  The writer does not seem to want to take
on the whole world in quite the same way.

This is not to say that all the writing in the '30s was all that great.  There
was a lot of politically engaged bad writing.  The average young writer is far
more skilled than his or her equivalent 50 years ago, but so many writers do
not see the novel any more as a major act of the culture.  That's the big
difference.

Q: Why are you fascinated by gangsters?

A: Because like art and sports, gangsterdom is a very important avenue of
assimilation into society.


	Reprinted without permission from the
	International Herald Tribune, Monday, October 1, 1990
    

    Rainy day
    Rain all day
    Ain't no use gettin' uptight
    Just let the groove find it's own way
    
    - Jimi Hendrix

    I didn't mean to bring up Rushdie (the quote is perfect for our 
    little hand-wringing session here), but I'll say this: The general
    impression the public has of Rushdie based on his public presentation
    during the death-sentence flap was that he's a sensationalist writer
    hungry for free publicity in the Bret Easton Ellis _American_Psycho_
    mode.
    
    Salman Rushdie is quite possibly our best living writer.  But he's 
    liberal Muslim and a leftist so he's a dog in everybody's world except
    those who love great literature.
    
    Salman shoulda taken the same approach as his literary twin Thomas
    Pynchon and maintained total anonymity from the outset.  His life is
    ruined now...
    
    MrT

Hawk --

Man, if that don't say it all...

A few simple words from "The Master".... 8^)

'Saw

    As evidenced by the early writelocking of this note, we've been
    treading on a very thin line here.  A line which isn't even remotely
    sports related (I don't need another "microcosm of life" spiel,
    thanks).  Let's becareful out there.

>    A line which isn't even remotely
>    sports related 
    
    Hey, man, what are you talking about?  I brought it full circle:
    

>Q: Why are you fascinated by gangsters?
>
>A: Because like art and sports, gangsterdom is a very important avenue of
>assimilation into society.
    
    
    	--dan'l

Mac, Mac, Mac --

You hurt my feelings, dude.  "Another microcosm of life spiel"....

Once you showed me the one right and true way of life, it changed
me forever!  Anyone will attest to the fact that my JN count has
dropped way down!  

Oh well, I guess I'll just sulk my way back to the rugby topic now 8^)

8^),
'Saw

    Besides, Mac, that lasted "microcosm of life spiel" can in now way, no
    how, be bettered.  That is it.  No need for a_nuther.  Case closed!
    
    Hawk

	Dan Infante has received at least one reply from an IS manager which 
basically said, leave the Notesfiles alone. They don't use major
resources, and can be a help, in todays environment. If people are spending
too much time in Notes, then it is a employee(individual) issue, not a
"Notesfile" issue. So take heart out there. 

	Remember, though, K&G is is better :^)

Jim M