Nobel Literature Head to America: You Suck

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@friedo

I do. If I go on Bill O’Reilly and say “hey, I work for Spectre of Pithecanthropus Global Enterprises LLC and my boss is a big poopy-head,” should I expect to still have a job in the morning? What changes if I say that on my angst-ridden LiveJournal instead?

My basic position is that I’m paying you to work for me, not love me. I could see some justification for firing someone under these circumstances, but this isn’t really the sort of thing I’m talking about.

I come a little closer to your position if you propagandize against SPGE LLC, or against our principal lines of business. This would be akin to working for Ford and propounding owning a private automobile is immoral because of the ensuing environmental degradation, or working at a cable TV company and marching around with anti-TV signs. Or doing either on the Internet. But in those cases, I have a proximate reason to question your dedication to your work. And again, this isn’t what I’m talking about. These would be examples of conflict of interest violations, and I don’t have an issue with conflict of interest agreements.

@friedo

If you owned a printing press, should you be required by law to print an editorial advocating something you abhor?

Freedom of speech is a negative right in that it subsists in a person’s being left alone to speak or write , and not subsequently punished for it. It has nothing to do with forcing anyone to say or print something. It’s one thing to retaliate for direct attack if you have reason to believe that it compromises a professional relationship. But should I be able to fire you because you’re going to vote for the other guy? Suppose you were gay and came out in your blog? Should I as your employer be able to fire you because of that because I don’t approve of it? I think definitely not. What if a third person at the office dredges up a picture of you drunk, wearing a multicolored sombrero, at a Cinco De Mayo party, from three years back? Should your job be in danger? Again I think not, and I disagree that I should be able to take any such action against you, except where there’s a clear antipathy or conflict of interest.

It’s nice that the more reputable newspapers have a policy of printing a wide range of views, but what do you think the response of the editors would be if you told them they had to print anything?

Nothing to do with it. Who said being able to express yourself without dire consequences for the content of your expression has anything to do with forcing anyone to print anything? I’m willing to concede a point with regard to clear conflict of interest, but people don’t get sacked just for that.

You have a Constitutional right to say what you want. You do not have a Constitutional right to do so without pissing off the people you insult. The Internet makes casual discourse much more public and accessible than it used to be. People often forget that their half-drunken rants about the dumb secretary who wears too much perfume will be preserved by Google for generations to come. That’s the risk you take if you want to use a form of public expression that communicates your thoughts to anyone who wants to hear them.

Couple of points here. These examples (like the first one) are in the realm of direct personal attack, which could make you civilly liable in any case. I do not advocate libel. My position is that it is unethical to use someone’s data trail and punish them for their opinions and discourse expressed therein that do not attack their boss or colleagues. I’m not denying that technology allows this to be done, but I am saying I question the ethics of doing so.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@Vox_Imperatoris

Yes. Bob has a deal with Omnicorp in which Omnicorp decides, of its own free will, to pay Bob in return for showing up and working. Unless they signed a contract otherwise, there is no reason why Omnicorp *has *to keep paying Bob and letting him come on the property, and there is no reason why Bob has to keep working. If Omnicorp is the one paying Bob, then it has a right to stop paying him for any reason. They should be able to fire him because he wore a red tie and the boss hates red or any other ridiculous reason. The other option is that you’re forcing Omnicorp to pay him, which violates Omnicorp’s right to free business association.

Valete,
Vox Imperatoris

Did I miss the memo? When did they bring back serfdom?

[Vox_Imperatoris]

@Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus

Did I miss the memo? When did they bring back serfdom?

An employer is giving you money, of his own free will, to get you to do a job. There is no reason why he should be forced to give that money to you, but if he doesn’t, you don’t have to work for him anymore.

That’s capitalism in a free market, where you can choose to work for an employer and be paid, and the employer can choose to employ you. It is not serfdom, where you are obligated to work for your liege-lord and he is obligated to give you a cut and certain rights.

Valete,
Vox Imperatoris

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@Sunspace

I took this to mean that companies were patrolling non-work-related activites of their employees.

That is exactly right. I’m not saying it happens all the time, or even often, but it does happen. This is what spooks me. For the most part friedo’s examples are a different issue and I’m more inclined to agree with him on those.

[Cisco]

@ArizonaTeach

America to Nobel Literature Head: Fuck you.

Reference

Read about this this morning and considered starting a thread about it. What a blood-belching asshole. His comments were deliberately inflammatory and completely inappropriate for a judge to be making. I wonder what he’s really pissed about that’s making him take his aggression out with these delusional remarks.

[Westrogothia]

“Foreigner thinks USA is not greatest Americans go batshit.”

How about you guys actually read the thing and maybe consider if hes got a point instead of going all patriotic.

[Cisco]

@Westrogothia

“Foreigner thinks USA is not greatest Americans go batshit.”

How about you guys actually read the thing and maybe consider if hes got a point instead of going all patriotic.

Oh, fuck yourself. Really. I read it. He was being an asshole. We are capable of reading and forming our own opinions, you know.

[Westrogothia]

@Cisco

Oh, fuck yourself. Really. I read it. He was being an asshole. We are capable of reading and forming our own opinions, you know.

Torches and pitchforks eh?

Yes Merica is probably the greatest nation on the earth, I just wish you guys weren’t so insecure about it.

[Bootis]

@Westrogothia

Torches and pitchforks eh?

Yes Merica is probably the greatest nation on the earth, I just wish you guys weren’t so insecure about it.

I doubt you really wish that.

[Ogre]

@Westrogothia

Torches and pitchforks eh?

Yes Merica is probably the greatest nation on the earth, I just wish you guys weren’t so insecure about it.

Yeah, cause we’re HUGE on the whole “America, fuck yeah!” thing around here. Good God. Before you shoot your mouth off, perhaps you should read for comprehension. The guy says that America is too insular to produce great literature. Are you fucking KIDDING me?

Do you know anything about America? At all? Or are you just flapping your gums?

[FinnAgain]

@Westrogothia

Torches and pitchforks eh?

Yes Merica is probably the greatest nation on the earth, I just wish you guys weren’t so insecure about it.

So, let me get this straight… people call Engdahl on factually inaccurate claims, objectively inaccurate.

You respond with a strange strawman, saying that people went nuts because someone said America was not “the greatest”. Of course, I’m sure you’re well aware, that bears not even a passing resemblance to what we’re actually discussing.
You even went as far as to accuse people of not reading the article (while rebutting not a single thing anybody said, anywhere), and to accuse people of ‘going all patriotic’, whatever exactly you think that means. I guess you needed to get your “Americans suck!” dig in, somewhere.

Then, of course, when you’re told to fuck off, you claim that factual refutations are “torches and pitchforks” and that Americans are overly sensitive… after people took offense to you smearing them.

Go figure, eh?

@Ogre

Yeah, cause we’re HUGE on the whole “America, fuck yeah!” thing around here. Good God. Before you shoot your mouth off, perhaps you should read for comprehension.

Reminds me of some other new poster from a few years back who should’ve lurked more… accused people in GD of being partisan Bush lovers because they rebutted his claims on factual grounds.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@Westrogothia

“Foreigner thinks USA is not greatest Americans go batshit.”

How about you guys actually read the thing and maybe consider if hes got a point instead of going all patriotic.

We have read the thing. It’s hogwash. The author can’t think of any authors over here at the moment, who are worthy of consideration, but to say we don’t take writing and literature seriously is insulting. Tell me, does everyone in Sweden go nuts if they inadvertently leave the house without a book, just in case they have time to read it somewhere? Is it that important to you? It is to me, but probably not to most Americans. And I think it would be similar elsewhere. A small core of readers supports the book market, aside from the mass markets. I hesitate now to mention - heh - since it seems to be a problem judging by another recent thread, I did spend a year of uni in Germany. I don’t remember everyone reading all the time. I would have definitely noticed that and said to myself, “They’re all acting exactly as I do!”

Most people of any country are not supporting the literature market. It takes above-average intelligence to truly enjoy better writing, and by definition most people don’t fit into that category. Anybody can read through an Updike or Saroyan novel, and force themself to analyze the symbolism inherent in various inanimate objects or characters, as they would for a school report, but the avid reader enjoys doing this, and does so automatically

And the part about Europe being the only place where a writer can write in peace and without fear of government harrassment. You know, we don’t quite yet have Hail Bush rallies here, nor do Federal officials go through the libraries burn books. The right of free speech is still in force.

People aren’t pissed because a foreigner says we’re not the best. The insult is that he said there’s nothing here to even consider.

[Claptree]

It seems to me there’s a certain amount of misspeaking and misreading going on here. Maybe I’m being too generous, but I didn’t interpret Mr Engdahl’s words as an attack on the US, more him trying, albeit clumsily, to explain why so few authors from the US are in contention.

“Of course there is powerful literature in all big cultures, but you can’t get away from the fact that Europe still is the center of the literary world … not the United States,”

“The U.S. is too isolated, too insular. They don’t translate enough and don’t really participate in the big dialogue of literature,” Engdahl said. “That ignorance is restraining.”

Now, I’m not going to say that I have cites for my interpretation, but I’d guess he’s, again clumsily, trying to point out that most authors in exile end up in Europe, and that a society with lots of writers births more writers. He may be wrong, for all I know, I just don’t see his words as deserving of the venom in this thread.

[Westrogothia]

@FinnAgain

So, let me get this straight… people call Engdahl on factually inaccurate claims, objectively inaccurate.

Claim? He was stating his personal opinion. As per freedom of speech etc. How the hell can an opinion about literary quality be “factually inaccurate”.
Hes one person on a board that decides the winner, his vote is worth 1/13.

@FinnAgain

You respond with a strange strawman, saying that people went nuts because someone said America was not “the greatest”. Of course, I’m sure you’re well aware, that bears not even a passing resemblance to what we’re actually discussing.

Yes, I responded saying maybe you should read it again, he wasnt saying america sucks really. He was saying that he thinks that americas writers has too little outside influences, beeing to fond of traditional american themes, not that america lacks talent.

@FinnAgain

You even went as far as to accuse people of not reading the article (while rebutting not a single thing anybody said, anywhere), and to accuse people of ‘going all patriotic’, whatever exactly you think that means. I guess you needed to get your “Americans suck!” dig in, somewhere.

Going all patriotic = thinking what I said was america sucks when I neither said, nor meant, such a thing.
Or perhaps I was cleverly hiding it behind “america greatest nation on earth” cant trust em damn foreigners.

@FinnAgain

Then, of course, when you’re told to fuck off, you claim that factual refutations are “torches and pitchforks” and that Americans are overly sensitive… after people took offense to you smearing them.

Yes being told to fuck off when I pointed out maybe you misunderstood. How ever could I have have thought you were being overly sensitive.

@FinnAgain

Reminds me of some other new poster from a few years back who should’ve lurked more… accused people in GD of being partisan Bush lovers because they rebutted his claims on factual grounds.

It was better back in the day and I should get of yer lawn?

[RickJay]

@friedo

Yeah, I know what you mean.

I love European art and culture as much as anyone, but I will never understand the pervasive willingness to accept arbitrary limits on basic human freedoms.

In what country are there not such limits?

[TVeblen]

@Westrogothia

Yes, I responded saying maybe you should read it again, he wasnt saying america sucks really. He was saying that he thinks that americas writers has too little outside influences, beeing to fond of traditional american themes, not that america lacks talent.

What the asshole claims is that authors from around the world have been celebrated–because they were properly “Europeanized”, of course.

Deep stupidity, and distinctly nasty. Nations don’t write books. Individuals write books. Nobody has starved for ‘outside influence’ since the days of travel by horse and sail. To claim that now is patently ridiculous.

Engdahl is an Eurocentric ass. His prejudice blinds him. I’m sure as hell not saying the US is ‘the’ literary center for the world. But Engdahl is a bigot. Period. He prejudges authors from the US not for what they wrote, but on what he believes to be their homegrown cultural limitations.

What a ludicrous set of false ‘choices’ this nasty little man presents. Authors from the US are swamped by mass culture and thus too insular to produce excellent work. Authors from other places, you know, the Caribbean, Turkey–and presumably Canada, Australia, etc.-- must flee to Europe lest they be beaten and persecuted for writing at all. The central issue being, of course, the civilizing Europe influence.

What a putz.

[FinnAgain]

@Westrogothia

Claim? He was stating his personal opinion.

What’s funny is that for a poster who started his spew in a thread by accusing other of not having read an article… you evidently either didn’t read it, or just skimmed it.

The claim was made that “many authors who have their roots in other countries work in Europe, because it is only here where you can be left alone and write, without being beaten to death”
Only Europe? Only? As should be obvious, this is such blatantly idiotic, nationalistic, eurocentric drool that you should have spotted it, even with your agenda of being a massive twat.

Speaking of which, it’s elucidative that when a European gasbag claims that Europe is the best in the world, indeed virtually the nexus for the entire world when it comes to the intellectual pursuit and exchange that is literature, you see no problem with such absurd nationalistic swill. In fact, you took it upon yourself to try to annoy those who had a problem with it. And you pretend that the Americans in this thread supported such a view for their nation, and tried to pick fights with them based on that strawman.

@Westrogothia

Going all patriotic = thinking what I said was america sucks when I neither said, nor meant, such a thing.

Your very first post in the thread accused Americans of being “batshit” and “going patriotic”. Obviously, if they were already doing such a thing, it couldn’t have been in response to you. In fact, you were talking about people’s response to Engdahl, not to you.

You’re not even lying very well, I’m afraid.

@Westrogothia

Yes being told to fuck off when I pointed out maybe you misunderstood. How ever could I have have thought you were being overly sensitive.

Naw, you don’t honestly misunderstand what happened, you’re just being a disingenuous twat. You weren’t told to fuck off for “pointing out” that a misunderstanding might have occurred.

As I already said, you started with an obnoxious strawman, accused the posters in this thread of going “batshit”, not reading the article and “going patriotic” which, whatever your weaseling now, you obviously meant as a slur about jingoism. All that in your very first post. And that’s what you were told to fuck off for, which you took as an excuse to further play “bait the Americans”.

But come on, you’re just a twat on the internet looking to annoy Americans by dishonestly picking fights. In other words, you’re a troll. Let’s not play games here.

So I’ll second the recommendation, fuck off, troll.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@FinnAgain

Speaking of which, it’s elucidative that when a European gasbag claims that Europe is the best in the world, indeed virtually the nexus for the entire world when it comes to the intellectual pursuit and exchange that is literature, you see no problem with such absurd nationalistic swill.

Rooting for a continent rather than a country cannot be “nationalistic” by definition. The sentiment makes sense, though.

I don’t see what the big fucking deal is here. Americans win about half of all Nobels awarded; who really gives a shit if one guy on the Lit committee won’t vote for American authors?

[FinnAgain]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Rooting for a continent rather than a country cannot be “nationalistic” by definition.

Yes, and no. I agree that ‘nationalism’ is not perfectly suited to describe the situation. But it does well enough. The EU has its own laws, currency and governing bodies. I suppose instead of ‘nationalism’ I could’ve said ‘unionism’ but that just sounds weird.

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

I don’t see what the big fucking deal is here.

No BFD from where I sit, more like RO.
An idiot ‘unionistic’, eurocentric gasbag was pitted. I happen to agree that the pitee was being a douche.

[Shodan]

I think Americans are just smarting under the realization that we have not produced any fiction of the stature of I, Rigoberto Menchu.

Regards,
Shodan