The Pastiche of a Presidency, Imitating a life,in 957 boring Pages

[Milum]

Darnit Dopers,again you all have missed important news!
This morning The New York Times thought that Bill Clinton’s new book, obsequiously entitled “My Life”, was so self-serving and boring that they, in effect, put a “don’t buy” book review lamenting the publication of his book on the front page. Unprecidented.

**THE NEW YORKTIMES BOOK REVIEW
The Pastiche of a Presidency, Imitating a Life, in 957 Pages
By MICHIKO KAKUTANI
_______________________________MY LIFE
_______________________________By Bill Clinton
_______________________________957 pages. Alfred A. Knopf. $35.00. **

Like his celebrated 1993 speech in Memphis to the Church of God in Christ demonstrated, former President Bill Clinton is capable of soaring eloquence and visionary thinking. But as those who heard his deadening speech nominating Michael Dukakis at the 1988 Democratic National Convention in Atlanta well know, he is also capable of numbing, self-conscious garrulity.

Unfortunately for the reader, Mr. Clinton’s much awaited new autobiography “My Life” more closely resembles the Atlanta speech, which was so long-winded and tedious that the crowd cheered when he finally reached the words “In closing . . .”

The book, which weighs in at more than 950 pages, is sloppy, self-indulgent and often eye-crossingly dull — the sound of one man prattling away, not for the reader, but for himself and some distant recording angel of history.

In many ways, the book is a mirror of Mr. Clinton’s presidency: lack of discipline leading to squandered opportunities; high expectations, undermined by self-indulgence and scattered concentration. This memoir underscores many strengths of Mr. Clinton’s eight years in the White House and his understanding that he was governing during a transitional and highly polarized period. But the very lack of focus and order that mars these pages also prevented him from summoning his energies in a sustained manner to bring his insights about the growing terror threat and an Israeli-Palestinian settlement to fruition.

Certainly it’s easy enough to understand the huge advance sales for the book. Mr. Clinton would seem to have all the gifts for writing a gripping memoir: gifts of language, erudition and charm, combined with a policy wonk’s perception of a complex world at a hinge moment in time, teetering on the pivot between Cold War assumptions and a new era of global interdependence. Add to that his improbable life story — a harrowing roller-coaster ride of precocious achievements, self-inflicted slip-ups and even more startling comebacks — and you have all the ingredients for a compelling book.

But while Dan Rather, who interviewed Mr. Clinton for “60 Minutes,” has already compared the book to the memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant, arguably the most richly satisfying autobiography by an American president, “My Life” has little of that classic’s unsparing candor or historical perspective. Instead, it devolves into a hodgepodge of jottings: part policy primer, part 12-step confessional, part stump speech and part presidential archive, all, it seems, hurriedly written and even more hurriedly edited.

In fact, “My Life” reads like a messy pastiche of everything that Mr. Clinton ever remembered and wanted to set down in print…

**And the debate is… Have scales fallen from the eyes of the New YorkTimes or do they have advanced notice of the second comming? **

[cheddarsnax]

What scales? What second coming?

First, a book review is never important news. It’s not even news. Second, it’s impossible to draw any conclusions about the political leanings of the Times as a whole from one book review. Third, the Times is not the liberal rag people like you and Ann Coulter make it out to be. The fact that it continues to be characterized as some sort of extreme leftist paper is absolutely ridiculous; it’s used as a punching bag for bloviating conservative ideologues who are more interested in hurling accusations of liberal conspiracy than actually finding institutional media bias, if there even is any. If you want to talk about the book review, head over to the Cafe Society. There is absolutely no debate here.

[John_Mace]

@Milum

And the debate is… Have scales fallen from the eyes of the New YorkTimes or do they have advanced notice of the second comming?

Possibly a 3rd option: The book just isn’t very good. I would suspect that most presidential memiors are not all that great.

Of course the real conspiracy theory is that the NYT knows Clinton will suck all the air out of the room wrt Kerry’s campaign and that he really just wants Kerry to lose so Hillary can win in the next election. So you see, it all makes sense afterall.

[cheddarsnax]

@John Mace

Possibly a 3rd option: The book just isn’t very good. I would suspect that most presidential memiors are not all that great.

Indeed:

He has said that writing a “great” book has been a longtime goal, although the history of presidential memoirs works against him. The only highly regarded book in this genre is by Ulysses Grant, who devoted the vast majority of his memoirs to his triumphant Civil War military leadership and wrote virtually nothing about his often disastrous presidency.

[elucidator]

Oh, don’t be silly, John! Everybody who knows what is really going on knows that that conspiracy is merely a stalking horse for the real conspiracy, which centers around the international banking cabal centered in Switzerland and, of course, Uruguay.

Don’t buy it? OK, then, just one name, a hint: Franklin Delano Rosenfeld!

I could tell you more, but then I’d have to shoot myself.

[Munch]

Dnftt.

[pravnik]

@elucidator

Uruguay.

Whut choo call me??

[Nonsuch]

Clinton’s speechwriters used to complain that he would always revise their work, and that in doing so, he invariably made it longer. Assuming the review is accurate, it doesn’t surprise me.

[blowero]

And the debate is… Is Milum the new December?

[El_Kabong]

And the debate is… Have scales fallen from the eyes of the New YorkTimes or do they have advanced notice of the second comming?

Well, after considering your proposition, I would have to of the first part that I have no clue what you are talking about, and of the second part that I, er, have no clue what you are talking about.

I’m sort of interpreting here, but is this perhaps what you meant to say?

“Can it be possible that the New York Times, which I, Milum, believe to be some sort of official press outlet for the Vast Liberal Conspiracy, and which I believe vets its every word, right down to its book reviews, to ensure that it supports The Liberal Agenda, has actually published an article dismissive of Bill Clinton’s memoirs, thus apparently demonstrating that my views are unfounded in reality?”

If this is what you intended to ask, then you’ll get no argument from me; I heartily agree with you.

[elucidator]

@pravnik

Whut choo call me??

I said that you are a guay, vato! Choo gonna deny it? Y tu madre, tambien!

[gobear]

@elucidator

I said that you are a guay, vato! Choo gonna deny it? Y tu madre, tambien!

Dude, that’s about as authentic as a lutefisk tamale.

[Ravenman]

I just came into this thread in amazement that Milum used the word “pastiche” in a title.

Then I found that he was only quoting. Color me disappointed.

[Zagadka]

Slow news day, Milum?

I can see how, in your self-insulated world, a bad book review for Clinton would be a newsflash worthty of a ticker-tape parade (I can see your mind exploding with glee at Clinton stubbing his toe!), but as a self-proclaimed humanitarian, don’t you think you should be starting threads on the horrors happening in Sudan or somesuch?

[RTFirefly]

I came in here wondering how Milum had read the book so quickly, and now I find out he’s only quoting the paper that let Judith Miller use its front page to give blowjobs to the Bushies for the past two years.

[rjung]

@blowero

And the debate is… Is Milum the new December?

I was no fan of december, but Milum’s latest series of Great Debates OPs make december seem like George freakin’ Will by comparison.

[Starving_Artist]

@El_Kabong

“Can it be possible that the New York Times, which I, Milum, believe to be some sort of official press outlet for the Vast Liberal Conspiracy, and which I believe vets its every word, right down to its book reviews, to ensure that it supports The Liberal Agenda, has actually published an article dismissive of Bill Clinton’s memoirs, thus apparently demonstrating that my views are unfounded in reality?”

If this is what you intended to ask, then you’ll get no argument from me; I heartily agree with you.

Or, more likely, “has actually published an article dismissive of Bill Clinton’s memoirs, thus apparently demonstrating that this book is so mind-numbing dull and self-serving that even we can’t bring ourselves to support it, dear readers, so even though it flies in the face of our poliitical leanings, we’re going to have to recommend, on our front page no less, that you take a pass on it.” “Uh…oh, yeah…GO KERRY!!!”

[Zagadka]

Is it just me, or is mocking a book you’ve never read somewhat, well…

looks at the subtitle of the forum

[jshore]

@rjung

I was no fan of december, but Milum’s latest series of Great Debates OPs make december seem like George freakin’ Will by comparison.

Here and here are links for the benefit of Milum and Starving Artist since this is probably not a story that has received much coverage by Rush Limbaugh.

Hey, if we can’t turn Milum threads into opportunities to dispel a little ignorance, what good are they (besides the entertainment value)?

[jshore]

Let’s try that again from the top, starting with the correct quote this time:

@RTFirefly

I came in here wondering how Milum had read the book so quickly, and now I find out he’s only quoting the paper that let Judith Miller use its front page to give blowjobs to the Bushies for the past two years.

Here and here are links for the benefit of Milum and Starving Artist since this is probably not a story that has received much coverage by Rush Limbaugh.

Hey, if we can’t turn Milum threads into opportunities to dispel a little ignorance, what good are they (besides the entertainment value)?