Interesting sugary excerpt from Stanley Fish responding to the criticisms for his positive review of Sarah Palin's Going Rogue:
”Law and Order” creator Dick Wolf could not possibly supervise, never mind write, every script churned out by his production company, and yet TV critics have no hesitation in saying about a particular episode that it conveys Wolf’s usual message or embodies his vision of society. In his new book, “The Audacity to Win,” David Plouffe, campaign adviser to Barack Obama, recalls that when Obama decided to write his famous “race” speech, he said, “I know what I want to say,” and added that he would call the speechwriter “and give him some initial guidance.” The rest is history and everyone refers to the speech as Obama’s. In the same way, “Going Rogue” is Sarah Palin’s book, for good or ill. If I may mix metaphors, the issue of ghost writing is a red herring, a point made inadvertently by those posters who both deny Palin the title of author and excoriate her for her lies. If she didn’t write the book, she can’t be lying in it, and if she can be called either a liar or a truth-teller, she wrote the book.
As someone who skimmed Going Rogue, I have to say that it makes Sarah Palin likable, but it doesn't doesn't scare me or make willing to agree with her politics because on the contrary to the majority of Americans, I don't believe that likability is the key component to electability and to ideological discussions. May be the reason why I have never been able to hate or to despise Palin is that one of the most important lessons that I have learned the last few years is that people who hold beliefs, which I find ridiculous and despicable can be decent individuals and people who agree with me can be despicable and intolerant people. That doesn't stop the debate or make their view point acceptable, it just stops discussions from becoming petty, personal, superfluous, and apolitical and to become too infected to be productive.
Comments