Thanks, Maureen...: Maureen Dowd has a good op-ed column in today's NYTimes about the idea of men and fashion. I particularly like this statement: "Dishevelment — stains that indicate you had soup at your desk as you sorted through Social Security offset taxes, or that you are wearing a hand-me-down sportscoat your dad gave you at Harvard — signals that you're far too busy pondering the meaning of neoimperialism to look in the mirror." Indeed. Beware the sartorially-obsessed man. To read the rest of the article, you'll need to fill out some info and then you can access the Times whenever you want for free. The rest of the article is here.

Newt....: Newt Gingrich was on The Daily Show last night and proved how utterly devoid of humour he is. The more a man is already pre-disposed to being a caricature, the more likely he is to be concerned about being taken seriously, at least in the Big 50. I can only imagine how American politicians would react to the shenanigans of their leaders being assaulted by Marge Delahunty or doing a walk-on with the Air Farce. I can only imagine how they would react to know that Dubya and Gore have indeed been exposed for their ignorance by Rick Mercer. Even the most-uptight of Canadian politicans know they ought to have a healthy sense of self-deprecating humour, else they become the victim of attack rather than a co-conspirator in their own ribbing. Mulroney's the last politician who made that mistake, but he always seemed about as Canadian as Martha Washington. Some US politicians are starting to learn this-- and some, like Joe Lieberman, proved surprisingly good at demonstrating a sense of humour. But, Newt.... You don't go on with Jon Stewart and expect to play above the game; that's just silly.

The Agony of Writing: The Dr is trying to put some material together, mainly his proposal and his outline for his dissertation, and with the writing of the proposal I am (as I always do) struggling with the first sentence. It's easy to forget how crucial the opening sentence is; it determines direction and approach, it determines tone and atmosphere, and it determines your central premise. And yet, I keep coming back to the dry bones of "It is regularly observed that Modernism has numerous connections with and a degree of indebtedness to the traditions and techniques of Nonsense literature, particularly Nonsense poetry." Blah. Yes, it says what it has to say, and it determines the direction. But it plods along with a metronomic and stuffy gait, and commits the glaring style error of a subjunctive clause. I have to find the right way to approach this, the right words. It's not as easy-- as so many think-- as merely putting down the facts. And, frankly, if I can find a way to get into this that is 'lively,' I can hopefully engender a stronger mimetic sense that will make the dissertation more sprightly, more apropos, more valuable in itself. I also don't want to write the same sort of dull, heavy-handed, imperious criticism that most of my colleagues write-- and which, sadly, my own sentence above tempts me to write. Words move.....

From the Oh My God File:Just watched an episode of Cosby in which we're treated to an education in Shakespeare, ripe with the most ignorant interpretations of Shakespeare imaginable past the grade five level. There's very little more disconcerting than being preached to about Shakespeare by people who've obviously only read Shakespeare in Coles Notes. Just as bad, there's another episode of the same show that I saw some time ago with Anthony Quinn (!) as a blind professor explicating Milton with the insight of Cheech and/or Chong. No wonder people hate the classics-- because of manipulative, self-important, and mindless exhortations like this.

Yes, the Dr has the TV on as he tries to write.... And he's in a grumpy mood, for obvious reasons. ;-)