The Literary Critic

  THE LITERARY CRITIC

Due to certain feedback, designating Iowa Senator Brad Zaun as our senatorial literary critic requires an explanation.  Senator Zaun publicly denigrated a published work by Maia Kobabe.  The book is titled GENDER QUEER and the Senator proclaimed it disgusting.

In attempting to analyze the Senator's literary analysis of the novel as "disgusting", one must keep in mind the Senator's frame of reference.  Frames of reference are often a beginning point for analysis and in the Senator's case, most appropriately.  In that the Senator has become one of the Iowa's Senate more notable literary interventionists, his views on what is acceptable and not acceptable in civil society should begin any commentary.

The Senator has not only approved, but, been a significant factor, in the past two years of legislative activity which includes book banning, restricting or eliminating diversity programs, regulating educational content,  correct bathroom protocol, etc.    These activities pretty well sum up the Senator's frame of reference.

To begin, Maia Kobabe is obviously a foreign name.  Now, to the Senator's mind a foreign name is one not derived from English, German, Scottish, Irish, Polish,  Italian languages. Other lesser known derivations of European languages will sneak in occasionally.  But clearly any name coming from the continent of Africa is foreign and the name Kobabe is certainly African of some sort.  Which sort is not important to our Senator.

Secondly, to our Senator's mind, gender issues are either the work of the devil or a communist plot.  And we all know his position on "queer".  The Senator has declared the book "disgusting".  This appears to be the extent of his literary criticism.  One would think that, as a literary critic, one could go into a little more detail and give us a basis for his opinion.  Of course, this would entail reading the novel - an exercise clearly beyond the Senator's capabilities.

We have a really good example here of judging a book without reading it which certainly saves time and effort.  The basis for the Senator's opinion is the title of the book and the name of the author.  Both are clearly un-American and un-Iowan which gives our literary critic license to dismiss the book as "disgusting"  viewing the title as disgusting and the author's name as extremely unorthodox. 

It really is a very good shorthand way of literary critique - - determining the quality of the work by the title and the name of the author.  I'm sure the Senator did not think this up on his own since this sort of analysis has been around as long as there have been books and once again is becoming a popular method of determining the value of a novel.

We can only hope that the Senator does not relax in his efforts of understanding our current literature.  It is important that we have people who will consider books as proper subjects of examination and critique and our Senator is setting such a good example that we need to applaud his efforts.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Sniff, Sniff!

 SNIFF, SNIFF!

There doesn't appear to be any valid reason why commentary and discussion can not occur over decisions of the Iowa Supreme Court.  Probably very few people other than the bar read Supreme Court decisions even though these decisions actually affect the citizens of Iowa more directly than just about any other reading matter that one can come into possession of. As an example, a recent decision of the Iowa Supreme, State v, Bauler, once again rules that a dog sniff is not a search.

Most of the local citizenry probably does not realize that the policy of the Newton Police Department is that they can perform a dog sniff on your vehicle once your vehicle is stopped for any traffic violation as long as the stop is not unnecessarily prolonged.  Considering the prevalence of illegal substances in the citizenry as a whole, it really should be something that is better publicized.  I am quite sure that you, the reader, have not been aware of this unless the police dog is brought to the location of your own street detention and worked around your car while you are receiving your ticket from the officer who stopped you.

Dog sniffs aren't searches according to the U. S. Supreme Court and the Iowa Supreme Court and therefore are not subject to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the State of Iowa which protect a citizen from unreasonable searches and seizures.  This is one of the anomalies that so befuddle us lawyers.  In effect, a dog searching for the smell of illegal narcotics located in your car, being led around your car, is not a search.  The courts try to convince us by whatever terminology they currently use, that a search is not a search.  Interesting isn't it when a search is not a search.  It is not a search because the courts say it is not a search:  there you have it.

The courts have gone to great lengths to convince not only us, but themselves that a dog sniff is not a search: many opinions have been written justifying this position.  Once a dog sniffs something illegal, then the officers have probable cause to search not only the car but you.  Funny how that works.  What these rulings mean, in effect, is any time you are in your vehicle and stopped for whatever reason, you and your passengers and the car you are in can be searched by a dog first, and then by humans second if the dog indicates his sniffing is positive for an illegal substance.

If a drug dog is brought into your house while they search for drugs and the dog shows the officers where the drugs are, that is part of a search.  If a drug dog  is at the airport sniffing passengers' suitcases, that is a search.  If a dog is used to track you down in the woods, that is a search.  But, searching for smells emanating from  your car is not a search  they say.

Another interesting fact is that under normal circumstances, only the dog's handler will know that the dog "hit" on your car.  They have gone to sniff school together; they are a team.  It is difficult to convince someone, like a judge, that the dog's handler will always say that the dog hit on the car once they find anything in the subsequent search.

It boils down to the fact that you really don't have any privacy rights while in your car.  You don't need search warrants for people's houses if all you have to do is follow people around in their cars until they commit some traffic violation:  no turn signal, crossing the center line, five miles over the speed limit, defective equipment etc., etc.  It's easy to forget that pot pipe in your pocket when late for work.  The courts allow this sort of intrusion into our lives often with the result of jail, bond, court, fines, etc.  

Because driving has been criminalized (you can't drive without committing a crime), a citizen doesn't have a right to privacy while out on the road.  I'm sure the courts and prosecutors have written volumes contrary wise and will continue to do so especially when they see a writing such as this willing to actually call a search a search.  But, you know, if your native language is English, a search is a search is a search. 

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

The National Debt?

 THE NATIONAL DEBT?

The United States' debt concerns people; they look aghast at the numbers - - trillions.  That is a lot of money you say and it is.  How do we pay that debt?  It will bankrupt the entire citizenry of the country you say and it will not.

The United States dollar is the planet's currency.  There are very few places on earth that you can go and not use a dollar bill to pay for something.  This is quite a feat and one that works to our benefit in many ways.  Have you heard of the term "Eurodollar"?  Look it up sometime.  It constitutes a vast number of dollars existing outside the boundaries of this country that are used by other countries to trade with each other, such as in oil.  Dollars are everywhere and lots of them.

If we were to pay off our debt, foreign and internal, the earth would be awash with trillions of new dollars instantly.  And I say instantly because what we forget, especially those of us who worry the most, is that the United States makes its own money.  The debt both foreign and internal could be paid in minutes with computer key strokes; money, after all, is nothing but electronic blips. Think of credit or debit card purchases. Or you had $50,000 in government bonds and suddenly you don't have any bonds, you have an electronic deposit in your account of $50,000.  There would be no national debt but a whopping amount of new money.  It is expected that the amount of money that would be created and floated would cause  tremendous inflation.  Money will be there to spend and lots of it and spent it will be.

Just think of all the interest that the government is paying out annually.  That is money that is added to the purchasing power of the economy along with the money it borrows which is immediately spent.  What you may or may not realize is that other countries hold a lot of our debt; when an individual, corporation, mutual fund, hedge fund, foreign country buys US treasury notes or bonds, they are buying our debt. China holds a lot of US debt. They buy our debt because it is a safe investment; when everything else is going into the tank, you can always buy treasuries.

These hysterical comments about our national debt are simply that - - hysteria.  All countries have debt; unfortunately very few have the ability to pay their debt that we do.  We have thousands of economists graduating every year from our universities and tens of thousands of business graduates;  The national debt is not a secret; anyone with slightest background in either economics or business understands that debt, per se, is not something to be hysterical about; it is useful.

The money that our government borrows is used and spread throughout the country; and, as I said above,  that money is added to our economy: it in many ways controls the supply of money as well.  Not only does the government of the United States create our money (much of it); your local bank when it loans you a thousand dollars  has created a thousand dollars that did not exist before it loaned you the money.  Along with the government, the more money loaned by banks, the more money there is to spend on stuff you don't need. Money is being created constantly. To be fair though, if you make a payment back to the bank on the money it loaned you, you are in fact decreasing the money supply, so we can only hope you had a good time with it when you had it.  The effect is just the opposite with Uncle Sam, for every treasury note or bond he redeems,  dollars are available for use in the economy that were not there before the redemption and Uncle Sam's balance sheets have improved.

So there you have it folks, the national debt.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Back to School We Go

 BACK TO SCHOOL WE GO

Once again our little urchins are enclosed in the halls of learning.  It is now time, again, to make doubly sure that they do not learn of anything that is actually happening in the world or with whom it is happening.  You know, for example, the Russians are killing thousands of Ukrainians, the Israelis are killing thousands of Palestinians, the Myanmar army is killing thousands of Rohingyans.  

As you can see, all is well on the planet.  And oh! don't forget the coastal cities of the world will soon be under water and it's going to be really hot.  We don't want to worry their little brains with all these issues; no dejected kids here - - not necessary.  As long as we have them educated enough to read an how-to-manual and operate a computer we're good.  And let's not forget the continuing effort of book banning.  Possibly we could have a book burning for homecoming  Now that would be interesting.  The students can pick out the ones they want to burn.   I say give every kid three choices from the school library.  Hopefully there are that many left to burn by the time the legislature is finished with its efforts.

Now you might say I'm overreacting.  Well, there are plenty of precedents for this sort of thing.  The libraries of Babylon and Alexandria were burnt to the ground. The Nazis burnt all the books written by Jews.  One religion or another has been banning and burning books since books have existed.  Our federal government banned books from being sent through the U. S. Postal Service.  Nothing new here: a long and enduring celebration of destroying the word.  Many of us probably didn't realize just how dangerous words are; very dangerous indeed especially in the minds of those in charge.  

As we know all too well, especially by proponents of banning and burning, words create ideas and ideas create trouble; you can't control ideas unless you control books.  Very simple really and there are always those who want to limit the ideas floating around in the heads of our little urchins especially.  And since ideas cause trouble; no  new ideas please.  Only those ideas that meet with the approval of those who seem to be in charge will be tolerated; and if we can't keep them out of books stores and off the internet, we can at least keep them out of the school and local library.  No good can come from our children actually understanding the history of our country or giving some thought to why the Russians are killing Ukrainians, Israelis killing Palestinans, or the Myanmar army killing Rohingyans.  These things simply do not help them get jobs.

So once again, we must renew our efforts of limiting what our little urchins are exposed to.  We are making progress but it is not now the time to relax our efforts.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Et Tu Babe

 ET TU BABE

It is now time to consider whether ET TU BABE by Mark Leyner is a Book for Bigots.  Interestingly, the main character in this work of fiction is Mark Leyner himself who transcends most of our ideas of wealth, power, popularity, and personal attributes.  After half a century of reading books, this is a new one - - the author as main character. 

If one looks at the reviews of the book reflected by a cursory Google search, one does not see much of an analysis:  such epithets are used as "cyberpunk", "rabid egotism", "exhilaratingly bizarre", "exhaustingly funny", "hilarious", "hyperglandular", "extravagant", and "kaleidoscopic" all of which would superficially suggest the book worth reading by anyone who reads novels.  This normally excludes Bigots since Bigots don't normally read novels (with the possible exception of Goldilocks) in the event they might run across a character that does not meet with their approval.  And in this case, they certainly would not approve.

I do not characterize ET TU BABE with any of the above.  It is a novel, since it is designated as such by those in the trade, only with the understanding that there is no other term that is appropriate to describe it.  Mr. Leyner, the fictional Mr. Leyner, has everything that any human being could imagine in the genre of superhero but a superhero totally self-indulgent.  One reaches the end of the book without the slightest inclination to be acquainted with him or anyone like him.

But more to the point, the author relates in one section of the book:  'Dr. Williams handed Todd a glossy brochure entitled "The Auto-Erotic Repetitive Motion Disorder Association of America"'.  Now this suggests right off that this is not a book for bigots - - autoeroticism is not normally a general topic of conversation for Bigots at meal time or while watching the Disney Channel.  In addition, since the main character is insatiable, all-wealthy, all-powerful, and all-popular with amazing personal attributes, sex is easy to come by and constantly appearing in one form or another making it verboten for all Bigots and those besotted with Bigotry, since sex, above all things, does not exist and not to be spoken of in their world.

As with most modern American literature in novel form, it is a book that would be subject to banning and burning by Bigotry and could not possibly be allowed to grace the library shelves of  our public schools.  What the intent of the author was in writing the book and structuring it as he has, is uncertain.  But one is left after reading it, not particularly caring for anyone portrayed in it.  One must gather that this was the intent; and consequently, a book that might actually have a beneficial effect on those who are  allowed to read it - - the characters here are not people you may want to emulate and as far as I can tell, have no admirable traits whatsoever.

At any rate, ET TU BABE is a candidate for banning and burning.  No erstwhile Bigot could possibly come to any other conclusion; the circumstances and references in it would cause serious discomfort.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

My Cousin, My Gastroentologist

 MY COUSIN, MY GASTROENTEROLOGIST

In my continuing series of Books for Bigots, Mark Leyner's MY COUSIN, MY GASTROENTEROLOGIST is the next suggested title for those of professed bigotry.  Other than the fact that it is a difficult book: I had to read it twice to try to come to some  understanding of it and have probably failed.  Other than clearly written by a person with a considerable vocabulary and a large store of literary references, I am still not settled on a category.

Clearly, any bigot would be appalled after the first few pages and would find it extremely difficult not only to follow it, since it can't be followed in the normal manner, and with subject matter that will appear on almost every page to be profane, vulgar, sexual, and in most others manners extremely upsetting to bigotry.  There is something in it for all bigots to be pissed about.  It is as if it were met specifically to annoy and will certainly be banned even though there is not one  representation of actual coitus.

I see that several references call the work "postmodern".  Most references I see of it online consider it a positive treatment of something or other such as "Every sentence is a stand alone short story . . ." or "a bunch of weird stream of consciousness shorts that don't quite go together . . . ".  I don't see much positive in the book, but am willing to give it a chance to be banned or burned with the best of them. 

The book is incoherent and appears to be purposely so.  It is a Jackson Pollock painting.  It has no flow, nothing linear.  It is a complication of references and events with no connection.  Simply by having a sentence containing his cousin the gastroenterologist here and there throughout the book does not render it coherent; it has no sense of a story or stories or snippets of personality; it is simply a jumble of random thoughts and references most of which may reflect the postmodern human being (at least to the mind of our author).  Most bigots want coherence and words they understand.  They will get neither from MY COUSIN, MY GASTROENTROLOGIST.  

The book will be banned and burned on two bases:  one it has language unacceptable to bigots and two, it is beyond their comprehension.  When a work is not understood, bigotry is at its finest.  We don't understand it, ergo ban it and burn it.  Be done with it and do not allow our children access to something that actually takes work and effort to understand; life's too short for that sort of thing.

This series of Books for Bigots has an inherent contradiction:  They are books that bigots ought to read and they are books that will  be banned and burned by any serious bigot.  As with many things in life, a significant contradiction exists between what should be done with the book and what will be done with the book.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

 

Let's 3-D Them

 LET'S 3-D PRINT THEM

As a follow-up to Guns for Third Graders, having introduced an idea with obvious value, a suggestion to alleviate some of the cost of the new emphasis on being able to shoot people while in school, it would seem the ideal solution is to introduce the 3-D firearm production to high school shop classes.  I remember my shop class in high school although I will not disclose the project that I was required to display in the high school gym.

As an aside only, our shop class, in toto, was required to go to the principal's office for disciplinary purposes - twice. It was quite a room full of would-be scholars and we were severely reprimanded as a group for untoward behavior not only concerning our shop class projects but for our lack of respect for the shop teacher.

But back to guns for third graders.  The cost of providing firearms schools wide, if falling on parents, could be a special burden not willingly undertaken by those of modest income.  So, rather than making stupid stuff in shop class, shop was required in my high school and most of us did not want to be there as was apparent by the occurrence of visits to the principal's office, the kids will learn how to make guns.

After all, the money for materials and the machinery necessary to concoct whatever is being concocted in shop class, is already available.  So the limited resources available to the school will not be stretched any further than already stretched.  And politically, we know that our current state administration and legislature would support the idea of a  "Shop of Guns".

"Shop for Guns".  It is a catchy little phrase that would quickly catch on.  It could even become a mantra for the new effort to arm our student bodies with firearms making it very dangerous indeed for a potential mass shooter to enter the doors of the school building with the intent of committing mayhem and otherwise being disagreeable.  So folks, let's give this idea some serious consideration and possibly get some legislative proposals prepared for the next legislative session.

Richard E. H Phelps II

Mingo