« Left-Right Pirouette | Main | But Is It Art? »

October 10, 2007

Comments

dearieme

Astonishing, Mick: commie proves untruthful.

Dr.Dawg

Come on. He got the reference wrong, but the quotation absolutely right. And Amis is not even being particularly subtle or sly in his phrasing.

"What can we do to raise the price of them doing this?" he begins, and then comes his list of collective punishments. Does he say, "Well, that's extreme, of course, and we shouldn't give in to our emotions; here's what we should do instead?"

No, he does not. That's what he puts on the table, and he doesn't take it off. So, in the final analysis, he got his source wrong. Big whoop. Amis said what he said Amis said--that's the main point.

Dom

Actually, when I read the interview just now, I assumed the phrase "Well, that's extreme, of course, and we shouldn't give in to our emotions" was pretty much understood. Why didn't he actually say it? Well, it's an interview, and he is allowed to ramble and sometimes things get left out.

Notice he says "There’s a definite urge – don’t you have it?" This implies, to me at least, that he is speaking of base emotions. He admits to it, but knows better than to follow it.

DaninVan

Dr. D; for a guy (you) who takes such relish in throwing peoples words back at them, as well as denying suggestions of your own utterings, this is rather suspect logic (on your part).

PooterGeek

http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/philip_hensher/article3041082.ece

Dr.Dawg

PG:

So Philip Hensher conceded that Eagleton was right about the anti-Semitism.

DV:

I have no idea what you're talking about. But Amis was quoted correctly by Eagleton, and I'm afraid res ipsa loquitur. Pretty hard to rationalize his comments, although I'm sure you'll try. Indeed, the extra context provided by our host here makes my point. Amis is obviously advocating precisely the measures that he's, er, advocating.

DaninVan

Do you even read your own stuff, Dr.D? Look at what you wrote in answer to the well researched piece by P. Hensher. A mere suggestion on his part, becomes total absolution on your part, for Eagleton's piece.

This from the linked interview:
"“And now, for instance, it’s very important to me that my daughters are fully Jewish by Jewish law, which is matrimonial. So I’m pleased they’d be the first to be summoned.” That’s rather a peculiar thought, isn’t it? “It is, but let’s not mess about – that’s what they are. So there’d be no shilly shallying there. Especially since what we’re living through now, among other things, is a huge recrudescence of anti-semitism. And, with my two daughters, it makes me feel great solidarity with them.”

Yup, that there's some kinda anti-semitism!

Dr.Dawg

I read Hensher, to whom I was pointed by PooterGeek:

"There is plenty of evidence to suggest that he was somewhat anti-Semitic."

That's more than "mere suggestion," but the parsing some of you people do could turn anything into anything else. As, for example, Amis' list of collective punishments, spun from the notion of an "urge" that he suggests everyone shares, is now being wished away by those who are embarrassed by it.

Mick H

Eh? It's Kingsley about whom Hensher suggests there was evidence of his anti-Semitism, not Martin. And if you can't see the difference between making a proposal and acknowledging an urge, there's really not much point in any further discussion.

Dr.Dawg

Sheesh. Will you guys get your Ames (pl.) straight, please?

Yes, MH, I know it was Kingsley that Hensher was writing about. It was Kingsley that, by extension, got into the discussion because Eagleton segued from Martin to Kingsley, attacking the latter for, inter alia, anti-Semitism. I read Hensher, and noted that Eagleton seemed to be right about one aspect of Kingsley's character, at least. DV jumped in to tell us that "a mere suggestion" is how we are supposed to translate "plenty of evidence."

But back to The Quotation from Amis fils. It's a lengthy quotation going on and on about the various humiliations he wanted to visit upon innocent British Muslims. In the haste to give Eagleton a kicking because he's a Marxist, you're all giving Amis (Martin) an undeserved pass. What was the point of saying those things, if he didn't believe them?

The comments to this entry are closed.