View this email in your browser

A NEWSLETTER WITH AN EYE ON POLITICAL MEDIA

To keep receiving this newsletter, please update your preferences by
logging in to
"My Account " on the Prospect
website and clicking the "Manage Newsletters
" link.

Republicans 'Quietly Pursue' Traditional Policies, Says Politico

Like what? Insurrection?

The New York Times recently ran a piece entitled "With Disruption and
Trolling, Greene Reflects G.O.P.'s Shift
"
that focused on the style of newly elected Georgia Congresswoman
Marjorie Taylor Greene. It explained that while she had been "expelled
from her congressional committees as punishment for conspiracy mongering
and violent statements, she embraced her exile, declaring that she had
been 'freed' from the obligation to participate in the drudgery of
legislating."

I suppose it was good of the Times to mention why Greene had been
expelled, though the piece declined to say just what her "conspiracy
mongering and violent statements" consisted of. (Here
's
a short greatest-hits package.) That was more than could be said of the
article's all-but-contextless references to Madison Cawthorn, Lauren
Boebert, and Newt Gingrich. Its thesis-that "A growing number of
lawmakers have demonstrated less interest in the nitty-gritty passing of
laws and more in using their powerful perches to build their own
political brands and stoke outrage among their opponents"-is hardly
false. And its stated concern, that "The trend has contributed to the
deep dysfunction on Capitol Hill, where viral moments of Republicans
trying to troll their colleagues across the aisle-often in the mold of
President Donald J. Trump, who delighted in being disruptive, often on
social media-generate far more attention than legislative debate" is
also true. The problem is the use of euphemisms such as "less interest"
and "contributed to" in the above. Honesty would demand terms like:
"purposely dishonest," "hate-mongering," "lunatic conspiracy-minded,"
and "deliberately designed to ensure that hundreds of thousands of
people die unnecessarily."

This lack of concern for the substance behind the made-for-media
shenanigans invites what comes next. You guessed it: an intellectually
indefensible feint toward bothsidesism. You come across "conservatives

who say they want to be

their party's answer

to Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, a
second-term progressive who has excelled at using social media to raise
money and hurl barbs at political opponents." Never mind that AOC has
come up with detailed policy plans that actually address the concerns
she so effectively articulates. That would upend the false equivalence
that the Republicans set up and the Times plays along with, even when it
is covering the very phenomenon that demonstrates its falseness.

As if to demonstrate what it can do when its reporters and editors are
apparently in the mood, the Times ran another piece headlined
"Assaulting the Truth, Ron Johnson Helps Erode Confidence in Government
"
that not only provided the evidence to support its thesis, it
contextualized the argument it sought to make as more than just a media
strategy. For instance: Johnson's "continuing assault on the truth,
often under the guise of simply 'asking questions' about established
facts, is helping to diminish confidence in American institutions at a
perilous moment, when the health and economic well-being of the nation
relies heavily on mass vaccinations, and when faith in democracy is
shaken by right-wing falsehoods about voting."

This is the kind of reporting we desperately need if we are to defeat
the neofascist forces seeking to destroy our democracy. We see precious
little of it owing to a number of reasons, but most prominent among them
are the mainstream media's addiction to the sort of bothsidesism cited
above, and its members' belief that politics is just theater in which
"the play is the (only) thing."

Politico recently offered a lengthy examination of the Republican
commitment to "Owning the Libs
"
to the exclusion of everything else. This piece too is filled with false
equivalences, though they are implicit and usually put in the mouths of
the pundits it quotes. But it also gets to a useful comparison between
today's Republicans and yesteryear's threat to democracy, Joe
McCarthy. Like the disgraced Wisconsin red-baiter-misnamed a
"red-hunter," though he never actually exposed Communist spies anywhere
and never even really tried-today's Republicans seek to undermine
our democracy and rights to freedom of expression and association. Also
like him, they rely on the mainstream media's commitment to the
ideology of objectivity-or at least its facsimile-to publicize their
lies and conspiratorial musings as if they are no more or less valid
than the truth. This piece, committed to the tried-and-true mores of
Washington insiderdom, claims that the contemporary Republican Party
"offers bread and circuses for the pro-Trump right while Republicans
quietly pursue a traditional program of deregulation and tax cuts at the
policy level." Really? That's all? What was January 6
?
What was all that gassing of peaceful protesters and threatening to turn
U.S. troops on them
?
What about the assault on voting rights under way virtually everywhere
Republicans enjoy legislative majorities
?
This is "a traditional program of deregulation and tax cuts"?

This is not just old-fashioned lipstick-on-a-pig-style source greasing.
Given the threat we face, this sort of irresponsible obfuscation
functions no differently than if its practitioners had made a conscious
decision to run interference for those who would destroy our democracy,
rather than to expose them.

And now for something completely different, here's a guest comment I
prevailed upon the novelist and critic Brian Morton
to write on Blake
Bailey's new Philip Roth biography
:

The poet said we're forced to choose between perfection of the life or
of the work. Philip Roth liked to tell the world that he'd chosen
perfection of the work. "Usually I write all day," he told David Remnick
in a New Yorker profile in 2000. "I'm like a doctor and it's an
emergency room. And the emergency is me." If you Google "Philip Roth"
and "monastic," you get upward of a million results.

One of the many virtues of Blake Bailey's Philip Roth: The Biography
is that it shows that as work-obsessed as Roth was, he had plenty of
time for other things. Love affairs, breakups, intense friendships,
volcanic feuds. Bailey shows us a Roth the force of whose personality is
almost overwhelming.

Bailey writes winningly, and he has just the right attitude toward his
subject. He's like a friend who can lovingly call you on your
bullshit. The catch is that although he tells you everything you ever
wanted to know about the life, he has little to say about the work. As
Joshua Cohen, speaking in the voice of the departed Roth, puts it in his
clever review

in Harper's, "MY BIOGRAPHER HAS NO INTEREST IN MY WRITING!!!!" You
could come away from the biography with a picture of Roth as a guy who
had a lot of sex, held a lot of grudges, and somehow popped out a book
every couple of years. I'm not sure Bailey can be faulted for not
being a literary critic. But it would have been nice if he'd tried to
capture something, if not about the writing, then about the writing
process-the immense labor involved in writing 31 books, the feats of
patience and solitude and stamina, and the extraordinary aesthetic and
intellectual resourcefulness involved in undertaking so many aesthetic
transformations. Everyone always claims that it's impossible to say
anything interesting about a writer at work, but I think the titanic
artistic struggles Roth engaged in at his typewriter might be the stuff
of high drama in the hands of the right biographer.

Roth wasn't one of those great writers who marry their astonishing
gifts with astonishing curiosity about the souls of others. He wasn't
Chekhov; he wasn't George Eliot. (Here I had some critical remarks
about Roth and women, but Alterman wouldn't let me keep them.)

But he was a great writer. I can't think of another contemporary
novelist who produced as many masterpieces as Roth did. Everybody's
got their own personal list; mine would include Goodbye, Columbus,
Portnoy's Complaint, The Ghost Writer, Patrimony, and Sabbath's
Theater, with another four or five books just a step and a half behind.
For much of his career, critics used to get on him for staying with the
same supposedly small set of concerns. This was foolish. Newark was to
Roth what Paris was to Balzac, what Yoknapatawpha County was to
Faulkner, what Cairo was to Mahfouz. I don't think these comparisons
are exaggerated. His work will last. ✦ ✦ ✦

ODDS AND ENDS

* Want to see Bruce with the Stones singing "Tumbling Dice
"?

* How about a video with the Stones hamming it up
backed by (a sadly unseen)
Sonny Rollins on sax?

* Or just Mick and Keith singing "Country Honk
"?

* And here's Mick with a kitten
.

* Feeling classy? Check out this version of Beethoven's Moonlight
Sonata (third movement).

* And here's "Pink Houses
" with John Mellencamp and
guess who? (I'm up there in the last row.)

Need a movie you've never heard of to watch this weekend? Here are
three that come with an Altercation seal of approval:

* Mr. & Mrs. Adelman
,
free on Prime or Kanopy, and in French.

* Between the Lines
,
directed by Joan Micklin Silver, who died recently and does not get
nearly the credit she deserves for being a feminist pioneer in the indie
film world.

* Mistress America
,
my favorite of Greta Gerwig's performances, with a terrific Noah
Baumbach script.

See you next week.

~ ERIC ALTERMAN

Donate to The American Prospect

Eric Alterman is a CUNY Distinguished Professor of English at Brooklyn
College, an award-winning journalist, and the author of 11 books, most
recently Lying in State: Why Presidents Lie-and Why Trump Is Worse
(Basic, 2020). Previously, he wrote The Nation's "Liberal Media"
column for 25 years. Follow him on Twitter @eric_alterman

[link removed]

HOUSEKEEPING NOTE: You are receiving "Altercation" because you signed up
for newsletters from The American Prospect.
To continue this subscription, please update your inbox preferences by
logging in to "My Account "
and clicking the "Manage Newsletters
" link.

To receive this newsletter directly in your inbox, click here to
subscribe. 

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

 

[link removed]

YOUR TAX DEDUCTIBLE DONATION SUPPORTS INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM

Copyright (C) 2021 The American Prospect. All rights reserved.
_________________

Sent to [email protected]

Unsubscribe:
[link removed]

The American Prospect, Inc., 1225 I Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC xxxxxx, United States