Counting sand, shunning Boy Scouts, talkin’ young, &c.

March 12, 2002 8:45 a.m.

ou really can’t parody places like the University of Michigan, and I could spend full time reporting on its follies. I suppose one should resist. But let’s dip in, just for a second — just in case someone has forgotten what it’s like on American campuses.

In Ann Arbor, it’s time for “THE SEVENTH ANNUAL EXHIBITION OF ART BY MICHIGAN PRISONERS!” (I’m quoting from a university circular.) As the notice goes on to explain, “This event has taken place every winter since 1996. It is prepared for all year by prisoners throughout Michigan and is a very meaningful event, revealing the many-sidedness and the talent of men and women who are mostly stereotyped by the media and by many of our politicians.” A premise of this University of Michigan project is that prisoners are wrongly incarcerated, the victims of racism, capitalism, and so on — of America, in a word.

One of the most striking parts of the university’s festival is the “Sandcounting Lab.” Let me explain. No, let the University of Michigan explain: “Interdisciplinary artist Alison Cornyn’s installation at the Natural Science Building Greenhouse gives you an opportunity to meditate upon the two million men and women incarcerated in United States prisons and jails. The United States has twenty-five percent of the world’s prisoners. This is an opportunity to have quiet, focused time counting grains of sand and reflecting upon this fact. To reserve an individual session of ten minutes or longer in the lab, contact” — a nice woman named Becky.

To repeat: “This is an opportunity to have quiet, focused time counting grains of sand . . .”

You can’t beat the sand-counting, but bear with me a second longer. The university speaks of the “prison industrial complex,” illustrating the ideology that runs throughout. A panel scheduled to take place on March 7 was called “Words from the Inside Out,” and it promised “an opportunity to hear the often forgotten, but nonetheless passionate, voices on the inside.” This was “a reading of the prose and poetry of inmates in Michigan’s prisons and detention centers, as well as works from Detroit public high schools.”

That joining of Detroit public high schools with the state’s prisons was a little unnerving to me.

There’s more — so much more — but I’ll stop now.

Hang on, one more item, Ann Arbor-related. Wouldn’t you know? The Washtenaw County United Way voted to cease giving money to the Boy Scouts. Yep. Everybody at the university is real happy about that, too.

Remember: Prisoners, good. Boy Scouts, bad.

Only in Ann Arbor. No: Only in America.

On to something more cheery: Let’s do a little language. As regular readers know, I’m a nut about words, slang, expressions — including youth-speak. I spotted a prize specimen of youth-speak in an article about the return of Olympic gold medalist Sarah Hughes to high school. One of Sarah’s excited classmates explained to a reporter, “This is so, like, ‘Whoa,’ for us . . .”

I adore that expression. In fact, I plan to use it in my music criticism: “This was so, like, ‘Whoa’!” It says a great deal.

Speaking of criticism: Clive Barnes is one of the top critics of the last half-century, an authority on, and arbiter of, theater, ballet, and other important things. In the New York Post recently, he had a fascinating little article on what a critic should be, and how one should respond to critics. He says intriguingly — and not at all conventionally — that “the critic’s role is to be an advocate, not a judge. The good critic is trying to persuade you to agree with his viewpoint . . .” Barnes ends, “Critics might merely be nice-writing nuts, but trust one who is at least a nut on your particular wavelength.”

I must say, this is one of the most refreshing and thought-provoking items I have read in a long while. And I’m still not 100 percent sure what to think about it (a good sign).

As some of you may have read, Harvard has just sullied itself by signing on an official of the Castro regime to be a professor. This Cuban enforcer is to be — this is so delicious — the Robert F. Kennedy Professor at the School of Design! All in all, Harvard’s act is so disgusting — a pissing in the face of all the people persecuted by the regime that this man represents — I can barely write about it.

Luckily, Ross Douthat, a Harvard senior, can. His recent article in the school newspaper certainly speaks for me. I should tell you that Ross was an intern here at National Review. The first time I heard of him, I received an e-mail from someone recommending him. The Subject line read: “Ross Douthat, Superstar.” I soon learned the truth of that.

The latest cool thing for colleges and universities to do is to sponsor trips to Cuba: They think it’s daring, and they know it’s politically correct.

The University of Connecticut is sponsoring such a trip for this summer, and its flier chirps, “The Republic of Cuba is known for its dynamic music and dance traditions, diverse religious communities [yes, Castro has really helped out them!], and intriguing history.” Etc.

Now, I’d like to comment only on this: that phrase “the Republic of Cuba.” Obviously, the university just can’t help adding this extra insult. I don’t expect them to say “Communist Cuba” or “the island suffocated by the beast Castro.” But wouldn’t merely “Cuba” do? Do they have to cooperate in the lie that this totalitarian system is a “republic”?

At Olympics past, Bob Costas, on NBC, would speak of “the German Democratic Republic” — meaning, Communist Germany, East Germany. He would say it over and over, as if in love with the very sound of the phrase.

When free people abet the lies of oppressive regimes, the truth has to fight all the harder.

One more Cuba item: A reader contributes a perceptive letter:

“Over the years, I’ve found that one of the most foolish things journalists say about Castro, among many, is that he’s ‘outlasted’ any number of U.S. presidents. Worse, they often say it with a kind of perverse admiration, a kind of ‘Don’t underestimate this guy, he’s outlasted eight U.S. presidents’ attitude. Well, totalitarian dictators tend to last, yes. U.S. presidents participate in free elections (and I don’t think Castro is term-limited). Journalists like to use this one for other despots as well, like Saddam Hussein. Saddam ‘outlasted’ George H. W. Bush, right? The Iraqi people had no say in that.

“When Castro finally kicks it, how many times will this garbage be parroted, about ‘outlasting’ all those presidents?”

Many, many times, my friend.

I am disappointed — bitterly disappointed — to hear White House and Republican spokesmen say, when confronted with a charge about the 2000 election, “It’s time to move on, the country long ago was ready to move on,” etc. This is Clinton language. “Move on” is Clintonspeak for, “Yes, you’re right and we’re guilty, but we don’t want to address the subject, and don’t you look silly for obsessing?”

Republicans must not engage in this. When challenged or needled about the Florida post-election, Republicans should patiently reiterate the facts, which are very much on the GOP side. These matters aren’t like milk — they don’t have expiration dates. To use this “move on” nonsense is to appear to concede something, or to duck something: and, given the history of Clinton, that is an asinine thing for Republicans to do.

A headline in the New York Post the other day said (in classic tabloid fashion): “Dropout Shocker: 30% Don’t Graduate HS” (meaning, high school).

In a strange way, I was sort of relieved by that headline: I’d been under the impression that everyone graduates, that schools just pass everyone on, no matter what they know, even if they’re illiterate. I thought that dropping out was a thing of the past: Why drop out, when the school will give you a diploma for nothing?

A very weird reaction to a very sobering headline, I grant you, but there it is.

This is a subject we were supposed to get off, but I’ll continue just a wee bit. I suggested that “pro-choice,” meaning to be in favor of abortion rights, was the greatest lexical feat in politics. Someone else said: “No, it’s Karl Marx’s term for a free economy: ‘capitalism.’” I conceded that that was the all-time champeen, bar none.

But still others want to play. Someone suggested “Star Wars,” for missile defense, and that is, of course, an oldie but goodie. “Star Wars” came out of Ted Kennedy’s office, and I believe that the ghost and attack dog Bob Shrum coined it (though this has not been established). It is one of the most underhanded things ever done, of course: A missile defense is meant to defend against nuclear attack. “Star Wars” implies something totally different. And wasn’t Reagan supposed to be the Hollywood president, obsessed with movies? And here the Democrats pinned a frivolous and misleading movie label on a subject of utmost seriousness: on a matter of life and death, really.

Remember the bumper sticker “Don’t militarize the heavens!”? I think it was required on every Ann Arbor car, along with “Think Globally, Act Locally,” “Hands Off My Uterus!,” “U.S. Out of El Salvador!,” and so on. I am convinced that “Star Wars,” as a derogatory term, set back missile defense in this country by a considerable amount.

Still another reader brought up “reproductive rights” (for abortion): nice, especially with the alliteration and all, but not terribly effective. (Still, Democratic and some other politicians love it — anything to keep from having to utter the word “abortion.”) (If an abortion is not so bad — if it just removes a meaningless blob of protoplasm — why stay away from that word, any more than one would stay away from “appendectomy”?)

Another reader writes, “How about the word ‘adult’ to describe pornography (as in ‘adult bookstores,’ ‘adult entertainment,’ etc.)? ‘Adult’ used to mean something to aspire to: Shakespeare and Mozart, for example. If a city has to allow pornographers to do business, why not take the word ‘adult’ away? Force them to use terms that convey truth in advertising, such as simply ‘pornography,’ or ‘smut.’”

Last, a reader says, “Don’t forget ‘homophobe.’ This is a classic case of a word invented to further a social cause, whether it is accurate or not. ‘Homophobe’ is an epithet that says, ‘What you say is unimportant, because you say it only because you hate homosexuals, and you hate homosexuals only because you’re afraid of them, and you’re afraid of them probably because you’re afraid of your own homosexual tendencies.’ That’s a lot of attack wrapped up into a single word. No wonder almost everyone even thinking of criticizing homosexual practice or homosexual politics in any way begins by saying, ‘I’m not a homophobe’ — which of course only gives undeserved legitimacy to the word and further establishes it as an epithet to be avoided at all costs.”

Let’s end with a most amusing letter. I described the other day the Our Town currently playing in New York that uses a 9th-grade girl as the Stage Manager (and narrator) because, according to the director, no one is interested in hearing what “an older white male” has to say.

A reader tells me:

“This reminded me of a local production of Peter and the Wolf I saw two weeks ago. The voracious wolf ate the duck, as he would, but when it came time for the Russian soldiers to dispatch him and hang him upside down from a pole with his bloody tongue lolling in the dirt, Peter was made to intervene, shouting, ‘Don’t shoot! Don’t shoot! Just tie him up and help me take him to the zoo!’

“I’m trying to cut back on the number of things I become enraged at on any given day, but meddling with the intentions of an author of a perfectly good and illustrative story does it for me every time. Luckily, the narrator inadvertently made the situation humorous by bobbling his lines. ‘Don’t shirt!’ he shouted (shirted?) at the critical moment. He was an older white guy, but I think he might be excused: The rule is that audiences won’t cotton to lectures from white men unless they’re mental defectives (viz. Forrest Gump, Rain Man, I Am Sam, Awakenings, any film starring Robin Williams, etc., etc., etc.) And I think he was distracted by the American Sign Language lady next to him translating the story for all of the deaf people listening to the symphony. They can really flail during the shouting parts. Not that they are distracting, don’t take me wrong! I think a wildly gesticulating person with a spotlight on her is a definite improvement to any performance!

“A zoo in the Siberian forest! And lest you think that wolves are higher up in the PC pantheon of preferred pets, the narrator assured the audience that the duck was not only still alive, but quite happy, and could plainly be heard quacking in the wolf’s tummy. Inexplicably, she could also be seen dancing at the back of the stage during the final scene. No harm, no fowl, excuse the pun. I was confused, and my 10-year-old son was disgusted. To get him to the symphony, I’d promised him a positive body count.

“We now have a new PC Gone with the Wind, a Morte d’Arthur with Morgana as the good guy, a new feminist Holy Bible (‘Jesus wept. Verily, his feminine side was revealed’). What’s next? Atticus Finch as the child molester and Boo Radley as the protagonist? Gatsby giving away all of his filthy money to fund AIDS research in Africa? Thucydides’ history of the intervening peace between the Peloponnesian wars? Castro as the heroic savior of an oppressed people? Oops, as you reported, Oliver Stone is taking care of that one.

“Thank you for much enjoyment.”

No, thank you.