.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Sundries
...a sweatshop of moxie

Monday, December 04, 2006

"Be Adequite"

By now, everyone has heard of the passing of director-auteur, Robert Altman this past November.

You know me by now: I refuse to trample on someone's grave by proclaiming my opinions on said person if I had disliked them when living. I am that most square of persons -- someone who thinks everyone deserves a moratorium from carping, at the moment of their death.

(All bets are off for Castro, though)

But this blogpost is not about Robert Altman, but rather the reaction of one of his biggest fans, apparently, had to his death. Namely, the young vivacious Miss Lindsay Lohan.

Remember when she was an up-and-coming Hollyweird starlet, with plenty of talent for a 13-year-old, a Dakota Fanning with spunk?

I read, what?

Yeah, me either.

Like many child actors, sadly, the ginger-mopped one had to breeze through her childhood without all the entailing educational rigours.

For it was, when she heard of the devastating news that her mentor, Robert Altman, had passed on to his glory that she promptly fired off an official press release via her Blackberry.

That it was slapdash, to say the least, is understood. No doubt, it was heartfelt for all that, too.

She genuinely seemed agrieved that Mr. Altman had died all too soon, a man whom she regarded as a father or grandfather, or sometimes both at the same time, according to her message.

How someone can be two things at once, is best left to be explained by catechism tutors.

And since they're explainin' stuff, perhaps we could ask them what Miss Lohan meant by this sally:

"Make a searching and fearless moral inventory of yourselves' (12st book) -everytime there's a triumph in the world a million souls hafta be trampled on.-altman Its true. But treasure each triumph as they come."

Where does one start? Or even want to? Yet, there's so much to glean from this one sentence.

12st book clearly is a 12 century book somehow referenced by Altman to her, once. The open quotes which bracket the beginning, but not the end of her quote, are a sight for sore eyes, it must be said though.

Then, in a flurry to connect the two thoughts, she was obviously quoting something Mr. Altman himself must have said often, since her errant hyphens end with his name at the end.

And may I say, I love the usage of "hafta". I hafta use that one day. Real soon.

Now, I don't know about you, but though I could make fun of her grammar and syntax until the proverbial bovines come home, I want to concentrate for a moment on exactly what it was that she quoted.

For in that little sentence, is contained a lot of the personal philosophy which guides those of progressive tilts.

"Every time there is a triumph in the world, a million souls have to be trampled on."

That, my friends, is the overwhelming thought by which political liberals like Mr. Altman feel most bothered.

The idea that triumphalism is particularly odious, since it never takes into account all those who bore the cost of that triumph.

It is but a short step from protecting people for their own good, to the ethos of political correctness and moral equivalency, erring always on the side of those perceived losers, itself a condenscending thought.

She actually makes a very sound point, after you shake the cobwebs of illiteracy from her statement.

For all her wanton stupidity, in her posthumous reply to Robert Altman, she understands that what he said may be true in its most extreme sense, but that she for one will, when presented with a triumph, savour the moment and not let it go unremarked.

So, okay. She's no Milton or even Sidney Sheldon.

But poor Lindsay, with her hedonistic buffoonery and lack of self-control, knows that life is not all a column of wins and losses.

She could have been one of the many whose life did not meet with triumph, but been just another freckly-faced gypsy actress, trying to make her way through life by her own wits, however meagre.

That kind of person may not stop to think, but she certainly knows how to give thanks, even without a spellcheck.

Good on her.

Now, if you can decipher what she meant by her ending salvo, of "Be Adequite", I'll give you a cookie.

Me, I'd rather not be...adequate, thankyouverymuch.

I hafta to be triumphant.

P.S.: Oh boy. Though my own comments about her are acerbic, they are no where near as mean as the ones on this board.

My favourite comments include:

"suddenly paril doesn't look like such a moron."

"er... "paris"

"God! I'm still so pissed off. Somebody with actual talent drops dead and this irrelevent piece of trash has to pop open her jumbo box of crayolas and start mouthing words out loud while she puts crayon to paper. This outburst is more offensive than Richards or Gibson. I demand an apology."

(quoting Lohan) "....to of been able to work with Robert Altman"

"But apparently not lucky enough to HAVE been able to learn to write.

Christ, a room full of chimps with typewriters could've come up with something more coherent."

"12st? Which translates to "twelvest"? She obviously has LD injuries from fallling down stairs and/or having her head constantly slammed against the bed headboard."

"Jesus Christ, you people suck. You have to realize that regardless of whether or not she is sleeping with lots of men, partying all the time and doing drugs and drinking she doesn't deserve any of our judgement."

(And my favourite)

"Honey, Word has spellcheck and grammarcheck. But you hand wrote that letter the other night with your pink fuzzy pen, laying across your semen-stained sheets and eating a box of Ding-Dongs because, well, that's what fat Hollywood sluts do late at night after getting trashed. Trash."

*LOL*

These comments could well be called, "the revenge of the non-triumphant".

It's a shame Mr. Altman apparently never realised losers can talk back. RIP.

8 Comments:

  • Well, we don't pay starlets to spoke good the English any mooore than we pay noookular physicists for they're ability to fill out a bikini! So LL is charmingly inept, sorry, unept, in her use of the motha tongue. We forgive.

    Adequitely Yers,

    Rooon

    By Blogger Ron, at Mon Dec 04, 11:48:00 am GMT-5  



  • Well, we don't pay starlets to spoke good the English any mooore than we pay noookular physicists for they're ability to fill out a bikini! So LL is charmingly inept, sorry, unept, in her use of the motha tongue. We forgive.

    Adequitely Yers,

    Rooon

    By


    In a society whose youth is now text-messaging sentences like "ne1" and "wot skl u go 2", anything is possible.

    Me, I don't get hung up too much on spelling. I make too many mistakes, despite being a rather good speller.

    It's the thought process that reveals a lot about one, dnt u agree r0n?

    Cheers,
    Victoria

    By Blogger vbspurs, at Wed Dec 06, 04:25:00 am GMT-5  

  • All bets are off for Castro, though

    Why? Were you ever his mistress? ;)

    But seriously, what about Pinochet? Now that's the person I can't stop badmouthing. I regret he escaped justice and died out of prison. Boo.

    By Anonymous Elko, at Sun Dec 10, 08:32:00 pm GMT-5  

  • Poor Lohan ... the wind makes her head whistle!

    Pinochet may have been a bad man, but he gave up power, on his own. Still waiting for that action from fidelito. Loved the images of folks dancing in the streets at the news of Pinochet's death. Another custom I pray never makes it to the USA.

    By Blogger benning, at Sun Dec 10, 09:54:00 pm GMT-5  


  • Why? Were you ever his mistress? ;)

    But seriously, what about Pinochet? Now that's the person I can't stop badmouthing. I regret he escaped justice and died out of prison. Boo.


    For lovers of democracy, BOTH Pinochet and Castro are abhorrent.

    The problem occurs when a person decides to bad mouth one dictator over another, for whatever reason (I know the reason, you know the reason, we all know the reason -- and that reason is whether they are "closer" to our politics, than the other was).

    I didn't like General Pinochet, but Pinochet's junta was in no way comparable to the atrocities of Fidel Castro.

    - 3,000 tortured and exiled v. millions imprisoned, tortured, executed, displaced.

    - Handed over power after his junta was voted out of "office" versus almost half-a-century of island house arrest.

    - Economically guided his country to its stablest period ever versus stagnation and decay.

    I can't tell you what to feel, Elko, but for me, the choice is not even close.

    Cheers,
    Victoria

    By Blogger vbspurs, at Tue Dec 12, 04:41:00 pm GMT-5  

  • Pinochet may have been a bad man, but he gave up power, on his own. Still waiting for that action from fidelito. Loved the images of folks dancing in the streets at the news of Pinochet's death. Another custom I pray never makes it to the USA.

    I dislike what the Chileans did, actually.

    But I can't be a hypocrite and say the Cubans wouldn't do the same thing.

    Look at my earlier blogpiece in Cafe Versailles. They weren't exactly playing it cool.

    Cheers,
    Victoria

    By Blogger vbspurs, at Tue Dec 12, 04:43:00 pm GMT-5  

  • I didn't like General Pinochet, but Pinochet's junta was in no way comparable to the atrocities of Fidel Castro.

    - 3,000 tortured and exiled v. millions imprisoned, tortured, executed, displaced.


    Umm, Vicky, that woulde be 3,000 killed or disappeared. The tortured and persecuted would be anything between 30,000 and 100,000. This is still less than Castro, but is in the same ballpark, totally comparable. However, counting victims is irrelevant - life is priceless, and even one killed is intolerable, one too many.

    The reason Pinochet is much worse than Castro is that he did it in the name of democracy and anti-communism, using exactly bolshevik methods. The goal does never justify the means, never did, never will. The means pollute the goal. You can't imagine what a blow for democracy around the world Pinochet's coup was.

    Castro, OTOH, did not stray far from the mold - he did exactly the same things Communists coming to power did in let's say East Germany or Poland. That was much less than what Stalin did, or even the commies in Bulgaria in '45-'55. The reason why Castro is so much demonized is that he did it in America's backyard, without their permission, unlike Eastern Europe. All this IMHO, of course.

    By Anonymous Elko, at Wed Dec 13, 03:59:00 pm GMT-5  

  • Umm, Vicky, that woulde be 3,000 killed or disappeared. The tortured and persecuted would be anything between 30,000 and 100,000. This is still less than Castro, but is in the same ballpark, totally comparable.

    No, Elko, it's not the same ballpark.

    Because Pinochet did it for 13 years.

    And Castro, nearly 50.*

    On an island.

    Where people couldn't escape overland unlike Chile.

    Where the rest of the intelligentsia around world wasn't clamouring to receive Pinochet's victims.

    Where Hollywood didn't make a movie about this situation, unlike Jack Lemmon in Missing.

    It's just not the same, at all.

    *You may not be able to qualify the suffering of human life, and I would agree with that, but you can and must compare timelines.

    Of course, I said that after mentioning that I too disliked Pinochet, and what I was upset about were those people who would badmouth one dictator over the other.

    The point is, they are both equally abomimable -- but the same people who dislike Pinochet, give Castro a pass. And vice-versa.

    That's horrible.

    As to your views, that's fine of course.

    Me, I would just say I am an anti-Statist, free-market traditionalist...

    ...who loathes Communism.

    That explains much.

    Cheers,
    Victoria

    By Blogger vbspurs, at Thu Dec 14, 06:08:00 pm GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Who linked Here:

Create a Link

<< Home


 




Advertise on blogs
British Expat Blog Directory.