First off, I wasn't talking about Palin, but rather Paglia's
interpretation of Palin. I've repeatedly said that I don't think that
Palin is dumb or naive. I don't think she is an uneducated hick. I
find many of her views to be odious and her political persona to be
nauseating. I could understand why it would appeal to others and don't
think I underestimate it.

As for the Shakespeare, Paglia said:

"Finally, as a lover of poetry (my last book was about
that), I savor every kind of experimentation with standard English —
beginning with
Shakespeare, who was the greatest improviser of them all at a time when
there were no grammar rules.

Many others listening to Sarah Palin at her debate went into conniptions
about what they assailed as her incoherence or incompetence. But I was never
in doubt about what she intended at any given moment. On the contrary, I was
admiring not only her always shapely and syncopated syllables but the innate
structures of her discourse — which did seem to fly by in fragments at times
but are plainly ready to be filled with deeper policy knowledge, as she
gains it (hopefully over the next eight years of the Obama presidencies)."

So yes, she was directly relating Palin's speaking to Shakespeare. I
think her analysis of Palin's oratory is ridiculous. As for her
analysis of Palin's place within Feminism, we can certainly disagree.
Paglia has a lot of history in the feminist movement, a great deal of
it seemingly spent railing against other feminists rather than shaping
a positive vision of her own. That being said, she also has
contributed to the cannon of sex positive feminism, so I certainly
would not dismiss her out of hand. She's no Betty Dodson, Susie Bright
or Carol Queen, but I respect her years of thinking and writing so
we'll just have to disagree regarding Ms Palin.

Judah

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> She didn't say Palin was a modern day Shakespeare. She said Palin represents
> a branch of feminism that has been ignored by the repressive orthodoxy of
> paleo-feminists like Gloria Steinem. Read the letters that follow on the
> next page and you will see why. Conservative, small-town, religious women
> connect with her. They see themselves in her in a way they could never see
> themselves in ideologically narrow-minded women like Steinem. I especially
> love how Paglia blasted Katie Couric, calling her out for the harpie that
> she is. What I like about Paglia is that she is intellectually honest.
>
> Underestimate Palin at your own peril. Women like Paglia may be voting for
> Sarah Palin for President one day.
>
> Brooks has clearly bought into the liberal line that Palin is a frontier
> rube with no brains and no skills. Sure, he's a conservative, but he's also
> part of the Northeast elite professional class that Paglia loves to ridicule
> for its insularity and self-aggrandizment.
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 9:16 PM, Judah wrote:
>
>> Palin is a modern day Shakespeare and Madonna was the international
>> birth of sex positive feminism.
>>
>
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to 
date
Get the Free Trial
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:273136
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to