By Wlady Pleszczynski on 2.26.02 @ 12:03AM
Excuse games people play -- when they're not being offensive.
KOFI SWEETENER: TAP Loose Canons columnist Jed
Babbin sends in a Short Shot: "The 'London Times' reports
that U.N. Secretary General (and Lil' Billy Clinton's surrogate
commander in chief of all U.S. forces) Kofi Annan is warning
against our possible attack on Iraq. Before I was in doubt. This
clinches it. On to Baghdad! And don't spare the horses."
BLOCK THAT EXCUSE: Liberals say the darnest
things, at least when they're caught red-handed. My favorite recent
excuse comes from Michael Finkel, the "New York Times" contributor
who fabricated a recent major offering from west Africa for the
paper's Sunday magazine. According to the
Washington Post," three years ago Finkel said in an interview
he rarely takes notes but simply writes up his impressions each
night after he returns home. But after the recent fabrication was
discovered, he claimed he actually took copious notes, though the
Times's note to readers had him telling the paper he wrote the
piece without consulting his notes. So what happened to those
copious notes? Finkel told the Post's Howard Kurtz: "In order to
break through a writer's block I put my notes aside and attempted
to write what I knew ... with a sense of flow and feeling." Then he
added: "I know it sounds odd." If only Evelyn Waugh were around to
build on this scoop.
SOMETHING BORROWED: Doris Kearns Goodwin's story
keeps evolving. On Saturday the "New York Times" ran a major
news
story on Goodwin's new admission that recent revelations of
Goodwin's unacknowledged "borrowing" from another historian barely
described the extent of those borrowings. Now there are hints that
"several" of her "new books" also contain "additional repetitions"
from other authors. It's all too confusing for the nonscholar. But
unlike last
month, when Goodwin described her research method as a solo
operation, this time she referred to a team of researchers who, for
all we know, not only helped discover the "borrowings" but perhaps
were also responsible for causing them in the first place. Not that
Goodwin is blaming them -- the trick is to create just a whiff of
possibility. In any case, Goodwin insists it was all accidental in
the first place. Meanwhile, at least she's backed down from another
excuse of sorts. Last time she said her new research method would
include a scanner. No mention of it this time. Maybe one of those
researchers informed her a scanner would only introduce new
errors.
Much of the reaction to the latest on Goodwin focuses on her
effort to release the story on a Friday so that it would be printed
up on a slow-news Saturday. If that was her calculation, it only
served to raise questions about her motives and thus added to the
sense she faces growing problems.
Overlooked in the wake of Saturday's story was its revelation
that in her earlier settlement with the historian whose book she
had "borrowed" from without attribution Goodwin agreed to refer to
that book in her new acknowledgments as "the definitive biography"
of its subject. So now we have a historian praising a book not out
of intellectual conviction but out of legal obligation. Sounds like
a topic the American Historical Association should discuss at its
next convention.
RICH IN LOVE: Joe Conason and Gene Lyons must have
been asleep at the switch: How could they let Frank Rich have first
adoring crack at David Brock's new memoir? The piece
in Sunday's "New York Times Magazine" reveals Rich in all his
splendor, smearing and slandering anything that moves and is
thought to be right-wing. ("A Richard Mellon Scaife-financed
talk-show bloviator and cut-and-paste writer" is how he describes
William Bennett.) He seems forever stuck in 1994 or any of Bill
Clinton's better years, still lashing out at conservatives as
"gargoyles and lunatics." A depressing if telling commentary on a
boomer big shot. Before Clinton came along, Rich was universally
regarded as the most influential theater critic in New York. But
for reasons best known to himself and his analyst, he gave it all
up to become a political hack. In one of his early efforts he outed
Brock as payback for Troopergate, which caused the "Washington
Post" to comment that "few journalists have been subjected to an
assault as scathingly personal as that mounted last week by Frank
Rich." Rich may have lacked the staying power to do important work,
but he compensated by making sure he and his crowd stayed in power.
Good luck to all of them.
topics:
Books, Iraq, Africa