the personal is NOT political

***WARNING: the following is extremely bitchy. read at your own risk. the author wishes to assure all readers that in publishing this post he wishes to convey no real hostility. arrogance, yes. disdain, no.***

sigh, mr. cohen, just, sigh... inane and petty commentary of the worst sort, resorting to personal and semantic attacks because you have such untenable positions...

---on why it took me so long to respond (at least, as measured in blog time), and why I've not blogged lately---

I apologize, I've been busy the last couple of days and blogging has fallen by the wayside. life seems to be moving very quickly right now, in every aspect. I had class all afternoon, and then I rushed downtown to see Prof. George Chauncey give a lecture on the drag balls of NYC and Chicago at the Chicago Historical Society. afterwards I spent a pleasant evening at Starbucks, reading for one of the four papers I've got due next week. blogging will be light until next wednesday, I'm afraid (and thereafter I hope to be inebriated for at least some time). unless, of course, procrastination kicks in. but with 35 pages and six days to go, that seems a luxury I cannot afford.

---on slander---

as for the charge that I slandered you, I'd like to quote the following from your post on monday, may 17th at 11:55 PM in which you say:

"Random rant for today: I can't believe I'm going to be voting for George W. -- I hate to waste my vote, but the stench emanating from this election is becoming unbearable. Perhaps Kerry will keel over dead and we can have a Democrat who isn't a spineless, pandering, wimpy Arabist bastard. One can always hope -- then again, death doesn't have to stop the man from winning -- at least not in Illinois or Missouri." (emphasis mine)

now I do indeed have plenty of "academic snob" in me, as you suspect, but it doesn't take an academic, or even someone who likes to think of himself as one, to read that statement as a pretty clear indication of your voting preference for herr bush.

given that's no longer your stated preference--a change in position that members a certain "g. o." party might find akin to a certain lack of backbone found in mr. kerry but which I will excuse given the "stench" of the election--it appears that there is no need for us to debate.

---on me being existentially wrong---

for the record, there's no such thing as existential "wrongness." not only becuase existentialism is inherently subjective and really doesn't care or believe in "right" or "wrong" (even in the sense of "true" or "false") when it comes to things like politics and/or brad pitt, but also because you talk about me being "inherently wrong." and any good existentialist will tell you that, as existence precedes the essence, there is really no inherent "wrongness." sorry. maybe you should start asking your gf what she's been learning in class before trying to sound intelligent by using the word "existential"

---on brad pitt---

I'm trying to remember why I should care if you're attracted to brad pitt. lacking such a justification, and any desire to argue about something as utterly subjective as looks (ms. maltz and I usually have notoriously differing opinions on such matters and still manage a rather polite discourse), I'll move on, and hope you will, too.

(for the record, matt damon is cuter, imho)

---on banal, useless, and personal commentary---

I find it hard to believe that as such a self-styled intellect you're so incapable of finding fault with what I say that you're reduced to critiquing (a) my punctuation and (b) my use of abbreviations.

Sartre having established in 1948 in his famous essay, "What is literature" that language in prose is indeed a tool for understanding ideas, I really must say that I'm dismayed at your critiquing my posts on the level of "poetry" and not of "prose" (i.e., you did not read past the words on the page and seek to understand their ideas, taking words designed to be used as tools and making them the subject themselves).

if there was ever an example of "intellectual torpidity" it's the miring of oneself in personal (e.g., "inherent wrongness") and stylistic attacks that don't even rise to the level of engaging in a debate over ideas. your post, petty and semantic waste of server space on blogspot that it is, reflects "intellectual torpidity" of the worst sort, because it pretends not to be intellectually torpid but in fact is, without even realizing it. I might understand if my words had become an impediment to understanding, but I doubt seriously that this is indeed the case.

as for your first "suggestion", I'll say that I think it's simply an indication of the more informal nature of blogging and specifically my writing on this blog. furthermore, on a more poetic level, I appreciate the aesthetic, especially with sans-serif fonts such as the one used on this page. and given that neither the dates nor the title of this blog as it currently appears on this webpage have capitalization consistent with your suggestion, I'm going to have to dismiss it.

as for the second suggestion (my use of abbreviations), I'll say that, blogging and sleeping time being more scare than I'd prefer, and my work load being rather much larger than I'd prefer, they provide a convenient way to express myself quickly and informally. after all, if I had to sit down and write a formal post each time I wanted to say something here, I'd not post nearly as often.

in that vein, it's time for me to stop critiquing senor cohen's misguided attempt at intelligent blogging, and sleep. but, really quickly:

---on hyperlinks in blogging---

do us all a favor (this isn't just monsieur cohen): just after the "href=..." but before the '>' put the following

target="_blank"

so that your link opens up in a new window, which is easier for everyone.

also, be sure that your hyperlink starts with http:// (e.g., http://cabalofstyle.blogspot.com), otherwise the computer will interpret it as a relative hyperlink (which you don't want).

oh, and one last thing:

---it's "tarasen," not "tarsen"---

I realize that doesn't look "past" your words, but when I'm the idea signified by the word, I think I get to object (and, after all, I made a similar mistake and apologized).

good night everybody!