Esto no lo esperaba (pero tampoco me sorprende)

Gavin McInnes, creador de Vice Magazine, etc., enumera diez razones por las que el aborto es cosa de las ‘90. Desde luego no dice nada nuevo y no es que uno vaya a reconocerle una autoridad especial por ser una especie de santo patrón de la comunidad hipster, pero aprecio la delicadeza que tiene de destacar lo siguiente:

10. MANY WOMEN ARE AGAINST ABORTION
I’m not sure why it’s a given that abortion is feminist. Almost half of American women describe themselves as pro-life. Are they sexist? Most Americans are pro-life and it can’t be as simple as them not wanting women to have rights. The women who call themselves pro-lifers are not fools and they obviously see this issue as much more nuanced than the liberal babies make it out. So let’s stop all the tantrums and start calmly discussing it.

Sigue justo aquí. (Y se declara pro-vida aquí.)

Hitchens (Peter) contra Fry (Stephen)

El encuentro al que se refiere el siguiente texto tuvo lugar tras una ceremonia celebrada en memoria de Christopher Hitchens. Escribe Peter Hitchens.

The discussion turned into a more general debate about the dangerous intolerance (as I see it) of the anti-God faction for believers. It seemed pretty clear to me that Mr Fry was unschooled in the subject, often mistaking his opinions for facts, and given to circular argument and cliché. It was rather like dealing with some of the more obdurate and dogmatic contributors to this blog, in fact. He was rescued by the incomprehensible and (to me) unwanted intervention of another person in the bar. This baffled us both so,  that it derailed the argument and gave Mr Fry the opportunity (no doubt welcome to him) to break off. Later he bumbled up to me again, and when he tried to summarise our conversation to the person I was then talking to, I said that we had established that he thought he knew several things that he didn’t actually know.

La columna completa puede leerse aquí.

Stephen Fry abordó el encuentro del siguiente modo, vía Twitter:

Hitch had the knowledge without the conceit, Peter has the conceit without the knowledge

(¡Si sólo el ingenio fuera sabiduría! En todo caso me parece que se trata de un retweet. No encuentro el original.)

Añadido: OK, creo que el tweet original de Fry decía como sigue:

The sad element was Peter Hitchens, thought bro might have at least a 10th of the wit, charm & intelligence. Just a joyless Daily Mail clod.

Añadido (26-4-2012): la última entrada de Hitchens en su blog en el Mail on Sunday (no el Daily Mail, como sostenía Fry) deja claro, de una vez por todas, cuál fue el tweet que Fry publicó -y luego borró- sobre el infeliz encuentro.

Sobre la joven Eula Varner

El primer día, [el hermano de Eula] Varner obligó al caballo a buen trote, para acabar pronto, pero en seguida sintió todo aquel cuerpo, que ni aun abandonado sobre una silla renunciaba a expresar una invencible aversión a las líneas rectas, sacudirle contra sus espaldas las turgentes curvas que lo componían. Se había así entrevisto a sí mismo, en el acto de transportar no solamente a través del horizonte de la aldea, sino hasta, como el sol, a través del inmenso proscenio del mundo habitado, un rollo calidoscópico de elipses mamíferas.

Opinaba su hermano:

-Se comprende por qué ha aceptado enseguida ir a pie hasta el bazar. Si se pudiera conseguir que se cruzara cada cien metros con un hombre, iría a pie hasta casa. ¡Es como una perra! En cuanto ve unos pantalones, empieza  a portarse como una perra. ¡Se la huele! ¡Se la huele, a diez metros!

Pues:

Era como su padre: incorregiblemente holgazana, aunque lo que en él era constante, su atareada y alegre indolencia, en ella era una fuerza efectiva, inquebrantable y hasta despiadada. Sencillamente: Eula, por su iniciativa, no quería saber nada de moverse, exceptuando el ir y volver de la mesa y el levantarse y acostarse de la cama.

[…] Eula tuvo las acostumbradas muñecas. Ella las colocaba sobre sillas alrededor de la suya, y así se quedaban sin que ninguna presentase un aspecto de vida mayor o menor que la otra. […] Al principio pensaron que se trataba de un caso de atraso, que ella no había alcanzado el debido grado de desarrollo físico femenino; pero muy pronto comprendieron que su indiferencia por los juguetes la provocaba el hecho de que, para hacerlos mover, hubiese tenido que moverse ella también.

William Faulkner, El villorrio (Eula, Libro primero, capítulo primero). (El villorrio, en Amazon.)

El abordaje

Interviewer

Some people say they can’t understand your writing, even after they read it two or three times. What approach would you suggest for them?

William Faulkner

Read it four times.

Sigue la entrevista de ayer.

—–

Actualización: lo digo en serio; no voy a volver a citar la entrevista. Es demasiado buena, así que lo más razonable sería copiarla íntegramente aquí, o más sensatamente, advertirte que no puedes dejar de leerla.

C.S. Lewis sobre la actitud frente a Jesús (y a la figura de Jesús)

Wirt [entrevistador]: You wrote 20 years ago that “a man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God; or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool; you can spit at him and kill him as a demon; or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

Would you say your view of this matter has changed since then?

Lewis: “I would say there is no substantial change.”

Vía @cslewisdaily sobre lo que llama “la entrevista final”.

William Faulkner y el Nobel

Faulkner won the 1949 Nobel Prize for Literature for "his powerful and artistically unique contribution to the modern American novel." It was awarded at the following year’s banquet along with the 1950 Prize to Bertrand Russell. Faulkner detested the fame and glory that resulted from his recognition. His aversion was so great that his 17-year-old daughter learned of the Nobel Prize only when she was called to the principal’s office during the school day.

De la entrada de la Wikipedia sobre William Faulkner.

—–

A propósito:

I’m a failed poet. Maybe every novelist wants to write poetry first, finds he can’t, and then tries the short story, which is the most demanding form after poetry. And, failing at that, only then does he take up novel writing.

Interesante. De una entrevista de Faulkner a The Paris Review.

Más (cómo duele, particularmente la primera cifra):

INTERVIEWER

Is there any possible formula to follow in order to be a good novelist?

FAULKNER

Ninety-nine percent talent . . . ninety-nine percent discipline . . . ninety-nine percent work. He must never be satisfied with what he does. It never is as good as it can be done. Always dream and shoot higher than you know you can do. Don’t bother just to be better than your contemporaries or predecessors. Try to be better than yourself. An artist is a creature driven by demons. He don’t know why they choose him and he’s usually too busy to wonder why. He is completely amoral in that he will rob, borrow, beg, or steal from anybody and everybody to get the work done.

Procedente de la misma entrevista.

—–

De acuerdo, sé que no debería, pero me siento, por así decir, obligado.

No. The writer doesn’t need economic freedom. All he needs is a pencil and some paper. I’ve never known anything good in writing to come from having accepted any free gift of money. The good writer never applies to a foundation. He’s too busy writing something. If he isn’t first rate he fools himself by saying he hasn’t got time or economic freedom. Good art can come out of thieves, bootleggers, or horse swipes. People really are afraid to find out just how much hardship and poverty they can stand. They are afraid to find out how tough they are. Nothing can destroy the good writer. The only thing that can alter the good writer is death. Good ones don’t have time to bother with success or getting rich. Success is feminine and like a woman; if you cringe before her, she will override you. So the way to treat her is to show her the back of your hand. Then maybe she will do the crawling.

La comparación final (success is like a woman) habría destruido su carrera en caso de manifestarla en la actualidad, una señal muy esclarecedora de qué tipo de mundo podrido es la modernidad.

El asesinato de Channon Christian y Christopher Newsom

Un alumbramiento. Es bueno sacarlo, por eso lo comparto.

According to the testimony of the Knox County Acting Medical Examiner Dr. Darinka Mileusnic-Polchan at the subsequent trial of Eric Boyd, Newsom was repeatedly sodomized with an object and then blindfolded, gagged, arms and feet bound and his head covered. Barefoot, he was either led or dragged outside the house to a set of nearby railroad tracks. He was shot in the back of the head, the neck, and the back, and his body then set on fire.

Channon’s death came after hours of sexual torture, medical examiner Mileusnic-Polchan testified. Channon suffered horrific injuries to her vagina, anus and mouth. She was not only raped but savaged with “an object,” possibly a broken chair leg, the doctor testified. She was beaten in the head. Some type of chemical was poured down her throat, and her body, including her bleeding and battered genital area, likely scrubbed with the same solution – all while Channon was alive, the forensic expert said. She was then “hog-tied,” with curtains and strips of bedding, her face covered tightly with a small trash bag and her body stashed inside five large trash bags before being placed inside a large trash can and covered with sheets. Channon died slowly, suffocating, the medical examiner said.

Sigue aquí.

El Papa sobre la Resurrección de Jesucristo

La luz hace posible la vida. Hace posible el encuentro. Hace posible la comunicación. Hace posible el conocimiento, el acceso a la realidad, a la verdad. Y, haciendo posible el conocimiento, hace posible la libertad y el progreso. El mal se esconde. Por tanto, la luz es también una expresión del bien, que es luminosidad y crea luminosidad. Es el día en el que podemos actuar. El que Dios haya creado la luz significa: Dios creó el mundo como un espacio de conocimiento y de verdad, espacio para el encuentro y la libertad, espacio del bien y del amor. La materia prima del mundo es buena, el ser es bueno en sí mismo.

Sigue aquí.