Tuesday, November 08, 2005

 
Okay, I've been trying not to say anything about Maureen Dowd because she already gets more attention than she deserves. I've never been able to read any of her columns without falling asleep halfway through, and my standard is not that high -- I've been caught reading the phone book for fun at times.
So I'm not really qualified to react to what she might be trying to say. But it burns me up when Dowd and the rest of the "Sex in the City" crowd claim to speak for intelligent women anywhere.
The thing is, I haven't yet seen any evidence that Dowd is intelligent. It certainly isn't reflected in her writing. If this is what passes for wit in New York, I'm glad I live in New Mexico.
I'm a bit younger than she is, but I remember the seventies when it was considered charming for a good-looking chick to be able to babble about the books she'd read. I played that game myself for a while, but I didn't make it my profession.
Maybe that was a mistake.

Comments:
Don't you find the NYT oped stuff less interesting since Brooks supplanted Friedman as the top star? Frank Rich is pretty good but too wordy.
 
Yes. I pretty much agree about Maureen Dowd. Nice to hear Im not alone. The phrase that comes to mind is one thats been hung on me occasionally: Often wrong but never in doubt.
You know, though, its like your blog. I think Maureen Dowd comes up with something to say, whether she has it all digested or not. Sometimes just seeing it in print helps decide things. Does she ever change her mind? I cant remember.
 
I read the Times on line. Brooks, Friedman and Dowd are now part of something called "Times Select" which you have to pay for. I briefly considered signing up, then realized I don't really miss them.
Columns by Friedman and Brooks are often picked up a day or so later in the local paper, or if I'm really wondering what they had to say on something I go read it at the library. I more often agree with Freidman but I like the way Brooks reasons.
Frank Rich is hard to find in the online version so I've sort of gotten out of that habit too.
Lately I'm more likely to read op-eds and columnists in the Boston Globe, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune or Slate. Or even the Wall Street Journal which is sort of the flip side of the Onion....
 
well. that explains it. We also watch Brooks on PBS so I kind of get my fill of him, but he does try and he is definitely articulate and not as argumentative as some. In the words of one of a famous young woman WHY CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG? Im feeling especially that way with the US Congressional battle over Iraq. I guess at least they are talking about it - screaming about it? - discussing what to do. Wish they had done that before we headed over there.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?