Sherman Alexie still hates ebooks

[whitearrow]

Good to know that Sherman Alexie is still a jackass.

[purl4peace]

Boy, that guy was annoying. I really wanted Colbert to point out that there are other ways to acquire and read books besides "your local bookseller". Has the guy ever heard of "lending libraries?"

I think Colbert just didn't really have a dog in the ebook fight so didn't really push back. He probably doesn't know enough to have a position either way. And I guess I really don't know why the author was on an anti-ebook tear since as far as I could tell, his book (and other books have nothing to do with ebooks or technology etc).

And the paranoia part was just plain silly. I could have sworn that there was something in the patriot act or some other act that allowed the feds to track our reading materials -- particularly through libraries and book sales. Or am I the paranoid one?

[=X=]

Are you guys done? Man what a bunch of whining babies. "Mommy why does he get to make racial slurs and we don't! Waah it's not fair"

If anything this should show this joker shouldn't be taken seriously and his work boycotted for such statements.

But to cry because one culture can't make such a racial slur, shows ignorance, immaturity and cowardice. If one is truly above racism then one should argue how wrong the person is for such a statement instead of crying about why one cannot be just a racist.

What he said was straight out wrong, no justification for that. And I like the way Colbert handled the issue, he promptly ended the interview. I can't stand this guy and his racist view but I have no desire to reciprocate his lowly stature

=X=

[meraxes]

Originally Posted by Crowl

Their obligation is to be entertaining and ideally funny with any informing being incidental to that aim

Informing - yes, but not misinforming. If they veer into serious subjects I'd expect a serious attitude to these subjects. And this "veering" is not an accidental tangent, I assure you. They discuss beforehand the topics they are going to talk about. If the host is not prepared for a serious talk on a serious subject, he should not stray into it.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by meraxes

Can anyone imagine a white guy saying something like that about Indian culture? He'd be strung from the nearest lamppost before the program was over.

Not only that Sherman has been a total ass about any other culture -- particularly white writing about indians.

Google for some of his other interviews.

[meraxes]

Originally Posted by =X=

Are you guys done? Man what a bunch of whining babies. "Mommy why does he get to make racial slurs and we don't! Waah it's not fair"
...

But to cry because one culture can't make such a racial slur, shows ignorance, immaturity and cowardice.
=X=

Look, I don't give a toss one way or the other. Where I live, everyone's white. And all the non-white folks I've met and worked with have been no different from all the rest. I have no axe to grind, so if it's moral high ground you're after, go hang this shit on someone else. But looking at all that's going on in America and Britain from the outside, I just can't understand how otherwise perfectly sensible people tolerate this manipulative bitching about alleged racism, and then let those very people who do the bitching get away with murder. Rules should be the same for everyone, or there's no point having them. Either everyone tiptoes around the race issue, like the whites do, fearing that the wrong word said as a joke could cost them a career - or no-one does, we all forget about this foolishness and apply sensible standards of judgment to everyone, no matter what the colour of their skin.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by whitearrow

Good to know that Sherman Alexie is still a jackass.

[LDBoblo]

Can't say I'm a big fan of Mr. Alexie's opinions, but gosh there are some insecure, defensive, even hostile people on these boards. Some of you guys make me feel downright well-adjusted.

[Crowl]

Originally Posted by meraxes

Informing - yes, but not misinforming. If they veer into serious subjects I'd expect a serious attitude to these subjects. And this "veering" is not an accidental tangent, I assure you. They discuss beforehand the topics they are going to talk about. If the host is not prepared for a serious talk on a serious subject, he should not stray into it.

The odds are that they producers probably decided that some guy having a little rant was likely to be more interesting to the audience than him blandly plugging his book.

If you want to complain about any dereliction of duty when it comes to reasoned debate then its the network news and the cable news networks that should be the target of your ire since it's supposed to be their job to report the news rather than dwelling on such trivia as golfers in car crashes or children in balloons.

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by =X=

Are you guys done? Man what a bunch of whining babies. "Mommy why does he get to make racial slurs and we don't! Waah it's not fair"

If anything this should show this joker shouldn't be taken seriously and his work boycotted for such statements.

But to cry because one culture can't make such a racial slur, shows ignorance, immaturity and cowardice. If one is truly above racism then one should argue how wrong the person is for such a statement instead of crying about why one cannot be just a racist.

What he said was straight out wrong, no justification for that. And I like the way Colbert handled the issue, he promptly ended the interview. I can't stand this guy and his racist view but I have no desire to reciprocate his lowly stature

=X=

It isn't whining - it's topic drift. I don't really care whether someone is white, black, red or yellow (Is that even *close* to what this whole skin-color thing is about?) when what really matters in any interpersonal relations is whether the people involved can (or cannot) find common ground.

What I find interesting in your comments is the easy willingness to hurl charges of immaturity, ignorance and cowardice. Say what???

That Sherman Alexie cannot find anything to like about e-books is a prime example of his aspirations to Luddism. That Alexie cannot understand that creating a book-oriented version of 'Buy Local, Eat Local' would only serve to reduce his admittedly small market demonstrates his own ignorance. (Does anyone think that a 'Buy only local authors' works' would increase his market share?)

Derek

[=X=]

Originally Posted by meraxes

...we all forget about this foolishness and apply sensible standards of judgment to everyone, no matter what the colour of their skin.

Yes I agree 100%, such foolish statements should not be tolerated for any group.

=X=

[meraxes]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

Can't say I'm a big fan of Mr. Alexie's opinions, but gosh there are some insecure, defensive, even hostile people on these boards. Some of you guys make me feel downright well-adjusted.

Well argued mate. And well done too having a go at "some of us guys", without quite saying who it is you mean, or why. Shows you can really stand up for what you believe.

[=X=]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

It isn't whining - it's topic drift. I don't really care whether someone is white, black, red or yellow (Is that even *close* to what this whole skin-color thing is about?) when what really matters in any interpersonal relations is whether the people involved can (or cannot) find common ground.

What I find interesting in your comments is the easy willingness to hurl charges of immaturity, ignorance and cowardice. Say what???

That Sherman Alexie cannot find anything to like about e-books is a prime example of his aspirations to Luddism. That Alexie cannot understand that creating a book-oriented version of 'Buy Local, Eat Local' would only serve to reduce his admittedly small market demonstrates his own ignorance. (Does anyone think that a 'Buy only local authors' works' would increase his market share?)

Derek

Hey I'm not defending this guy, if anything I agree with the latter part of you post, I really dislike the guy, he comes across to me as a Luddite, racist, condescending jerk.

My post was that the response to his racist comment to say "hey why can he get away with it and not us" is just not the correct approach. It's an argument for entitlement.

What I'm stating is no it's was not okay for him to make the statement and it should not justify others to make similar comments either.

=X=

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by meraxes

Well argued mate. And well done too having a go at "some of us guys", without quite saying who it is you mean, or why. Shows you can really stand up for what you believe.

Why would I want to be so specific when being vague allows me to only offend those insecure enough to take it personally?

[meraxes]

Originally Posted by Crowl

If you want to complain about any dereliction of duty when it comes to reasoned debate then its the network news and the cable news networks that should be the target of your ire since it's supposed to be their job to report the news rather than dwelling on such trivia as golfers in car crashes or children in balloons.

How do you know that I don't "target my ire" at the news channels too? I do it all the time, as a former BBC journalist. But neither do I believe myself to be qualified to lecture grown-up people about what they should want to see on the news. If they want their car crashes and balloons, let them have the crashes and the balloons. So long as there's a place to get some serious news too, I don't mind. However, it isn't right to pass on someone's ill-informed opinions on matters of serious public interest without challenging them, by way of entertainment. The guy should have been told to stick to his bloody book. The media have a duty not just to entertain but also to inform.