July 20, 2006

silhouette3.JPG From the desk of Jane Galt:

That's not funny!

A number of people have assumed that in titling my post "Tee hee" I was inviting laughter at Glenn Greenwald.

I wasn't. Honest. I was inviting laughter at James Joyner's rather deft deadpan. Is there a distinction? In my mind, yes.

I hate laughing at people. Even people I disagree with, like Glenn Greenwald. Even imaginary people -- I often turn sitcoms off just before the climax of a comedic scene, because I find it excruciating to watch people being embarassed. If Glenn Greenwald created a sock puppet, I wouldn't want to spend time making fun of him; I would feel bad for him that he got caught. I root for movie villains. I even feel bad for Deb Frisch, whose lunatic and morally outrageous comments have now cost her her job and probably her mental health. I am ever saddened by the fact that we live in a world of permanent consequences. Just look at what I wrote about Michael Bellesiles when he got caught, years ago. And I REALLY despised what he did.

So one can say he tried to lie his way to fame and fortune, and got a much-deserved comeuppance. And yet, I feel sorry for him. Just as I feel sorry for Monica Lewinsky and everyone else who sought fame and fortune, and found it in very public humiliation. We've all had the feeling, I imagine, of not being quite able to make it. We've all been tempted to push the envelope, go out on a limb, do something maybe not quite right just to put ourselves over the top. Thank God we didn't. We found a job or a field where we were more qualified, or we learned to compensate, or we accepted that we weren't ever going to win the Nobel Prize. But is it really so hard to imagine yourself taking that first step -- making up a couple entries in a table, maybe, to make your case look a little better? And when no one caught it, to make up a little more, so your case was really dazzling? And when people responded by showering you with praise for your results, is it hard to imagine how intense the pressure must have been to keep serving them up? People on HNN have been jumping all over a history professor for suggesting that this is a tragedy for Bellesiles -- that the peer review system served him as badly as it served us -- but really, couldn't we have saved ourselves a lot of grief by catching this the first time? Bellesiles might have been spanked and sent back to do better research, instead of rewarded in a way that demanded he produce ever more outlandish results. And how hard is it to imagine the hell he has been living in over the past few years, desperately lying to cover his previous lies, breathing a little easier as the questions receded for a time. . . but then the noose inevitably closing in? He didn't behave well, and he doesn't deserve mercy. But when we see a man destroy himself by inches, I hope we can muster up some compassion. His life is effectively over. He will never work again in his chosen field. He will never publish again. He stands revealed to everyone whose opinion ever mattered to him as a liar and a fraud. Frankly, I find it hard to imagine what he will do, since professors rarely have a lot of money, and their skills are somewhat rarified. Most of the professors I've worked for couldn't even type or file well enough to work in an office.
Posted by Jane Galt at July 20, 2006 04:32 PM | TrackBack | Technorati inbound links
Comments

I think it was pretty clear that your “Tee Hee” was directed at Joyner’s deadpan which was pretty funny. That being said, while I too don’t like to see people humiliated on sitcoms or in real life, for some reason I have a tough time feeling sorry for Deb Frisch and Glenn Greenwald who both by their behavior seem kind of creepy.


Posted by: Thorley Winston on July 20, 2006 04:56 PM

Barry Bonds was a star who got pissed that others were getting more attention than him. So he went heavily into steroids and became the best baseball player of his generation, maybe ever. But it was illegal, and almost nobody thinks of his records as legitimate. Now, he gets routinely booed.

Barry, meet Michael. Michael, meet Barry,

Posted by: Roger Sweeny on July 20, 2006 05:13 PM

I cannot comment on Greenwald since I know little about the particulars and care even less. But I did read the comments that Frisch wrote and posted for all to see.

Frisch gloried in imagined violence against an innocent man, and even fantasized about someone sexually abusing a child. I think some humiliation and a ruined professional life is the very least that she deserves. In fact, I wouldn't mind if she had to stand up in front of a judge and try to justify her remarks.

You might be uncomfartable with the humiliation heaped on Frisch, but I look at it as an admirable way to discourage this kind of behavior. It certainly is a better solution than helping the survivors try and put their lives together after violent fantasy evolves into horrifying action.

James

Posted by: James R. Rummel on July 20, 2006 05:14 PM

"I often turn sitcoms off just before the climax of a comedic scene, because I find it excruciating to watch people being embarassed."

Or those horrific telephone pranks DJs play on the radio... I can't listen to them.

Posted by: Sebastian Holsclaw on July 20, 2006 05:15 PM

"Married With Children" (1987-1997) got me through high school, college, and grad school.

Posted by: D------ on July 20, 2006 05:58 PM

What's wrong with laughing at him? He did something idiotic and surely deserves it. Actually, what he deserves is to slide back into obscurity, which hopefully he'll do after this dies down.

Posted by: brett on July 20, 2006 06:11 PM

I'm a wuss compared to you tough people. I find sitcom embarassment so traumatic that I have been avoiding watching them at all since I Love Lucy was in its first run.

Posted by: triticale on July 20, 2006 09:08 PM

Jerry Lewis movies have that effect on me.

Posted by: Twill00 on July 20, 2006 10:17 PM

I'm stunned that I actually have something in common with Jane: I am also stressed out for fictional character's embarrassments. I also feel awful about watching characters do sneaky, shady things, like Julia Roberts' machinations in 'My Best Friend's Wedding.'

Posted by: Klug on July 20, 2006 10:23 PM

I only cringe at fictional embarassments when I see myself in them. I could never watch "The Wonder Years" because that Savage kid was like a smoother, more sophistcated version of myself at that age.

On the other hand, Ross on "Friends" was such an incompetent loser, I always thought he deserved what he got.

Like Klug, I cringe at despicable characters on screen, which is why I can't watch "Seinfeld."

But real-life embarassments? Don't like them except in rare cases. Someone has to really piss me off before I'll enjoy watching their fall. Deb Frisch qualifies, Bellesiles does not.

As a final note, can we come up with a better word than "partner" for gay boyfriends? What, are they running a little accounting firm from home? "Sweetie, where'd you put the Intel audit file?" "It's on the dresser where you left it!"

Posted by: Rob Lyman on July 20, 2006 11:21 PM

I—fifth, is it?—the inability to watch sitcoms. I have a lot of trouble watching most comedy movies and shows because I find the stupid embarassments the characters get into excruciating. I have no problem with blood, violence, regular stupidity, or most other things. But I had to walk out of Elf because it was just too painful.

Posted by: Jadagul on July 21, 2006 05:01 AM

I've found that things are only funny when they come at someone's expense. I have no problem laughing at others because I have no problem laughing at myself. In the cases of Greenwald and Frisch you can't laugh at them because pathetic is not funny.

Posted by: CuriousTexan on July 21, 2006 09:51 AM

"[Professor's] skills are somewhat rarified."

More like professor's skills are somewhat limited.

Present company excepted, of course.

Posted by: G. Hamid on July 21, 2006 11:29 AM

Sadly it looks as if we will hear little about Greece...

Posted by: Tyler Cowen on July 21, 2006 12:06 PM

Okay, I'm going to be the designated contrarian here. I think laughing at someone's embarassment or humiliation can be very funny. I think intentions matter. If someone screws up trying to advance or protect their interests (i.e. Bellesiles), I can feel some sympathy even while acknowledging the need to punish their actions. On the other hand, Deb Frisch's embarassment seemed to be more of a case of open hostility. She wasn't trying to do anything for herself, she was trying to hurt Jeff Goldstein. In the case of Glenn Greenwald, everything I've seen of his writing suggests that he's basically...well...an insufferable jerk. And I think that's why so many are taking so much delight in leaving him twisting in the wind.

Posted by: Bill Dalasio on July 21, 2006 02:42 PM

Yeah, this is why my wife and I can't watch "The Office" (American version -- no cable so never saw BBC show). Funny, funny, funny. But you squirm for the characters, especially the boss. So generally one or the other of us doesn't have the stomach for it. Too bad!

Posted by: Sanjay on July 21, 2006 02:48 PM

Jane~

I'd be curious as to what issues you disagree with Greenwald on and why. I think his positions on the Administration's overreaching on surveillance and executive authority are pretty solid, particularly after Hamdan.

I find that most of the posters on right-wing blogs who have taken after Greenwald have not even attempted to address the merits of these positions, or have done so in the "if you question the Administration, you are supporting terrorists"-style of argument.

Posted by: Steven Donegal on July 21, 2006 07:52 PM

Is Greenwald the same guy who posts at at certain websites under assumed names praising himself?

Posted by: Moose on July 21, 2006 09:09 PM

That giant whooshing sound you just heard was a stampede of single guys reading Megan's "personal ad" leaving because she can't laugh at really stupid people. Fortunately, Phil Hendrie still offers a backstage pass and years of archives to entertain us.

Posted by: Brad on July 22, 2006 10:24 AM

Speaking of watching characters embarrass themselves: last night we watched "The Germans" episode of Fawlty Towers. I had to watch the Germans part from behind my hands, as if it were a scary movie. I could not stop cringing.

Posted by: Angie Schultz on July 22, 2006 11:26 AM

I think Angie's comment may have intuited why I haven't gone to see very many movies in quite sometime: 'cringe comedy' is painful to watch.

Posted by: Klug on July 22, 2006 12:30 PM

Yet another echo for "I cannot watch characters being embarassed on TV or in movies." I find that taking a walk around the room while listening helps me get through it.

I can't do that in books, which is why something like Anansi Boys is traumatic.

Posted by: Zubon on July 22, 2006 07:29 PM

Afaik, Monica Lewinsky wasn't aiming for fame and fortune. She wanted to have an affair with President Clinton and talk about it with one of her friends.

Posted by: Nancy Lebovitz on July 22, 2006 07:50 PM

Steven asks:

"I'd be curious as to what issues you disagree with Greenwald on and why."

Hmmmm....I don't know, maybe she finds his habit of misrepresenting people (now it seems even himself) and saying nasty things about them such as:

"...just some of the violence-inciting rhetoric and hate-mongering which has become a staple of the right-wing blogosphere. It cites examples from bloggers such as Dean Esmay, Misha, Megan McCardle (a/k/a Jane Galt), and Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds...."

Yes, Glenn Greenwald thinks the lovely Megan McCardle is a violence inciting hate monger. Don't you feel a bit dirty just being on her site? This is part and parcel of what he does, and infects even the long winded posts on less personal matters. My guess is that might be an example of the kind of things she disagrees with, amongst others.


Posted by: Lance on July 22, 2006 10:34 PM

Bellesiles may be the first phoney of any note taken down by the blogosphere. I remember Clayton Cramer had a major hand in exposing him. I liked what he had to say afterwards. Excerpt:

One of the hazards with the political homogenity of the professoriate at the first rank schools is that they don't get a chance to find out what people outside their narrow circle think, and they tend to underestimate their political opponents.

Posted by: The Sanity Inspector on July 23, 2006 09:18 PM

I suspect that if Bellesiles had written a book in which he claimed that there were few, if any, privately owned printing presses in the United States prior to the 1860's, and thus the 1st Amendment really didn't apply to individuals at all, but rather only to government agencies and maybe a few very large companies, etc. then things would have been different for him.

But, of course, "Arming America" didn't affect anyone working in Manhattan with its deliberate, and numerous lies, merely those unwashed, marginally literate, easily swayed militia-nuts out somewhere west of the Hudson in flyover country so...no harm, no foul, right, Jane?

Posted by: ellipsis on July 26, 2006 08:34 PM

Comments are Closed.