You are here

Multifaceted Moore

â??Fahrenheit 9/11â? debuts in theaters June 25.

But some are not happy about it.

It will be interesting to see where the dust settles,... if it ever does.

Comments

... who called Moore "...a horrible human being â?? horrible human!" [Courtesy BoingBoing] Apparently he was miffed that Moore decided to do something like, you know, allude to the title of Bradbury's most famous book.

Oddly enough, that's not the strangest thing that Bradbury said.

I was never a huge Bradbury fan, though I did always admire what he had to say about the craft and art of fiction. Now, though, ... It feels like his voice saying these things. The cadences and phrasing are consistent with what I've heard in interviews with him, over the years. So the challenge is to find where they come from.

"He slandered the president to General Clark, and Clark allowed him to do it," Bradbury said. "Clark should have said: 'Don't say that. It is not true.' That day Clark lost his chance to become president."

Where's the source of his offense? Is it patriotism? Offense at the "slandering" of a president he clearly wants to be replaced, anyway?
I'm tempted to speculate on his health, but that would seem uncharitable.

escoles, I was wondering if you could include the actual URLs that you are trying to link in your reply. I am not able to access them from my end in the reply format. I'd be happy to copy and paste them.

Thank you.

There seems to be a glitch in my stylesheets that makes links un-clickable in some circumstances -- probably an implicit problem with the z-index, or the display mode being "block", or something.

Anyway, here are the links:


http://www.boingboing.net/2004/06/04/bradbury_goes_nuts_o.html


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38776

Peggy, FYI, Cory Doctorow is an SF writer and probably has a pretty high opinion of Bradbury to start with...

Thanks, escoles, the new links work fine.

Regardless of Bradburyâ??s political views, we may just be seeing a hurt ego expressing itself, considering that allegedly Moore avoided Bradburyâ??s request to discuss the issue a while back,... not that Moore was in any way obligated to do so. But it does seem curious that the usually gregarious Moore would shy away from such a meeting, unless he or someone covering for him figured it just wasnâ??t worth his time.

Egos abound.

[quote=Peggy]But it does seem curious that the usually gregarious Moore would shy away from such a meeting, unless he or someone covering for him figured it just wasnâ??t worth his time. [/quote]

Well, it sounds harsh, but it also sounds likely.

The reaction is kind of bizarre; I mean, Fahrenheit 9/11 can't be the only time anyone's alluded to Fahrenheit 451. That kind of allusion is really a fairly high form of flattery, inasmuch as it's tantamount to saying "You are so famous that everyone will get the meaning." (Whether that's true or not is another issue.) So maybe Moore didn't want to deal with it because (like Cory Doctorow) he didn't relish seeing clay feet at such close range.

Sometimes, of course, you don't want to be quoted that way. I've seen that handled in some impressive ways, too -- e.g., by making a pointed response in the style of the respondent, or illustrating carefully and with biting wit just how seriously they've misunderstood you.

It can even work by proxy -- I still crack up every time I think of Woody Allen hauling Marshall McLuhan from behind a potted palm. ("You know nothing of my work.")

Add new comment