About Me

My photo
This blog is the work of an educated civilian, not of an expert in the fields discussed.

Monday, January 03, 2005

Poetry and Prose

Jets: Herm Edwards, the head coach of the Jets, was out after the game challenging everyone who felt the team should feel bad for losing (again) against a (in some respects) decent team. Sounding quite ghetto, he spoke about getting on the bus ... some get on the back, some on the front. As a local sports talk guy noted, the team appears to want to be praised for doing the small things. This is fine, if you actually do some big things too, and respect the size of your accomplishments. Also, some criticized the team for going to two late in the third quarter (and failed). I say it was okay, since if a field goal would have won it, the Rams would have used its time outs, and got the ball back with something left on the clock. Experience showed this to be a lethal proposition.


An Invitation of Poetry: A New Favorite Poem Project Anthology is a collection of poems selected by Americans of all ages and professions with personal comments added to suggest why they found the poem so special. Twenty seven of the poems are read and discussed on a companion DVD, and we not only hear the poem, but also get a feel for the various people who recited it. My favorite poems from the anthology ("a bouquet of flowers") might be these:

  • William Blake: "The Chimney Sweeper" (young orphan)

  • Gwendolyn Brooks: "We Real Cool" (and died young)

  • Emily Dickinson: "I'm Nobody! Who are you?"

  • Thomas Gray: "Ode on the Death of a Favorite Cat" (curiosity killed cat)

  • Thomas Hardy: "The Man He Killed" (had he and I but met elsewhere ...)

  • Evan Jones: "The Song of the Banana Man" (proud poor man)

  • Theodore Roethe: "The Sloth" (fun)

  • Ernest Lawrence Thayer: "Casey at the Bat"

  • William Wordsworth: "We Are Seven" (five alive, two dead ... child voice)

  • ---

    The Right Of The People* is a printing of three lectures Justice William O. Douglas gave in 1957, and I received the paperback edition (1962) for a few bucks from Amazon. There was still an address label on the inside cover (original owner? well, not the seller) and underlining inside. This reminds me of an essay in a reading comprehension test from long back that honored a marked up copy of a book.

    Some people are concerned about having pristine copies, but not that writer (reader) -- he enjoyed a book that was lived in. Likewise, there was the star of 84 Charing Cross Road that enjoyed reading the comments and scribbling of past owners. For instance, imagine some of the books owned by John Adams, who loved to makes notes all over the place. As do I oftentimes, as if it was for some college class.

    Suffice to say, some marks -- besides helping highlight what is important -- is not always a bad thing. On the other hand, once I was trying to sell a book on Ebay, and noticed someone wrote phone numbers in red on the cover sheets. Unless we are talking real nice handwriting here, this doesn't really add to the overall book owning experience.

    ---

    * The book supplies interesting perspective to the Douglas scholar. For instance, given his later absolutism, comments about the proper limits of libel law and campaign financing laws was notable -- ditto an earlier opinion in which he mentioned in passing that obscenity could be legally barred. Also, given all the ridicule over his use of "penumbra" in Griswold v. Connecticut and talk that Justice Brennan was really the brains behind the opinion, the lectures showed that Douglas used the word years earlier (and in various contexts) and had a basic understanding of a constitutional right to privacy in 1957. OTOH, his dissent in Poe v. Ullman showed this as well.

    Finally, his discussion of man "as a child of God," suggests an important aspect of his understanding of natural rights. It also might explain a controversial comment in an earlier opinion that argued that we are a religious people with institutions that presupposed the existence of God ... one used quite often by those who want the state to recognize said existence in ways Justice Douglas would have rejected.