Thursday, May 11, 2006

You can't keep a good Style reporter down

On the "Pontifications" blog, one finds Dreher's most recent explanation of why he went public with his conversion dance: "I did not want to go public with this struggle, which my wife and I have been dealing with for some time now, but I made the mistake of clumsily evading a Washington Post reporter’s questions about the practice of my faith. He could tell that I was trying to hide something, so I finally yielded and told him what I was dealing with. He put it in his story — how could he not? — and when that came out, I felt as if I owed my readers an explanation.... I loathe and despise being in this place of uncertainty...."

Kinda like Leave it to Beaver: Mom: "Junior, did you eat the chocolate chip cookies?" Son: "Ummmm, uhhhh" Mom: "well?" Son: "Y-Y-Yes mom! I can't take it anymore! I-I-I did eat the chocolate chip cookies!"

This is a cute story for Rod to tell himself. There's just one problem -- Rod has already demonstrated to his audience how skillful he is at evasion when he WANTS to evade. He's not clumsy when evading questions from contra crunchies -- in that situation he is a Jedi Knight of evasion ("These questions don't exist ... these voices are silent ... I do not hear them, I do not read them ... I addressed them years ago, I shall not address them again ...") But when faced with a question that would garner more attention for himself and his struggles? Well, then his evasions are "clumsy".

Apparently Rod expects us to believe that one would need some serious rhetorical skills to put a Washington Post *Style* reporter off the scent of impending religious conversion. Yeah that sounds right! Reporters from Washington Post's Style section are totally up on the fine theological distinctions between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. They can smell a religious conversion a mile away -- never mind that their beat usually consists of investigating stories like whether Britney Spears is pregnant again.


Blogger Bubba said...

A direct link to Dreher's comment is here.

His last paragraph is amusing:

"A person who is willing to allege all kinds of vicious things about my character — that I’m a snob, a fraud, a this and a that — based on the neotraditionalism about which I wrote in my book “Crunchy Cons” would do well to read the book before engaging in trash-talking. Unless of course trash-talking about things one doesn’t understand or care to understand is one’s hobby."

And by "amusing," I mean "snippy."

I wonder if Rod's okay if people think he's a fraud or a snob for reasons outside his book?

3:33 PM  
Blogger Pauli said...

Maybe to Rod, Orthodoxy is the "slow food" equivalent to the "fast food" of the modern Latin Church. Think about it: cheesy music composed by the imfamous St. Louis Jesuits, crappy McMansion-like architecture, "Pope-mobiles" - all this stuff is very mainstream and un-crunchy. How can he stand it?

Sometimes, as a Catholic, I have a hard time standing some of the seeming compromise with the culture and the horrid music, of course. But the Church is one city I'll stay in even amid the "white flight" of Rod and others into the safe suburbs of Eastern Orthodoxy. Everything else is ephemeral in my view, the Platonic chickens, the convivial coffee, the Republican party....

I have pretty good sources within the church - I could probably pull together a reliable list of priests in Rod's geographic area who won't molest anyone in his family. But I doubt that's enough for Rod - he probably wants a second honeymoon with a new church which will appreciate him more.

7:21 PM  
Blogger James said...

Good grief, people! I haven't had time to read the Crunchy Con book yet, although I definitely will eventually, but I did read the Crunchy Con blog and disagreed with some of the stuff posted there. Ergo, I found this site funny when it first came into existence. I checked it out for the first time in a while today and was shocked to discover that it had become an obsessive hate-Rod blog. Are any of you Jonathan Carpenter in disguise? (An even more humorous possibility would be Kevin Miller.) This blog should have died when the original blog did. It was Stegall who said most of the goofy stuff anyway.

James Kabala

11:05 AM  
Blogger kathleen said...

err, i don't "hate" rod, James kabala, I just think he is full of bunk and should be called out on it.

everybody calls us obsessive. man, i wish. I have loads of other pressing stuff to think about besides how rod tries to bamboozle people into thinking he's at the vanguard. there is nothing obsessive about discussing Dreher and his book at a blog set up for precisely that purpose. sorry.

11:32 AM  
Blogger kathleen said...

and who's Jonathan carpenter and Kevin miller?

11:34 AM  
Blogger Bubba said...

James, one has to admit that Rod's blogs have produced an embarassment of riches for those who wish to lampoon his book and theses.

I've think we've paid him a compliment of sorts in that we're among the few mainstream conservatives who have taken his ideas serious enough to challenge them and repeatedly request a response.

But I can't imagine we'll be doing this indefinitely. I imagine his blog's turning off more than a few people -- the mainstream conservatives because he refuses to defend his assertions about us, Iraq, or the environment; and the rabid left because he dares to believe that homosexuality is not moral and that the truth claims of Christianity are objectively true -- so it may be that his blog will soon be attracting the attention of practically no one.

Or, in downplaying his disagreements with the left, he may become indistinguishable from them.

Either way, he ain't gonna answer the right's criticisms any time soon, so my reasons to hang around are dwindling.

11:47 AM  
Blogger Pauli said...

Criticism and hate are different things.

1:08 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home