NYT: Michiko Kakutani rips apart new trashy Clinton bio

[dobak]

She hacks the book to death

I love it

---

http://nytimes.com/2003/09/23/books/23KAKU.html


A pasted-together compendium of recycled news, familiar observations and base gossip, Nigel Hamilton's new biography of Bill Clinton represents a sleazy new low in the chronicling of presidential lives. It regurgitates the most scurrilous and unsubstantiated rumors about Mr. Clinton and his wife; dwells, with voyeuristic fascination, on his sex life and uses soap opera prose and sociological hot air to recount (in this, the first of two projected volumes) Mr. Clinton's life through the conclusion of his tumultuous 1992 run for the White House.

<snip>

These are the sorts of rumors and conspiracy mongering that were once the province of right-wing extremists and right-wing publishers like Regnery, which published the Evans-Pritchard book on Mr. Clinton, as well as the former F.B.I. agent Gary Aldrich's Clinton-bashing book "Unlimited Access." That such rumors are now being recycled — without verification — in a nonideological, professedly serious presidential life signals not only the growing tabloidization of biography writing, but also the willingness of mainstream publishers like Random House to cash in on suspect material likely to create best-seller-making buzz.

<snip>

In the end, however, it is perhaps fitting that the prose in these pages is so melodramatic, reductive and foolish; after all, those are the very qualities embodied by this entire unfortunate book.

[mumon]

1. I sort of detest the last sentence...

it is perhaps fitting that

the prose in these pages is so melodramatic,
reductive and foolish; -> book is, melodramatic reductive and foolish.

Since this book- unless it's a picture book (or pop-up book...although I'm left of center, I'm thinking of a GREAT Bill Clinton pop-up book featuring Monica Lewinsky...) the value of the book is going to be YES dominated by the text.

DUH.

(on edit)

However...

This has GOTTA be the "It was a dark and stormy night" worst bio ever written! It's the "Battlefield Earth" of lunatic fringe Clinton bios!

I mean...

"Christmas 1989 thus saw an amazing epiphany as Bill Clinton, arch-narcissist, self-centered monster, seducer of women, and oral sex addict, found his selfish heart melting."

"And as Prince Hal had felt forced to deny Falstaff on his coronation as King Henry V, so Bill Clinton had to reject the fun-loving, wayward companion of his Arkansas years: Gennifer."


Plus, who cares? Bill Clinton's kinda low profile right now, and frankly it's really unimportant- even if you're a freeper- to wallow in this lurid sh*t if you're worried about your job.

[ComerPerro]

2. Won't someone please sue these people?

It really says that? All that crap?

I wish someone with the Clintons would sue even one tenth of the people who wrote lying, slanderous books about them. There are tons of the out there, all fueled by an intense hatred of the man.

[Mikimouse]

3. OK, now I'm pissed!

While I try to present reasonable arguments, when I do post on the various forums (fora?), I am really angry that, once more, my profession gets dragged through the mud by some moron who probably has no clue about the discipline.

"Sociological hot air"???????????????

Just what the bloody hell does that mean? Take a look at the classical theorists, you semi-literate idiot, and you will see plenty of evidence that predicts many of the problems we have now! If this was the only instance of such meaningless diatribe, I would laugh it off, but it seems that I hear this garbage more and more frewuently. I am sick and tired of it! Bring it on, jerko; let's talk about "sociological hot air"; You might just learn something. Hacking the book to death is a good thing, but on what is the completely irresponsible cheap shot based? Some of us want to know!:grr: :nuke: :wtf: :mad: