dagblog - Comments for "The Rorschach Of The New York Times"

Yeah, this is a new wrinkle.

Michael Maiello — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:51:38 +0000

In reply to BTW, the crawl below MNF on

Yeah, this is a new wrinkle. But not wholly unexpected, considering what people here have brought up about Kitty Genovese, which is that not only can these stories not be universalized, they aren't even necessarily factually accurate.

Also that he reported it to

AmericanDreamer — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 20:15:45 +0000

In reply to BTW, the crawl below MNF on

Also that he reported it to the police.

Who did what with it...?

Well thank you, I think.

artappraiser — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 19:46:19 +0000

In reply to FWIW, you're one of the best

Well thank you, I think. Ironically, turns out I am not a big fan of spinach for myself, much preferring arugula and chard. But I do grow spinach for the spouse's use.

FWIW, you're one of the best

Verified Atheist — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:08:45 +0000

In reply to A reminder that China just

FWIW, you're one of the best "spinach" servers I know.

A reminder that China just

artappraiser — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:58:30 +0000

In reply to The Rorschach Of The New York Times

A reminder that China just went through a big "bystander effect" cultural crisis, with the story of "little YeuYeu." Just in case someone tries to claim it's just American culture that fixates on individual tragic stories to get a grip on bigger questions. That's universal, in mho, and not just contemporary; there are many historical examples as well.

This whole thing often comes up in the blogosphere this way: with the more wonkish complaining that "the media" is causing the heavy coverage of some tragic story that is not important in the scheme of things (i.e., Anna Nichol Smith, etc.) Actually in most cases, I think "the media" is doing that because the public is responding that getting more info on the story is what they are interested in. (Josh Marshall addresses that whole thing in a different vain--pandering to interest in horse race politics--when he talks about not being interested in "eat your spinach" coverage of issues.) I think where the more wonkish err is in not seeing that what individual tragedy stories are popular are important in understanding their own culture. I do want "spinach" coverage to be supported and maintained, but I think that thinking that can be done to the exclusion of pop "personal interest" feeding frenzies is folly. I can mock the interest if I think it's excessive and silly and overblown, but I can't stop it, and I ignore it as culturally significant to the detriment of my own understanding.

Well, The Watchmen is more of

Michael Maiello — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:15:25 +0000

In reply to In The Watchmen graphic

Well, The Watchmen is more of a parody of super hero comics. The Rorschach character is one on a continuum (the black and white absolutist) and definitely isn't the character that the story endorses. But, mileage varies on these things. Sometimes I think people use "graphic novel" because they don't like to say they're reading comics.

The recent work on the Genovese incident is interesting. The "bystanders callously let it happen" story might not have been true. People do seem to see their biases in the story.

BTW, the crawl below MNF on

Donal — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 03:18:17 +0000

In reply to The Rorschach Of The New York Times

BTW, the crawl below MNF on ESPN has McQueary claiming that he did stop what was happening that evening. USA Today has the same story:

McQueary e-mailed the following about the 2002 incident when he was a graduate assistant at the school:

"I did the right thing…you guys know me…"

"... the truth is not out there fully... I didn't just turn and run... I made sure it stopped..."

"... I had to make quick tough decisions…"

Brooks is taking the moral

moat — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:48:46 +0000

In reply to The Rorschach Of The New York Times

Brooks is taking the moral outrage everybody feels about the story to make a case against a morality based upon mutual consent. The move is odd in this particular instance because the criminal act was obviously not, by any stretch of the imagination, an act of mutual consent. The bait and switch Brooks employs is so upfront that it seems disingenuous to me. But as you say, it is hard to know what is happening in another person's mind.

However that may be, I propose that developing a code of what comprises mutual consent has been a powerful source of good responses to awful behavior. For those who are willing to intervene in something that isn't their own business, what standard could be more clear than that?

In The Watchmen graphic

artappraiser — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:37:47 +0000

In reply to The Rorschach Of The New York Times

In The Watchmen graphic novel, the vigilante hero Rorschach is inspired by news of the real-life murder of Kitty Genovese, which occurred in public, while the residents of outer Queens neighborhood Kew Gardens watched from their apartment windows...

Interesting to know that one of the genre of "graphic novels" I hear so much about but don't know personally, is still playing the "everything is black or white, good or evil" of the plain old vanilla comic books. (As opposed to say, addressing the complexities of the human condition presented in a lot of other kinds of fiction, low to high, since the Renaissance.) I thought they were popular because they were more sophisticated, like novels.

Those interested in the complexities of real life might like to check up on more recent scholarship on the case of the supposed mythic Genovese murder "witnesses." What actually happened is more like a real Rorschach test, where everyone sees something different in those ink blots.

There is a difference between

bwakfat — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:19:45 +0000

In reply to The Rorschach Of The New York Times

There is a difference between condemning a failure to act, and condemning the person who failed to act. I don't read Brooks for the reasons you've stated and more. That he would attempt to conflate the two is no surprise. That's what he does, and that is why I think your brilliant debunking of his methods is pretty dang heroic in its own way.

Thanks, Destor.