Ciceronian Review

The first time I read that Susan Sontag believed that she would never die, I thought it was a small joke or some insider shorthand about fame.  The statement keeps being repeated, and each time apparently the iteration is serious.  Apparently Sontag really did think, until shortly before her death, that she would not die.  Of all the people in the world over all the many hundreds of thousands of years there have been human beings here, she alone would live without end.  Not, mind you, the widespread (and nevertheless terribly odd) view that somehow or other something survives death or is resurrected after death.  No immortal soul for her.  Seems she thought instead that she would just go on and on, like some Star Trek episode or Greek myth.   Or maybe it was that God picked her out, among the many.  This is hard to make sense of, coming from an adult.  I understand that children get all sorts of odd ideas in their heads, including that somehow they are Hercules reborn or some such.  But Sontag held this thought as an adult.  And made no secret of it.  Of course, she was free to.  No rules (none enforceable anyway) against ridiculous ideas, and it was her time to use if she wanted.  But it does raise a question about the fact that people listened to her, read her work, talked about her as though a serious thinker.  (I admit, I have a bias here in that I never liked any of her works.)  How is this not believing in magic?  Say the right words and up comes the mummy.  And now her notebooks are being published.  The excerpts I have seen suggest that publication is a bad idea.  Of course the notebooks of youth make for some moments of cringing, which is okay if there is a proper reward.  Is there?  What did Sontag say that would make anyone want to read her every word?  I doubt that even the likes of Wittgenstein or Quine, etc., would warrant such publication.  Surely not every word ever from the pen of Eliot or Bishop should be put out in print.  In general I am not much for the publication of the entire corpus of anyone's writings.  Even less reason to give such treatment  who held such a plainly idiotic view -- she would never die -- .   

Another Step Towards Justice in Britain

On Friday, the de Menezes family moved a little closer to obtaining justice.  As reported here, the inquest jury did not find that the shooting of Mr. de Menezes was a lawful killing.   A little more accurately, the inquest jury left the verdict open, declining to find the shootiong a lawful killing.  It could not find the killing was unlawful because that option was taken away by the coroner.  The family still may pursue matters in civil proceedings.

Shocking as the whole thing is, not just the killing but the failed cover-up after the shooting, and the absence of real disciplinary response towards those who ran the botched arrest, the last twelve months have been better than what I think one could reasonably expect in the US.  At the least, the police have apologized without equivocation and acknowledged that the shooting was, at very best, a horrible mistake.  I can't see the likes of that here.

Some further coverage here.

One area which remains an utter mystery is that the person whose performance was without doubt a complete disaster here, Cressida Dick, is still both on the force and under no cloud at all.  (Which is more like here.)  Of course, it is the usual story -- under incredible pressure -- I don't see it.  First of all, if the pressure was too much, send her off to route traffic.  The thing which she accepted as her job she failed utterly at.  That is not talent. 

Looking Is A Crime

The fearless District Attorney in Ogden is vindicating central values of the rule of law.  An inspiring story, at least for those enamored of Cotton Mather.  Two boys in high school were caught looking at pornography on their cell phones.  (Hard to say if it was porn.  In Zion, that might just mean women without shirts.)  Boys were suspended.  But that is not enough.  Nope, not only is the Board considering expelling the boys (seriously?), they are also being prosecuted.  Viewing pornography on school grounds is a misdemeanor, so, of course, we need to get a conviction for this horrible crime of teenagers looking at naked bodies -- that is the stuff of serious crime alright. 

What reasonable basis is there for this use of prosecutorial  and judicial resources?  Is this sort of activity really the sort of thing which belongs in front of the court?  It is hard to see how anything good could come of this sort of conduct by the prosecutors.   

Secret Dead

Like many states, Utah has difficulties securing representation for capital case defendants.  It is reaching a crisis in Zion.  In a recent opinion, the Supreme Court noted the increasing difficulty in persuading competent counsel to appear for capital defendants, not for the first time, and suggested that the crisis may force the Court to bar capital prosecutions.  There is nothing surprising about this state of affairs.  The cases are very difficult and expensive to defend.  And in Zion, a defense lawyer faces unusual hostility from the prosecution, including a request for Rule 11 sanctions which went up to the Supreme Court.  As a result, an effort is being made to better understand the funding of defense lawyers.  Part of that effort involves an attempt to examine the communications between the Attorney General's office and the state agency which funds defense activity.  The story is here.  Both the AG's office and the agency (Division of Finance) are refusing to produce documents.  Remarkably, the refusal is grounded in a claim of attorney client privilege.  This is hard to understand.  Why would the Division of Finance consult the Attorney General about funding of lawyers appearing adverse to the state?  How could either side here think that there was a confidential relationship as to the information or the subject?  In fact, it is a little hard to see how the AG's office could have these communications consistent with their professional duties.  Any discussion by the AG's office about defense funding must necessarily involve disclosure of defense activity and theories.  At the appeal stage, the AG's office is directly adverse to defendants.  There is no way around this conflict.  Moreover, the finance decisions are really between the Division of Finance and the defense, and there is no indication of any objection there. 

Aside from the ethical issues, it is a very bad sign that the AG's office is blocking access to information here.  It suggests an inappropriate attitude towards what is at issue ultimately -- seeing to it that justice is done.  An attitude reflected in the Archuleta case.  If the AG's office wants an improved appellate process, it ought to do what it can to help ease the extreme shortage of qualified capital defense counsel. 

Blackwater Circus

Blackwater employees turned themselves in today here in Zion.  Covered the local paper's front page, for the last two days.  Lots of photographs, including of course picture of the defendants in uniform from when they did serve in the military.  It is a little circus, and curious in a number of respects.  First, who is paying for the defense?  These five guys have lots of attorneys, and none on the cheap end as far as I can tell.  More importantly, they have good lawyers -- Hatch and Cassell are quite good at what they do.  But it seems a stretch to think these fellows are or could pay for the services of so many lawyers.  Is it the company?  It has reason to.  Unfortunately, none of the stories explain the payment arrangements.  A second thing that is curious is Cassell.  He left the bench, to make money obviously, and to devote time to vindication of victim rights.  I am mystified by his role here, if it is not just collecting dollars.  The victims are not the defendants.  (Pace TalkLeft, Cassell was a good judge for criminal defendants; he led on the issue of getting rid of mandatory sentencing, and discharged his duties with real attention to his duties as a judge.  Not an ideologue at all, and his departure was a loss.  Which surprised me, as prior to appointment there was little doubt he is career was basically ideology over all else.)  This defense does not fit the tale.  Finally, why the circus at all?  No doubt, plenty of very favorable coverage here in Zion, and almost no critical examination of the story.  The guilty plea barely registered.  But, why bother?  Surely none of the lawyers really thought they could get venue here.  There is no connection at all to Utah; and it surely could not help for the lawyers' story about venue to be in the first article, even before the first appearance.  I am not sure it is even possible to get venue change on an indictment at this point in the case.  There were some oddities, I am told, about the argument given the fact of indictment, but I do not understand criminal procedure enough to more than pass on the thought.

Not prejudge more than the defendants sought: their stories is a might ripe.  First of all, of course, they have the problem that they were in it for the money, not defending the country.  Second, their colleague in crime has rolled over on them.  But then, the officers in the Rodney King trial got off, as did OJ.  (I wish the Goldmans would focus a bit more ont he prosecutorial incompetence in that case.  The prosecutors made a good deal of money for doing a poor job of it.)  One never knows in advance what will touch the jurors.

Titian

The art market is, I think, the best place to test out theories about economics and the relationship of value and price.  A couple of items floating about will serve.  There are the recurring stories about the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles, and then, this morning, the news about a couple of Titian paintings up for sale in the UK.  The owner (the Duke of Sutherland) is asking 100 million pounds for the paintings, and apparently will get it.  Many contributions being collected.  People are entitled to give their money as they will I suppose, or within some pretty broad limits.  Which is the point -- is there a connection of any strength between the price of the two paintings and their value?  I am not at all sure how one goes about thinking it through.  The first two options are plainly deficient.  One could just leave it at the value of the paintings is the price paid.  Monetize and we are done.  Or one might hand it all over to some experts.  (Like wine -- and obviously just as much a fraud.)  Somewhere else I think is where one wants to be.  To me, the prices are far too high.  Titian is great, but not 50 million pounds.  I am not sure there is a work of art I would put up that much for.  Is that the problem?  An inability or defect in conception on my side?  Well, Jeff Koons sculptures at 15 million are ridiculously over-priced.  It is a funny market with lots and lots of levels.  In any moderately large city, one can easily find quite good art work at relatively low prices.  One can get first rate photographs, for example, at under $2,000, and paintings are not all that much higher.  And then this market of the hugely expensive.  (A market which is filled with dreck.)   This is the kind of thing I think is genuinely hard to think about.

Who's Ahead?

It is a scandal that the election is not yet over.  Votes are still being recounted in Minnesota, and Congressional races in California were declared just yesterday.  It is hard to fathom how the United States could be so bad at running elections.  That we will soon face court fights over whether to include or exclude some few thousand absentee ballots is discouraging.  It should not be all that difficult to put on an election, and count the votes.  That a reliable electronic voting machine seems beyond the abilities of US companies is shocking, and that we have such a hodge-podge of rules and mechanism --- it is like being in Sicily in 1910.  Instead of the wasted Homeland Security projects, put the money into proper voting machines and training. 

Belli

The collection of Belli sonnets I have (translated) is small compared to the overall production.  He wrote about 2200 sonnets.  Here is quick overview of the work and man.  The poems are quite amusing.  I may get to some literary studies at some point.  On my first read, they remind me of Baudelaire.  Maybe it was the air.  Belli seems a good deal rowdier, and cruder in the usual sense.  I got interested because of the odd memorial to Belli in Trastavere, right by the Tiber. 

Here is how the little book starts:

The Recollection

The day that Camardella faced the gallows,
I got confirmed...still seems like yesterday--
Godfather, me, the fairground games I played,
the treats I got (some knick-knacks and marshmallows).

My father booked a two-horse coach for us,
though first there was the hanging to enjoy.
"That scaffold,, eh?" he said, "the real McCoy!"
and hoicked me up so I could feel the buzz.

The very moment that the hangman thwacked
the prisoner's sorry arse cheeks into space,
Papa struck a blow across my face--

"Take that," he said, "so one day you'll look back
and understand: this fate is destined to
take down a thousand better men than you."

tr. Mike Stocks.

Books

I am done with the Anne Stevenson and with the Modesty Blaise and with Hiding in the Mirror.

Stevenson was very rewarding, with a caveat.  The last section of the book was taken up with her historical poems.  Maybe they were made from the journals and letters of the characters who populated, and maybe that was an edifice.  Either way, I was bored by those pages.  But the preceding 100 plus pages were full of great poetry, wonderful language and an intelligent mind working.  Very strong work.  And a recipient of that odd "Unrecognized Master" award.  I will put some of the poems up over the next several weeks.

Anne Stevenson is being replaced by Giuseppe Giacchino Belli, Sonnets.  In translation, of course.  That won't last long -- the computer boot-up time is when I read the poetry.  Which gives a surprising amount of time every day for poems.

Modesty Blaise, of course, is entertainment.  The books are relaxing.

Hiding in the Mirror I gave up on.  The writing was not enthralling - boring in fact.  Maybe I did not understand it well enough.  But it seemed a second-runner to some other physics for the uninformed books. 

Physics has been replaced with history.  Next up is the new biography of Lorenzo the Magnificent.  I am actually making a dent in the backlog of books.  In part because I have starting giving up sooner on the boring or badly written.  E.g., The Borgias and Their Enemies was too dull to finish, as was the book on the Lincoln/Douglas debates. 

Clinton Hill

I remain puzzled by the nomination of Sen. Clinton for Secretary of State.  I must be missing something.  None of the explanations I have seen make much sense to me.  Foreign policy experience?  I do not know what that is.  Wandering about the world as attender of funerals and cultural events is not impressive experience; is it that she knows some of the Moes running other countries?  I hope not -- do not need any more of the "I know his soul" foreign policy approaches.  Maybe there is something in her time in the Senate - but what exactly?  Is the idea to take a rival out of the way?  That is even less persuasive.  Clinton cannot run against Obama from the Senate unless there is first some very serious failure in his administration.  But she can't do anything to undermine the administration - that plays into too many existing reservations about her.  It is hard to see how any Democrat runs against Obama and has a hope of winning in the general election.  It is just completelu unrealistic.  And this was her time to run -- the clock ticks and she will be too old to have a serious shot in 2012.  Equally puzzling is why she wants the job.