text:
To Beatrice Mailer
August 8, 1945
Sweet Baby,
The news of the atom bomb has created more talk out here than the news of V-E day, and as much as President Roosevelt's death. I feel very confused about it. (This is written after just the barest communiqué. I don't know what it's done.) I'm understanding now how the bonds of self-interest affect thought. A good part of me approves anything which will shorten the war, and get me home sooner, and this is often antagonistic to older more basic principles. For instance I hope the peace time draft is passed because if it's not, there may be an agonizingly slow demobilization. In the same sense I approve of an instrument that will kill under optimum conditions many people in one instant.
But really what a terrifying perspective this is. We've always talked of humanity destroying itself, but now it seems so near a thing, so much a matter of decades, of a very easily counted number of bombs. This atom smashing business is going to herald the final victory of the machine. It had always been no more than pleasurable calculation in the physics I studied, a remotely attainable dream, and even then a terrible one, for the atomic energy in a mass the size of a pea is enough to drive a locomotive so many fantastic times about the earth.
I think our age is going to mark the end of such concepts as man's will and mass determination of power. The world will be controlled by a few men, politicians and technicians—Spengler's men of the late West-European-American civilization. Much as he stimulates me, I'm no Spenglerian. In the alternatives of doing the necessary or nothing, I prefer nothing if the necessary is unpalatable.
Really, darling, the vista is horrifying. There will be another war, if not in twenty years, then in fifty, and if half of mankind survives, then what of the next war—I believe that to survive the world cities of tomorrow will be built a mile beneath the earth. Man then will have escaped his animal heritage—the insects will no longer bother him, and Scarr-like in searching for heaven, he will have descended a thousand fathoms nearer to Hell. . . .
So little of love in this, but I am a little soul-sick tonight. The more I think about these things, the more frightening they become. What combination can beat the alloy of mechanism with sentimentality.
I need you in my arms tonight.
I love thee,
To Fanny and I. B. Mailer, Anne and David Kessler
September 4, 1945
Dear Mother & Dad, Aunt Nan & Uncle Dave,
. . . I saw an historic event or so the announcer informed me. We passed about a mile from the Missouri just as the surrender was being signed, and I got a kick out of hearing it announced over the radio as I saw it through a porthole. The commentator said, "Symbolically, the sun has come out and is shining over Tokyo Bay as the surrender is signed and peace is with us." Maybe I couldn't see as well as he, but the sky seemed as cloudy as ever. . . .
All my love, dears,
P.S. I weigh 145 lbs. now which is as much as I've ever weighed. So don't worry about my health.
To Beatrice Mailer
February 13, 1946
Hello Schnoog,
I've been doing a little thinking trying to reestablish some first principles of belief for myself, political belief that is. Or really, what I was doing was figuring a political credo to follow if I could believe in the improvement of man.
First of all, it seems quite self-evident that the only really decent government would be a Marxist one, but, and it is very difficult to figure out how this can be so, the emphasis must be away from government on the individual instead of the state. If I were to go political, I could see only one procedure, and that is to form a new Communist Party having nothing to do with Russia. I hate Russia (the govt. not the people), I do not admire her as you do. Admitting that her offensiveness and organization were dictated by the pressure of the world, the fact still remains that she stands now as a strangler to freedom of the individual, and I fear she is on a totalitarian trek from which there is no retreat. This New C.P. of mine would underplay the economic, the political; you cannot found a way of life on a part of man's whole soul, and emphasize the individual growth which is necessary. Remember my Militant Christians of Communism—it's something on that idea. You cannot found an ethic on economics, it is far more reasonable to orient it about sex say. The Communal Govt I see would be secondary, a natural outgrowth of a time recognition of things like equality and humility and dignity and creativeness expressed. The Quakers, I think, are a good example of this—I understand they have government which is good, but it comes last, as a natural equitable political shaping of their credo. . . .
All of what I have written is bullshit, naïve bullshit. I do not believe it, for I cannot believe in anything, but if I could, that is what I would stand for. What do you say, kiddo? . . .
I love thee so much, schnoog,
To Mark Linenthal and Alice Adams
April 30, 1949
Dear Mark and Alice,
. . . Actually, I'm not in the sense of not belonging to anything at this time, for all my ideas are too much in flux, but privately, emotionally, things are painful, for I have many Communist friends who are good people, albeit intellectual snobs, and they are hurt and worried about me. But finally I have come to realize that a political position must be separated from one's attitude toward people. (For example one should not join X Party because one likes the people in it.) This species of liberal shit and blood is something I expect you're still both prone to, and it's impossible for you to end with no political conclusion and no political program since every nice guy you meet in the camp-of-the-enemy undermines you. Viz: Norman Thomas. You know so many nice people who are Thomists so you think he must have something, when of course he is dreck. But then that is the depressing thing. You read politics and Partisan Review today, and there are no longer ideas in them, just canapés, and despite the brilliance of all their people and their erudition, etc. etc. they no longer think, they merely hate. Stunned, disillusioned, broken, they gravitate to a political vacuum like Thomas because it costs them nothing. Objectively they support the American war program, aid it, abet it, are at certain times the vanguard in an approach to war, and indeed when war comes I think an astonishing number of them are going to be bureaucratic intellectual wheels of the war mechanism. In the meantime, however, to keep their purity, they vote for Thomas. . . .
In re: this, I'm going to continue this obnoxious superior tone for another paragraph. I must confess Alice that I don't think much of what you're reading. The truth is you're looking at peripheral works, and despite occasional brilliances, their general effect is worthless. We don't learn chemistry by reading a book here and there about the philosophical extensions of some new discovery when we know nothing about chemistry itself. Marxism is a tool, it's a way of looking at things, and not a series of value-judgments, and if you want to learn it (a dreary process) you've got to read the source books, and study them. At least, study "Capital." If you find it uncongenial, you will at least have had the pleasure of studying a genius, and the incalculable agony. It is hard. But every day after mole-like I've studied my twenty pages, I feel as if I've come out of a shower bath.
If you find that studying economics has no appeal to you, then forget about politics, I don't mean this snidely. There are any number of other areas of activity which are far more delightful and fruitful for people. I just intend that to dabble in politics, to risk judgments on the halfway level is a completely confusing and unproductive process, and time so spent is best distributed on other things. . . .
Love from Bea, love from me,
To Philip Allan Friedman
April 24, 1953
Dear Mr. Friedman,
I'm afraid I won't be able to be of much help to you. I met [Sinclair] Lewis only once in the fall of 1948 at his house in Williamstown, Mass, and although I remember him very warmly, and he was in fine form that day, I doubt whether I could tell you anything which would be new.
One thing of course was his extraordinary vitality, and his child-like sense of discovering everything for himself, so that no matter what he said—be it banal or original—he delivered with great enthusiasm, and a kind of delight in the workings of his mind. For an example: at the time I was sympathetic to Stalinism, and he started scolding me with great good humor, his manner something of a cross between a kid brother and a doting uncle. "I can understand it of course," he said, "it's like religion. Uncle Joe Stalin is the pope for all you people. Why that's what he is, a pope, and all those Hollywood writers, very nice people some of them by the way, who are all giving their money, giving their donations to the party, it's like buying a mass to be said by Pope Uncle Joe," and he laughed with enormous pleasure in the idea, as if never before had any parallel been drawn between the Church and the Communist Party. . . .
I hope this will be of some small use to you.
Norman Mailer
To Charley and Jill Devlin
April 30, 1954
Dear Charley and Jill,
. . . Did you ever read "Lie Down in Darkness," by William Styron? It's not a great novel, but it is one hell of a novel, and I think of all of us, he has the biggest talent, the only one say who could some day write a novel as great as Proust's for example. Anyway, he's in New York now, and is one hell of a great guy, and I've been a little bit on the writers' circuit because [James] Jones has been in town too. Jones is something too. His great charm is a tremendous kind of animal magnetism which gives you the feeling that while you're around him things are just going to happen, and indeed they often do. He's a most peculiar mixture of Warden and Prewitt, very complex, very noisy, very crude, very affectionate, amazing you first with his naïveté and then with his shrewdness and insight. With it all, he putters at his writing, some days a page, some days a paragraph. As happened to me, he's scared, and probably has tightened up, but I think I'll be more surprised if he doesn't write another good book than if he does.
The McCarthy hearings are being televised these days, and I catch them from time to time. If you've never seen McCarthy you'll have a surprise when you do. What all his critics fail to admit is that he has enormous charm and sex appeal, and a characteristic man's man way of talking which dominates everyone around him, so that to a person ignorant of politics, he would seem just wonderful. The result is that it's truly terrifying to watch him work, because you wonder how can this man be stopped? Yet, on the other hand it's possibly not as bad as it seems, for I think a lot of his support is not active enthusiasm for his ideas, methods, etc., but simply the response of ignorant people to his vast and clever charm. The hope there is that when all the showdowns come, his minions may be startled to discover the ideas behind this guy they think is so great. The hope, I believe, is that he remain a reactionary. Just let him pick up a social program, and he'll be dictator, because as a demagogue he is really extraordinary. Even hating him, you have to admire him because he's so good at what he does. . . .
Love to you,
To Lewis Allen
April 30, 1954
Dear Lew,
. . . James Jones has been in town for a few weeks, and we've been seeing a lot of him. In a funny way I feel like the middle wheel between Styron and Jonesie—as if I'm made up of one half of each of them. And life with Jonesie has been great; with that loud brawling animal quality of his which loves life so instinctively and so warmly. I begin to feel a little warmer myself. . . .
There was a party at Styron's last night, and we all got drunk and decided to send a telegram to Joe McCarthy. So here's how it went:
Despite our mirth and our drunkenness, I think deep down we were a little aghast. It's exactly the sort of thing you go to a concentration camp for three years later. Ah, well, there are so many other reasons I can use to go. . . .
Yours, Lew,
To Jean Malaquais
October 13, 1956
Dear Jean,
. . . It's a peculiar thing about being a radical—the years go by and lo and behold there comes a time when the phone calls don't come in any longer from one's more elevated social friends. I think simply that one's become a luxury to have as a friend, and unless they care for you very much—which none of my social friends do—you just slowly are dropped from the orbits of their circulation. And then, on top of that, I was sick of New York itself, this desperately competitive inhuman city with its violence, its coldness, its electric assault on the nerves—perhaps I'm just getting middle-aged—at any rate we went up to the country in Connecticut to visit some friends, and found a house we liked very much, and we are now in the act of buying it. . . .
Anyway, that was a couple of weeks ago, and shortly after we made our offer to buy it, and were back in the city, I was out walking the dogs (our two big French poodles) late one Saturday night or scientifically speaking on early Sunday morning—it was one A.M.—when the dogs stopped to browse near three hoodlums who were hanging around a door step. Well, one of them made a nasty crack, the others laughed, and I who must have a touch of insanity asked the hoodlum what he said. Well, he then insulted me, we started a verbal contest, he told me to move on, I was scared but refused to, and finally we had a fight. Now I probably would have won this fight because believe me I was stronger than the hoodlum—he was tall but weighed less than me, and about 21 years old—as I say I believe I would have won, but he![#analytics: 4]|||||| started to gouge my eyes in a clinch—and very professionally I may say. I threw him off as best I could, we fought a little more, clinched again, and again he gouged me. At that point a crowd of people—a gang—poured out of a house (we were fighting on the sidewalk) and some tremendous brute of a character clouted me, and said "Have you had it?"
Well I had had it. I could hardly see, my eyes were bleeding, and I could see myself being beaten to death. So I nodded hopelessly, muttered several times over, "Yes, I've had it, I've had it, I've had it," picked up the dogs from another hoodlum who ironically had been holding them during the fight, and shambled off. What keeps the story from being completely inhuman is that two colored men, part of the gang, followed me. When I got to the corner they reached me. I was past caring at that point, and so probably for that reason had no fear. My feeling was that if they were going to jump me, I might just as well be dead. Perhaps it was that, I don't know, but at any rate, one of the colored guys said, "You didn't get a fair shake, man." And that somehow cheered me when I thought about it in the next few days.
But the aftermath was poor. My left eye hurt a bit, and I had a blind spot in the middle of my vision for a few days, and had to stay in a dark room for almost a week. Even now I suffer from eyestrain, and it will probably take a month to get over that. How happy I am that I bought the house before this happened, or else I would always feel that I was fleeing New York in a panic. . . .
Love from one old warrior to another,
To Jean Malaquais
September 25, 1957
Dear Jean,
. . . Now for my Dissent piece ["The White Negro"]. I sent your letter on to [Irving] Howe, and it will be printed in the next issue. I don't feel up to discussing it with you today, and indeed to answer you properly would take an article longer than the first and out of my means, but seriously, Dear Jean, entre nous, you are belaboring new if vastly imperfect ideas with a dead stick. When you write privately to me that I am suffering from inflation, I can only shake my head sadly and agree that you have put your finger on my worst fault—I want to be a great thinker without doing the work—I am indeed phony. But when you publicly say that the hipster is immature, irrational, unimportant, lumpen, etc. etc. etc. all of which is true, you are still ignoring the two important things in what I was trying to say which were 1) that barbarism may be the alternative not to socialism but to totalitarianism, and if this is true it is preferable to totalitarianism for the radical, or at the very least, poses a real alternative and 2) I was trying to fumble my way forward toward a theory of energy, human energy, which some genius following behind us may be able to pick up and use in order to become the new Marx. I do wish you would read the last page three or four times. The notion that society has reached a point of such complexity, such "organismishness" that it is capable instinctively of adapting itself to economic crisis by communicating psychological crisis via the mass communications is a notion which you cannot ignore, Jean, or you are no longer an inquiring Marxist but merely a scholastic. The contradictions from which America suffers are rapidly becoming psychological contradictions which are almost insupportable—if they should shift back to economic contradictions and economic depression which is far from impossible that will not mean that the process was a simple dialectic whose breath moved only through the circuits of productive relations. I suppose what I am fumbling toward is a dialectic which can bridge the material and the ideal—or put more palatably for you, I am trying to infuse material notions of energy into that philosophical country of the ideal which psychoanalysis now rules with a barbarian's club. . . .
To Samuel E. Lessere
December 30, 1957
Dear Mr. Lessere,
Pound's "racial hatreds" are likely to prove more embarrassing to the racists if he is on the loose than if he becomes a martyr. Frankly I don't see the point to prison, I never have—if prison is to exist as some sort of punishment for the harm one has done to others, it seems to me that until Orval Faubus has twenty years in the can, no one can argue convincingly that Pound deserves twenty minutes.
I suppose the real reason I favor Pound's release is that the same kind of government mentality which prosecutes, incarcerates, etc., a Pound also sets up Loyalty Boards, and what have you. Let it go, I doubt if we'll agree on this.
Norman Mailer
To Jean Malaquais
December 30, 1957
Dear Jean,
. . . Paris at the moment seems![#analytics: 5]|||||| far away. We've had the country, we're bored with it, disgusted with living the unbearably contradictory life of rich squires (besides we're not so rich any more—the sputnik having nicked the cream off my investments) and so we're going back to New York. I'm rather depressed these days. It's been years since anything I've done has turned out successfully—with a few rare exceptions—and I'm falling into the thing which afflicted you a couple of years ago—a failure of the will, shall we say. My ambitions seem far beyond my talents, and light-years beyond the vicissitudes of my character, and I think of this enormous novel I'm now starting, which could well take ten years, and if done properly, it must be unpublishable except in green-backed French "dirty" editions, and I'll be middle-aged when it's done, and somehow I just don't believe in myself the way I used to, and indeed, worst of all, it doesn't even seem terribly important. I'm beginning to have the tolerance of the defeated—people I would have despised a few years ago now seem bearable—after all, I say to myself, I haven't done very well with all the luck I had, and perhaps I do wrong to judge them. Naturally these states proliferate. The desire to work recedes, and as it recedes one welcomes the depression of not working which increases the difficulty to begin work again, and it gets to be a drag. You know I think of these miserable years since the war and how everyone I know has been diminished by it, their rebellion tempered, their caution swollen to cowardice, their malice to hatred, until the worst of all is that I get close at times to thinking that perhaps we have overrated the possibilities of people, and then life becomes dreary indeed. Forgive the tirade. You have your depression, I have mine (I too am smoking again). . . .
Now, of course, all this is every artist's anguish—so many of us could have been geniuses if everything had worked out right—but I had so much more good fortune than the others, and I've fucked it away so wastefully, Jeanbon, that I don't even have the dignity of frustration—what poor little Russian émigrés we all are really. Forgive me for complaining to you, but it is better that I complain to an old, a dear, and a trusted friend than depend upon the doubtful kindnesses of a drunken stranger at a cocktail party.
(Apropos of nothing, this genius of an egoist read Baudelaire's Intimate Journals—in English—a month ago. Now there's a man, I thought, who's exactly like me.) . . .
Love to you and to Galy,
To Irving Howe
January 9, 1959
Dear Irving,
. . . We've never talked about it, Irving, but I've felt for some years now that Marxism may take an enormous step forward in the next fifteen or twenty years because the only intellectual discipline which can comprehend the psychoanarchism of next year and ten years from now is indeed Marxism. The end of any theory of energy has to be society and the class conflict, not the orgone box, and I'd like you to understand that my eagerness for Dissent to begin a dialogue with the psycho-anarchists (wherever they are?) is not to have the magazine become by degrees a quarterly for jazz cum psychoanalysis but rather the intellectual center of a radical generation which may be coming into existence. . . .
My best,
To Jean Malaquais
April 29, 1960
Dear Jean,
. . . I joined the Fair Play for Cuba Committee on the old Leninist principle of Whom? In this case the Whom? was Time magazine. I figure if they're against Castro, I'm for him. Anti-Stalinism may not be a political position, but anti-Luce-ism well may be, since one can never determine the facts but only what various powers wish one to believe about the facts. I find it a good working rule of thumb to look for the center of day-to-day political evil in good old Time magazine. . . .
The big theater news here is "The Balcony" by Genet done at the Circle in the Square (Off Broadway). I thought the production disappointing, however. They cut the play stupidly, I thought, and the atmosphere was much too perfumed and faggy. I think some of this is Genet's fault; for all his brilliance he still gives me a pain in the ass.
Adele sends love.
To Fanny and I. B. Mailer
August 10, 1960
Dear Mom and Dad,
. . . Last Saturday I went down to Hyannis Port (50 miles from here) and had an interview with Jack Kennedy. We got along fairly well and he invited me back the next day, also invited Adele. We overslept and had to drive 80 miles an hour to get there on time. Barbara's comment was that Adele and I were the only people she knew in the whole world who could oversleep for an appointment like that. . . .
To John L. Saltonstall, Jr.
October 28, 1960
Dear Mr. Saltonstall:
Senator Kennedy's Wagnerian vision of a new American expeditionary force captained by Saint Grottlesexers and soldiered by some as yet undefined Marine Corps lumpen proletariat, for the invasion of Cuba, is insufficiently chilling to my notion of![#analytics: 6]|||||| a new America a little more brave and a little more honest than the one we have sadly become accustomed to, that I do not know if I can permit my name to be used in his support without some assurance that his remarks were a perhaps forgivable mistake due to the excesses of campaigning. For all I know, Castro may now be trapped in the syndrome of the Communists, but if he is, it is a tragedy which cannot be ignored by an adventure which will prove more ugly than romantic.
Yours respectfully,
Norman Mailer
To Mrs. John F. Kennedy
November 3, 1960
Dear Mrs. Kennedy,
It was nice of you to send your letter, and I thank you for it.
Once in a while when I think of going into another century, I pick the eighteenth, France, the last three decades, and the first of the nineteenth I suppose. But I do not know if I would be very good in all of that. If, perhaps, we do get to see you in Hyannis Port next year, we might talk. I suspect you know more about the subject than me. My competence becomes inexpert once I've passed the works of the Marquis de Sade. There's a man I'd like to do a biography of when I'm dead beyond repair. I might be able to throw a hint or two on the odd strong honor of the man.
In the meantime, let me wish that I am wrong in my fear of the night of November 7. I do not agree with your husband about Cuba, I think he is moving into a serious error, but I will vote for him anyway—I think it is more important than ever that he win. It is just that I have now lost much pleasure in my ballot. . . .
Yours, dear lady,
Norman Mailer
To Eiichi Yamanishi
October 23, 1961
Dear Eiichi,
. . . I've always felt a deep kinship with Trotsky and while I no longer could call myself in any way a Trotskyite it does not mean that I do not have a profound admiration for him. The difficulty here in America is that the conventional forms of revolutionary Marxism simply do not apply to the peculiarly intricate structure of American society. By this I do not mean that Marxism no longer applies but only that for it to become exciting again as a style of thought for the best of the young people it must be expanded by some genius who can comprehend the complexities of the American phenomena. I think in a way I was trying to point toward a possible direction in the last paragraph of "The White Negro." You see, Eiichi, the difficulty is that the working class in America is utterly without a revolutionary consciousness and the source of whatever rebellion there is in this country comes, not from people who function within the economy, but from the growing number of young people who feel profoundly alienated from their country and its history. It is possible that something may come of all this in the next ten years, for the spirit of rebellion is genuine. It is just that none of us has the intellectual stature to conceive of the problem in a radical new way. In America it is not that surplus value is extorted from us so much as that we are spiritually exploited and denied the opportunity to find our true growth. This is no doubt the highest stage of capitalism. You can see that in a situation like this it makes little sense to think of oneself as a Trotskyite. One might as easily call oneself a Bourbon or a follower of Batko Makhno. I am certain that if Trotsky were alive and in this country he would no longer be a Trotskyite. . . .
To the Editor of Playboy
December 21, 1962
Dear Sir,
I wish you hadn't billed the debate between William Buckley and myself as a meeting between a conservative and a liberal. I don't care if people call me a radical, a rebel, a red, a revolutionary, an outsider, an outlaw, a Bolshevik, an anarchist, a nihilist, or even a left conservative, but please don't ever call me a liberal.
Norman Mailer
To Mickey Knox
December 17, 1963
Dear Mickey,
The Kennedy thing hit very hard here. Women were crying in the streets (mainly good-looking women), a lot of middle-aged Negroes looked sad and very worried, and then we all sat around in gloom and watched the television set for the next seventy-two hours. Altogether it was one of three events having something profoundly in common: Pearl Harbor day and the death of Roosevelt being the other two. And the Ruby-Oswald stuff was just too much on top of it. I haven't felt like writing a word about the whole thing, I've been too fucking depressed every which way. The main loss I think was a cultural one. Whether he wanted to or not Kennedy was giving a great boost to the arts, not because Jackie Kennedy was inviting Richard Wilbur to the White House, but somehow the lid was off, and now I fear it's going to be clamped on tight again.
As for Oswald and Ruby, I don't know what was going on, but![#analytics: 7]|||||| I don't have the confidence we'll ever know. I'd like to believe that the F.B.I. had a sinister hand in all of this, but somehow I doubt it. I suspect the real story is that two lonely guys, all by themselves, put more grit in the gears than anyone ever succeeded in doing before, and it's just a mess, a dull miserable mess. . . .
To Eiichi Yamanishi
April 17, 1964
Dear Eiichi,
. . . As for the debate [with William F. Buckley, Jr.], it caused some interest, but not an overwhelming amount. It lacked the incisiveness of the first debate and ended inconclusively. I was furious at myself for not having taken the time to prepare properly. As a result I was on the defensive a good deal of the time because Buckley has a knowledge of contemporary politics, names, dates, places, so forth, which one cannot match casually. A lot of people were kind enough afterward to tell me that I won. The newspapers were all on Buckley's side. And between us two, I think I must confess that the best I obtained in the second debate was a draw. . . .
As for Trotsky, it is not that I feel antipathetic to him, indeed I think he is one of the few great figures of the twentieth century, and I've always felt sympathetically close to him, but the Trotsky movement in America is unspeakably arid and hidebound. Indeed one hardly hears of their existence any longer. Besides, there are political phenomena in America which Marx could never have contemplated, for the continued survival of capitalism displaced the economic imbalance into a psychic imbalance which corrupts the very being of people's lives here. Indeed, it is almost profitable to conceive of America as one vast horde of psychic totalitarians ruled by an establishment which is exceptionally self-contradictory; for while on the one hand it pushes America toward totalitarianism, there are elements in the establishment which offer our greatest defense against the continuing totalitarianization of the masses. Kennedy, for all his contradictions, was probably a defense of that sort, whereas Johnson, who has almost virtually the same political program, encourages the drift toward totalitarianism by the vacuity of his personality. The key to the entire situation is the Negro revolution, I believe. If it fails, and it most certainly can, even via the route of the next Presidential election, then the legal counter-revolution is, I fear, in the making. America is like a sullen attic full of smoldering dull heats. We can go on like this for years, but then again the fire can break out in six months. For we are in a profound crisis psychologically, since the country as it sees itself was founded and prospered on ideas of faith and reason, and faith has now become shattered or authoritarian, or the average American has lost his confidence in reason. The assassination of Kennedy did untold harms. The assassination of Oswald multiplied the disaster many times again. . . .
To Arnold Kemp
December 18, 1964
Dear Arnold,
. . . You know, when Sartre won the Nobel Prize, it's funny, but we have a different attitude. I think he should have taken it, and the reason I think is that it bugs the bourgeoisie more when people who are against them accept their biggest prizes rather than refuse them. For example, all these years Life magazine has been calling Jean-Paul Sartre an "apostle of despair." Now all of a sudden, apostle of despair and Nobel Prize winner. That makes it harder for them to bullshit people. I believe in taking honors because if you use them properly they are you. Some day if there were something really big going on and one wanted to write a letter to the New York Times, a mean stinging letter, and get it printed, there'd be just that much more leverage. . . .
To Eiichi Yamanishi
December 21, 1964
Dear Eiichi,
. . . I'm glad you liked the piece on the Republican Convention ["In the Red Light," in Esquire]. For some reason, I think mainly because Goldwater is so hated here, the piece was enormously well received. As I wrote to someone earlier today, it inspired more favorable comment than anything I've done since "The Naked and the Dead." I asked myself what I could have done wrong that it is so popular. Actually, what no one understands is that it is easy to write political pieces once one has had the good fortune to read "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon" at an early age. Anyway, there is talk here now of publishing it as a book. If that is done, I will restore its original title: "Cannibals and Christians, A History of the Republican Convention of 1964." Esquire was so afraid of a libel suit from the people of the Republican party that they refused to use that title, which was of course annoying for me, because it meant that once again I would have to sever relations with Esquire and I had enjoyed working with them up to that point. However, those decisions are not negotiable. I'm afraid I can't write for them again until they agree that I have absolute right to have my own title. . . .
To![#analytics: 8]|||||| William F. Buckley, Jr.
April 20, 1965
Dear Bill,
What a marvelous girl Joan Didion must be. I think that's one conservative I would like to meet. And who would ever have thought that the nicest piece [review of "An American Dream"] I am to read about myself four weeks after publication should come in the National Review. Well, this is the year of literary wonders. What do you think the odds would have been for a parlay of good reviews in National Review, Life, the New York Times Sunday Book Review, Paul Pickrel at Harper's, and the Chicago Tribune. One hundred fifty million to one, or would we have picked it by light-years?
Anyway, I write you this letter in great envy. I think you are going finally to displace me as the most hated man in American life. And of course that position is bearable only if one is number one. To be the second most hated man in the picture will probably prove to be a little like working behind a mule for years, which brings me to your address before the police department's Holy Name Society. I missed all of it at the time; I was in Alaska, and got my first inkling in the New York Post that some sort of bomb had gone off. At any rate I was not surprised when I read your speech today to find that it was literate, moderate in relation to your own position, and felicitously phrased. And of course I don't agree with your fundamental premise. On that I think you're all wrong. I'm not the cop-hater I'm reputed to be, and in fact police fascinate me. But this is because I think their natures are very complex, not simple at all, and what I would object to in your speech if we were debating is that you made a one-for-one correspondence between the need to maintain law and order and the nature of the men who would maintain it. The policeman has I think an extraordinarily tortured psyche. He is perhaps more tortured than the criminal, and so as you can see I can hardly concur with the valuations you put on these matters. At the same time there's no doubt in my mind that the newspapers misquoted you shamefully and the net result of that is to deepen one's sense of an oncoming disaster; for I think humanly it could only drive you further into some of your own most charming surrealisms, such as bombing China's atomic plants. Truly you amaze me, Bill. Did it ever occur to you as a good Christian that it is immoral to destroy somebody else's property?
But listen, I think our public debating days are probably over—for a time at least. As wrestlers we are not both villains, and that excites no proper passions. Still, it may open something interesting—which is that the two of us have a long careful private discussion one night, because I think in all modesty there's much in your thought which is innocent of its own implications, and there's much surplus in mine which could profitably be sliced away by the powers of your logic. . . .
Incorrigibly yours,
To William F. Buckley, Jr.
October 18, 1965
Dear Bill-elect,
What the hell does emunctory mean? You have here gone too far, sir, even for Buckley. I even heard one Roman turn over distinctly in his grave as the word went by and whisper to his neighbor, "Does that 'emunctory' come from the Greek?" Anyway, you're just an old fraud. You offered to pay a week's wages not to have to hear anyone who talks more predictable nonsense on the subject of foreign policy than myself. Sailor Bill, I come close to loving you here. When the hell did you ever earn a week's wages, you bleeding plutocrat. Of course if you were really indicating you were ready to give up one-fifty-second of your yearly income, then I will go look for such an intellectual and split the swag with him. . . .
Last, how is Patsy's leg? I hope it's back to everything original. Please give her my love, and let me know about dinner. We still have one to offer you. I expect you'll find it easier after the election, but if you think we can plan anything before, fine, and fine again.
To William F. Buckley, Jr.
January, 1966
Dear Bill,
I send you the enclosed not because I love National Review so much, for I don't—it's not so good as it ought to be, and often it's tiresome, especially when one knows in advance what your trusted old line contributors are going to say—but as a personal mark of respect to you. Your letter was the best letter I ever read by an editor asking for funds. . . .
One request. Please keep my contribution in the secret crypts. It is not that I fear public opinion so much as ceaseless repetition. Repetition kills the soul and I would not wish to spend one hundred evenings in succession explaining to various outraged and somewhat stupid people in calm clear fashion my complex motives for giving a![#analytics: 9]|||||| gift to a magazine for which I feel no affection and to an editor with whom on ninety of a hundred points I must rush to disagree. They would not understand that good writing is good writing, and occasionally carries the day.
To Diana Trilling
June, 1966
Dear Diana,
. . . You ask in effect if we, as friends, have any real sense of one another; if I address you as the real Diana Trilling, and whether by extension you address the real Norman Mailer, and I get so angered when I read this that I decide you probably are the great conservative, because who indeed outside of English dons and Diana Trilling still think of people as residing in the real. When I talk to you, I talk to you naturally with a firm "idea" of who you are, but since every mother's son and mother alive is in part a scientist, or at least a rational philosopher, a sensitive part of my brain is presumably reacting to the idea and seeing where it is wrong and where perhaps it is right. But even this is to pay too much service to your notion. I don't make friends with people because they satisfy my idea of them. I am friends with people because they make me feel good when I talk to them and since everything on earth is extraordinarily limited I often don't want even to have too good an idea of them. I don't want to have too much of a hypothesis to be proved or disproved—rather there's an animal pleasure in friends. One feels a little safer or a little merrier, one shores up a small bulkhead against the large dread that always waits outside the doors so if we're friends it's not because we necessarily have a good idea of what the implications of the other's thoughts might be, but because we are simpatico. Because in a funny way we are family, as opposed to the other sorts of friends who start as associates. For that reason I think it is no accident that we've never had a serious political conversation. Each of us is all too aware that it might be harder to remain friends afterward. Yet I see no inconsistency in this. Your ideas would have a negative importance to me if I did not believe in your good will and good conscience, just as my ideas would be finally intolerable to you if you did not believe in my essential good intent. What I think it comes down to is that our experiences have been so different that ultimate ideas are much at odds, but to me this is far less important than the fact that we have a friendship. That is what is real. I've never for a moment considered whether I'm talking to the real Diana Trilling, because I know damn well I am, you damn adolescent, and the way I know is that I have the clearest impression of not knowing who I'm talking to when I'm with someone that I don't know, which is to say, that I don't feel comfortable with. Besides, I feel your ideas and my ideas are going to become more and more unimportant. There's something going on which I don't think I understand anymore, and I used to have a confidence that I understood the times better than anyone, but now I just don't know. These McLuhans, these Pynchons and Jeremy Larners and this love of electronics and plastic and folk/rock make me feel like Plekhanov's scolding of the Soviets in 1917. Sometimes I think we're at the tail end of something which soon may be gone forever, so that in 50 years, for instance, there may not be anyone alive who's read all of "Remembrance of Things Past." See how gloomy I am. Why indeed should I give a damn what my friends' ideas are—indeed let them cherish them for a while, they don't matter any more than my own ideas. What I do know is that the majority of people among whom you spent your intellectual life, and they are the Communists of the '40s who form up a large part of this, had an aridity of invention and sterility of emotion which had everything to do with preparing the ground for the extraordinary nihilism which is now near upon us, because with rare exceptions, and Lionel would be one of the very rare ones, they offered no fertile continuations of Western thought—their best and final tool was a savage, even cannibalistic malice. . . .
Love for now,
To Jean Malaquais
July 9, 1967
Dear Jean,
. . . I have a general theory the act was committed by a petty conspirator or conspirators & Oswald was at least associated with it. He was also, I would hypothesize, a petty agent for more than one American secret police—let us say CIA & FBI, and also a petty agent for one or two other countries. So the history of the Warren Commission proceedings is the history of a series of attempts to conceal, by multitudinous layers of meaningless evidence, the simple contradictions attaching to the embarrassments of the various secret policemen when lo and behold one of their boys seemed to be at the gun. Plus other waves and layers of distorted evidence, Dallas police,![#analytics: 10]|||||| Jack Ruby, etc. . . .
To Marvin Gorson
April 11, 1968
Dear Marvin,
. . . I don't think I'll take up your kind invitation to become the philosopher-in-residence for the Peace and Freedom Party for two of the best reasons possible. I can't quite think my way clear to a coherent political position. As you may or may not know I'm a left-conservative, which involves such contradictions as being against urban renewal, but on the other hand not necessarily being for legalization of marijuana. I may have to come out for legalization of marijuana. I may have to come out for legalization if the police keep harassing people and arresting them unnecessarily, but with all that I prefer it to be illegal for it gives a touch of spice to the smoking and saves us from the corporation being able to put vitamins in the hydroponically grown and hybrid hyped marijuana with filters. Not to mention all the psychedelic commercials we'll be spared. Also I'm not so sure that McCarthy and Kennedy are indistinguishable from Humphrey, who if nothing else ought to pay for his total commitment to the war in Vietnam. It's all very well to say that there's no difference between Kennedy and Johnson, but I'm not at all sure I agree. It doesn't matter so much what goes on in Kennedy's head, as that you'll have a totally different country if a man who wears his hair the way he does becomes our President. . . .
To Allen Ginsberg
December 9, 1969
Dear Allen,
. . . This is just to say love to your manse and three cheers for the organic farming.
Yours sincerely,
P.S. People keep asking me to do pieces on what I think the '70s will be like. Do you know I don't have the remotest idea. We were sure of what would happen in the '60s and we weren't far from wrong. The '70s are just a fearful blank to me. I hope it's age rather than presentiments. Merry Christmas dear poet.
To Eiichi Yamanishi
December 5, 1975
Dear Eiichi,
. . . Our political situation here is curiously flat. There's no great excitement anywhere and there seems in manners and mores and morals to be a return to the center. More and more young radicals I used to know, who saw sex, for example, as a completely rational activity to be pursued for one's own pleasure, are now turning in the other direction and speak wistfully of finding a mate with whom they can suffer and die. The one thing one seems able to depend upon in American life is that the pendulum will operate. I must say that I've always been particularly sensitive to the pendulum, since I always seem to be swinging in the opposite direction from it.
As for city politics, Ford acted in disgusting fashion over the troubles of New York, and carried on as if there were something personally corrupt and deficient in the soul of New Yorkers themselves. When one puts his remarks against the unspeakable waste of the war in Vietnam, the various debauches of the oil fields, the absolute dissipation of energy in every endeavor of American and corporate and international financial life, one's old sense of anger comes back again. I've had the grim and funny satisfaction of having people stop me on the street in New York from time to time now and say to me, "I wish I'd voted for you six years ago. You are a prophet." To which I always laugh and say, "Listen, if I had been elected you'd be blaming me now for all this trouble." No, my life is simple, I do not have political ambition, I have only one, which is to get to that novel. . . .
To Mary Bancroft
October 18, 1976
Dear Mary,
. . . I find it hard to burn with your passion about Carter, for I have only to think of Ford or, God save my ass, Reagan, and wonder how a self-respecting conservative like you can get it up one more time to put the dipper in the bile pot. Yes, I think Carter is ambiguous as hell and yes he could be the devil and yes he could sure have taken me in and yes the Democrats will take us to war before the Republicans and yes it could be the biggest mistake I've ever made, but all I could tell you is I've learned over the years to get simpler and simpler. I decided it's finally no accident if I walk away liking somebody or not liking them. Rather, everything that's happened to me in my purchase on fifty-three years is in the judgment. And I walked away from Carter and I really liked him, he stayed with me in a good glow. Not many people do that to me. Since that part is incontestable for me, I have to recognize that if he is the devil, then so am I, and it was that good glow of fellowship devils feel when they encounter one another in high and secret places. But as for Ford, Reagan, Dole and the rest of that pirate ship—Mary, they're puke. They're hideous. Don't you know what they've done to this country? Johnson was a tragic monstrosity and he got us into Vietnam ten times as much as Kennedy—I'll grant you that. But what Nixon did in not getting us out for four long years is unspeakable, and what Ford and Reagan do in terms of the economy that is run by the guys who roll around in the golf cart, oh the corruption, oh the ooze, oh I miss you. Oh god I miss you. Mary, why do I never visit? . . .
To Richard Stratton
Early January, 1987
Dear Rick,
. . . Norris and I were invited to Moscow for that conference Gorbachev called. Rick, I tell you, it's incredible: there is something happening over there. It's as a bear, old, smelly, wounded all over the place, obese, matted in his own corruptions, and there's a look in the bear's eye: he wants to go back to the circus, he wants to be a trained bear and receive applause, and be honored by all the other animals. This is too fancy a way to put it, but in fact, I guess I've been brooding about Russia ever since "The Naked and the Dead" came out, because I went through the experience of so many in my generation, of thinking the Russians were great during the World War and respecting their army and their infantry as only an American infantryman could, and their war sacrifices, and then being plunged into the Cold War and all the signals being reversed. I didn't trust anyone after that, including the Russians when I got to Lenin about Stalinism and the real horrors that are there. There is one difference between Russians and Americans that is crucial: in America we keep running ahead of our guilt. We stay ahead of it by technique, by every trendy step. We're analyzed, tranquilized, and roboticized, nouvelle cuisine-ized, yuppified, we stay ahead of our anxiety and our great guilt and are able to avoid the issue. The Russians aren't. They're marooned in their guilt and there are very few Russians who don't have a bad conscience because the history of that place for 30 years required one to turn on friends, not overly perhaps, but through acts of omission, not helping friends who run afoul of the authorities. And authority itself kept stalling in its own huge bad conscience. The Russians, I think, live closer to their souls than we do because they're guilty, and I can't tell you how moving it is that out of the top bureaucracy itself has come this recognition that they've got to change and have a more human government. Rick, I tell you, if I were the kind of guy to pray, I think I'd even ask for good will from above so that unbelievable thing that Gorbachev is attempting in Russia, and brother, I feel for him. It could go wrong so easily, but if it goes right, this country, our country, America is going to have to cut out so much of its own bullshit and come face to face with the idea, if Communism becomes democratic, that our own stables are overflowing. And our horseshit is reaching our nostrils. Well let's see.
Three cheers,
To Don DeLillo
August 25, 1988
Dear Don,
What a terrific book ["Libra"]. I have to tell you that I read it against the grain. I've got an awfully long novel going on the CIA, and of course it overlapped just enough that I kept saying, "this son of a bitch is playing my music," but I was impressed, damned impressed, which I very rarely am. I think we keep ourselves writing by allowing the core of our vanity never to be scratched if we can help it, but I didn't get away scot-free this time. Wonderful virtuoso stuff all over the place, and, what is more, I think you're fulfilling the task we've just about all forgotten, which is that we're here to change the American obsessions—those black holes in space—into mantras that we can live with. What you've given us is a comprehensible, believable, vision of what Oswald was like, and what Ruby was like, one that could conceivably have happened. Whether history will find you more wrong than right is hardly to the point: what counts is that you brought life back to a place in our imagination that has been surviving all these years like scorched earth, that is, just about. It's so rare when novel writing offers us this deep purpose and I swear, Don, I salute you for it.
Norman Mailer
To Florence Bonanno
December 4, 1996
Dear Florence,
. . . I, too, like Dole but I ended up voting for Clinton mainly because I think if anyone can close the gap between black and white in America, Clinton has that possibility. Black people do trust him. He has a certain regard for them; I think it's the nicest part of his character.
Dole I like personally and, of course, we're the same age so I identified with his troubles. But, Florence, you know, he just never came to grips with any real problems. He kept saying the same things over and over, really. The fact of the matter . . . for me, is that the Republican Party is profoundly divided between those who believe in family values like yourself, I expect, and those who believe in a free market. And the two are absolutely divided. You could fit the Democratic Party between them. So I expect that Dole in trying to bring the two halves of the Party together just didn't dare to say anything too revealing of the huge split that exists and so he got less and less interesting in what he had to say. And that's not good for a President. If Nader had been on the ticket up in Massachusetts, I think I would have voted for him. . . .
To Sal Cetrano
March 28, 1999
Dear Sal,
. . . While the Democrats, and Clinton first, disgust me with what I call their "boutique politics"—a little bit here, a little bit there, and served with loads of bullshit slathered over it—the Republicans are a psychotic monstrosity. On the one hand, they're God, flag, and family—although few of them would know Jesus Christ if he were standing at the next urinal pissing along with them—and an astonishing number never served in the armed forces nor heard a bullet, and being politicians, they cheat like jackrabbits on their wives and families. But all right, what's the use of being a politician if you can't make a living at being a hypocrite? The point is: the Republican Party is schizophrenic: on the one hand, they are, as I say, for God, flag and family, but on the other, they are for the unbridled expansion of capitalism, and thereby leave out something that might still be important to you which is that Jesus, like Karl Marx, thought money leaches out all other values. Indeed, it does. If the whole country is going to pot, and it certainly is, I think you could graph the decline not only in morals, but in a sense of social éclat and social standards—I think you could plot the decline right next to the rise of the Dow Jones—the higher the Dow, the lower the standards. Money destroys all other values. I can even respect the right wing Republicans for holding to a few standards, as they do, but they never take on capitalism which, unbridled, is the worst scourge of human value that we have right now. There may have been a time when Communism was a worse scourge, but now we're the leaders, and I suggest you consider living with the notion that the party of your choice is paralyzed in its moral centers. . . .
Cheers, old buddy,
To the Editor of the Boston Globe
March 13, 2002
George F. Will writes (Boston Globe, March 12): "Bush's terseness is Ernest Hemingway seasoned with John Wesley."
Well, one is hardly familiar with John Wesley's sermons, but I do know that to put George W. Bush's prose next to Hemingway's is equal to saying that Jackie Susann is right up there with Jane Austen. Did a sense of shame ever reside in our Republican toadies? You can't stop people who are never embarrassed by themselves. George Will's readiness to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse can be cited as world-class sycophancy. . . .
Norman Mailer
To Sal Cetrano
June 17, 2003
Dear Sal,
. . . Even if you're a deep-dyed conservative, and Republican, please disabuse yourself of the idea that Bush is a good guy. Please, Sal. It seems to me the best argument you can present is that he's a total, shallow, manipulative shit, but that he's got the luck of the devil working for him and so his policy may not end up a total disaster. . . .
To Emmerich Kusztrich
January 26, 2005
Dear Imre,
It was so thoughtful of you to send me the piece on arthritis of the knees. I find that as time goes by I am able to live more and more easily with the condition. Two canes—and I'm not merely being cute—are kind of fun once you learn some of their dimensions. The key pleasure is that you can have the illusion that you are going in for cross country skiing and poling along and that is great fun. Moreover, you never have to stand for long; there is always somebody offering you their seat.
Sans façons, I hope to get back to Germany sometime in the next year and look forward to visiting with you and Gertrude again and we can talk about the operation at that point. I don't feel in deep need of it at this hour, but these things change from time to time. It will be one of a hundred things we can talk about. I read the clipping you sent me from the Financial Times and it is grim. I don't know where we are all heading. This is the first century that weighs upon us like an incubus. In the twentieth century it was the terror that we would all be blown up by nuclear war. But it seems surrealistic. Now, in the twenty-first, this heavy notion is present among so many that we may or may not reach the end of this century in something like our present condition. At my age it makes so little difference, but I do have nine children and a number of grandchildren and the prospect is hardly full of joy for them.
Forgive me for this visit to world doom. I got carried away, I fear. But I also want to say what I've said before; we hardly know each other and yet we feel like good friends. That is a most agreeable condition. Cheers, to you and Gertrude, and dare I say it?—a little love.
Norman ♦


text:
In case you missed it last week, "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" had a little fun with Planet Fitness in one of its "reports." You might think the folks at Planet Fitness would be pretty steamed about how the company was portrayed. Not so.
Correspondent Jason Jones gets to the heart of the matter of a Philadelphia man who was thrown out of a Planet Fitness club, accused of being a "lunk" and setting off the club's "lunk alarm" for grunting too loudly while working out.
"We thought it was pretty funny," John Craig, in charge of brand development at Planet Fitness, wrote in an email. "Most people saw the piece for what it was—a purely satirical (and highly scripted) episode. There's been some criticism—as we expected—from folks who oppose our policies against weight-dropping and grunting. Since it was the Daily Show, we knew we'd absorb a few blows — but we can take it."
Planet Fitness is no stranger to criticism. Ever heard of a fella named Mike Grondahl? He's the CEO of the Newington, NH-based company who made some disparaging remarks about personal training last year. When the subject was brought up in a recent phone interview, Grondahl didn't back down from his stance, saying ending personal training was the best move the company has ever made.
"We've really taken our group training to a whole new level," Grondahl said. "We were averaging 20-25 visits a week before. Now our clubs are doing over 100 visits a week. In turn, we won't feel anything short-term, other than we're having to pay our trainers a little bit more money. I suspect that long-term, [members are] going to get acclimated to the club much better, and I believe our retention's going to increase. Two years from now, our EFTs will be much higher than they are today."
Now is probably as good a time as any to let you know that Grondahl will be appearing on a panel at our upcoming Club Industry show. The session, titled "What IS Going On in the Industry," is Wednesday, Oct. 12, at McCormick Place and will be led by Michael Scott Scudder, CEO of Club Management Education and Training Online who recently became a managing partner of the Fitness Industry Group. The panel also includes Bill Rodriguez, vice president of marketing at Snap Fitness, Bryan O'Rourke, CEO of Integerus, and Robert Dyer, CEO of Fitmarc.
The hope is that each of the panelists will have enough time to air their views during the 90-minute session. One panelist just might steal the show.
"Put your seat belt on. I don't have a filter," Grondahl said.
Operators are standing by.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
toddynho needed a new logo design and created a contest on 99designs.
A winner was selected from 23 designs submitted by 9 freelance designers.
Looking for a nice logo to kick-off the redesign of the website. I'm looking for something creative. Check out the website first to see what it is all about: http://www.13styles.com
13Styles or 13Styles.com (capitalization not important)
Desired Color Scheme:
blue/orange, blue/blue, blue/anything
Desired Style:
open to both grunge and clean logos... doesn't have to be too web 2.0, just looking for a fresh look for the site. I will use the logo design as a starting point for the site redesign.
Accepted File Formats:
AI or EPS
I like blue's and orange's...
I'm not looking for an iconic logo, just something with the site name 13styles
The current website: http://www.13styles.com
Here are some links to logos that I like:
Find out how a design contest works or learn more about our logo design services.


text:
I was early for a meeting on friday afternoon and found myself sitting in a chat between a University President and members of the faculty. One of the faculty members asked the President about the "education bubble." The President gave his thoughts on the topic and then unexpectedly turned to me and asked what I thought.
I am a product of student loans. I got an engineering degree at MIT and a MBA at Wharton and paid for both of those degrees with a mix of family support, tuition credits for working while in school, and the maximum amount student loans I could take out. I spent much of my 20s paying those loans back. I remember when I made my last payment. It was a moment of great pride.
I have made a tremendous return on my two degrees. Those student loans were an investment in me and they paid off big time. For the right student and the right institutions, there is no better investment that society can make than to pay for a high quality college and graduate education. Not only have I paid back the loans, but the Gotham Gal and I have made and continue to make generous gifts to a host of edcuational institutions. We will pay back the investments made in us many times over.
When it came time for our children to go to school, we have paid for the highest quality education we could find for them. We are fortunate that we did not have to take out loans to pay for those tuition bills. But if that were not the case, I am confident we would have borrowed the money to help them attend those institutions. So we are big believers in the value of a higher education and we have invested in it for ourselves and our children.
I told the University President and the faculty members all that. But I also told them that I am deeply concerned that about the cost of a high quality education and the fact that it is getting out of reach for many. And I told them that I am not sure the return on the investment is as high as it once was for many degrees. And finally, I told them that too many students are walking out of college with a student loan burden that is crushing and that they can't and won't pay back.
So how you reconcile these two opposing views and what can we do about it?
Technology can help. But it is a tool not a panacea. Given the choice, most of us are still going to opt to send our children to MIT instead of the University of Phoenix. MIT and the other leading higher education institutions will increasingly use technology to improve the education they deliver and do so more efficiently. This may help alleviate the ever rising costs.
But we also need to get more creative about the financing of higher education. We should measure the return on investment students are getting from the institutions they attend and the degrees they obtain and tie the amount of loans they can get to the returns they are likely to achieve. Students that attend institutions that can deliver higher returns should be able to take our larger loans.
Repayment terms need to change as well. Loan repayments should be capped at a percentage of current income. I know a woman who has been out of graduate school for more than a decade who dedicates one of her two paychecks a month to paying back her student loans. She is spending half of her take home income on her student loans. That is nuts.
Bubbles are driven by easy money that drives irrational behavior. Our student loan policies have been doing some of that. We can and should change our policies to force more rational decisions in the purchase of higher education in this country.
But we cannot forget the power of a high quality education to put our children on the best possible path in their lives. I am an example of what such an education can do for someone. And I know that there are many others out there just like me. We need to figure out how to reform the system in ways that don't cut that path off for students like I was thirty years ago.
Read more posts on A VC »


text:
Toni Collette On 'The Realistic Joneses' and Why She Shaved Her Head
In Will Eno's Broadway play, "The Realistic Joneses," opening April 6 at the Lyceum Theater, Toni Collette plays Jennifer Jones, a woman whose laconic husband (Tracy Letts) has a rare terminal illness. When her new neighbors, also called the Joneses (played by Michael C. Hall and Marisa Tomei) show up, the four characters start interacting in all sorts of weird ways.
Mr. Hall's character can't seem to stop talking — he says all the things most people tend to keep to themselves; Ms. Tomei's is an emotional mess; and Ms. Collette's Jennifer has the difficult task of keeping it together when everyone around her starts to lose it.


text:
War Exacts Heavy Toll on Ukraine's Economy and National Mood
Long Slog of Conflict in East Further Imperils Already Fragile Growth Prospects
KIEV, Ukraine—Col. Andriy Lysenko, the security spokesman for the Ukrainian government, spends his twice-daily briefings cataloging in minute detail the government's offensive against pro-Russia rebels in the country's east.
But one thing he rarely mentions, unless specifically asked, is how many Ukrainians died fighting.
"It's better...
Sponsored Offers


text:
Please enter your email and password below to log in.
* Colours of fabrics on the website may be slightly different to the actual product.
Product Code: 12837
Size (cm): 180x250
Unit: Each
Inner Pack Qty: 1
Carton Qty: 5
Fabric: 100% Polyester
Weight: 225gsm
Availability: Made To Order. Lead-time 4 Weeks


text:
|Home >> Course Descriptions >> College of Arts and Sciences
|General World Geography
|Three semester hours. (FL/SP/SS)
|A study of the human geography of the world. An examination and comparison of major cultural geographic themes: population, migration, agriculture, religion, industrialization, urbanization, and political landscapes.
Home - General Information - Student Services -
Academic Undergraduate Regulations -
Undergraduate Degrees - Academic Graduate Regulations -
Graduate Degrees - Course Descriptions - Faculty -
Appendix A - Appendix B - Appendix C - Appendix D


text:
Hello guys,
I develop a Enterprise web Application in Netbeans. It has only normal .jsp pages rather then database or anything. There is .war file exist in that project.
I have my doiman and got space . but how to deploy that .war file on cpanel so that it would online
Please Help me as soon as possible.
Thank you in advance.


text:
I wanted to thank several travel editors for featuring some of our tours in their recent coverage. Thank you!
Los Angeles Times: Tours and cruises in Latin America, Europe and Asia
MSNBC: Argentina, air/8 nights, from $1,659
Frommer's: Frommer's 5 Deals: Puerto Vallarta, Morocco, Philly, India, and Texas Hill Country
Chicago Tribune: Borneo to Bangkok: Travel trips, tips & deals


text:
Logitech G610 Orion Brown Backlit Mechanical Gaming Keyboard : G610 Orion Brown starts with the same performance-driven design and integrates powerful gaming technologies. From the finest details, like fingerprint-masking matte texture and durable braided cable, to the most intricate, each aspect is precisely engineered to bring Logitech G's industry-leading technology and quality of construction to the uniquely crafted form.
Cherry MX Brown Mechanical Key Switches : Cherry MX mechanical switches are standard in mechanical keyboards. Mechanical switches last longer and are more consistent in feel and responsiveness than rubber dome keyboards. Low-noise Cherry MX Brown switches have a tactile bump for feedback while you type.* Cherry MX switches are rated to over 50 million keystrokes and actuate precisely for a reliable gaming experience.
Customizable Lighting : Use Logitech Gaming Software to choose your level of customization with the ability to select and personalize each individual key light. Light up keys to keep track of spells and other commands. Logitech Gaming software can also synchronize light patterns with other Logitech G devices.
Easy Access Media Control : Control your background track without switching out of your game. G610 Orion keyboards feature dedicated media controls that can be used to play, pause, and mute music and videos instantly. Use the roller to adjust the volume, or skip to the next song with the touch of a button.
26 Key Rollover : Multi-key input means you can flawlessly perform complex moves exactly right every time. With 26-key rollover, you can press a huge number of keys plus modifier keys (Control, Alt, Shift) in any order and still get exactly what you intended.
Three Angle Adjustment Feet : Three step angle adjustments allow you to set your keyboard to 0, 4, or 8 degrees for the perfect angle. Rubber feet keep your keyboard stable during intense gaming action.
Dealshabibi is a best place to buy the Logitech G610 Orion Brown Backlit Mechanical Gaming Keyboard in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Sharjah, Al Ain, UAE, Middle East. Now shipping available to Doha - Qatar, KSA - Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman in the GCC. Our customers keep on coming back the reason, we have best customer support service / Cash on Delivery and One Day Delivery in UAE.
|Actuation distance
2 mm
Actuation force
45 g
1259 g
|Physical specifications (HxWxD)
PointsPay enables you to pay for this purchase using Etisalat Reward points. Don't have enough points? No problem, you can top up with your credit card. Additionally, you have the option to pay only with your credit card and earn points for your purchase. All you need is your Etisalat Rewards membership ID and password to use PointsPay.


text:
Ridge steps down as homeland security secretary, officials say
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) – Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, whose name became synonymous with color-coded terror alerts and tutorials to the public about how to prepare for possible attack, is resigning, U.S. officials said Tuesday.
Ridge submitted his resignation in writing to President Bush on Tuesday morning, said officials who confirmed the departure only on grounds of anonymity.
In an e-mail circulated to Homeland Security officials, Ridge praised the department as "an extraordinary organization that each day contributes to keeping America safe and free." He also said he was privileged to work with the department's 180,000 employees "who go to work every day dedicated to making our country better and more secure."
A Washington news conference was scheduled for mid-afternoon.
A Homeland Security Department official said Ridge is expected to stay on his job for a few months, until a successor is found. Some officials expect the U.S. may face increased terror risks around the holidays and the Jan. 20 inauguration.
Among those mentioned as possible candidates for Ridge's replacement are Bernard Kerik, interim Minister of the Interior for Iraq and former New York City police commissioner, former Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Joe Allbaugh and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Mike Leavitt and White House homeland security adviser Fran Townsend. Others are also believed to be interested in the job, including Asa Hutchinson, undersecretary for border and transportation security in the Homeland Security Department.
Six other Bush Cabinet figures are leaving, including Attorney General John Ashcroft, Commerce Secretary Donald Evans, Education Secretary Rod Paige, Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman; Secretary of State Colin Powell and Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. Bush has chosen national security adviser Condoleezza Rice for the State Department, White House counsel Alberto Gonzales for the Justice Department and Carlos Gutierrez for Commerce.
In October 2001, Ridge became the nation's first White House homeland security adviser, leading a massive undertaking to rethink all aspects of security within the U.S. borders in the wake of the terror attacks of September 2001.
Congress subsequently passed legislation establishing the Homeland Security Department, merging 180,000 employees from 22 government agencies. Ridge became the department's first secretary in January 2003.
He has presided over six national "orange alerts" when the government boosted security out of concern that an attack may be coming. An attack in the United States never happened on his watch.
Ridge has said, however, that he believes an assault by the al-Qaida terrorist network was averted last summer during the Fourth of July holiday period, when intelligence reports indicated terrorists might be targeting international flights to attack the United States. Passenger manifests were scrutinized and flights were canceled.
Yet Ridge, a politician by nature, fought criticism leading up to the election from those who said he was using terror warnings to boost support for Bush. Ridge repeatedly said: "We don't do politics in the Department of Homeland Security."
Ridge, 59, has privately expressed his interest in moving out of the time-consuming, stressful post. However, those who know him said his loyalty to Bush was always a factor to consider.
Ridge, who has spent most of his adult life in public service, came home from Vietnam, earned a law degree and went into private practice in Pennsylvania. He later served as an assistant district attorney and ran for Congress in 1982.
Ridge was re-elected five times. He became the Pennsylvania governor in 1995, leaving the state capital in October 2001 after the White House called.
Associated Press writer Ted Bridis contributed to this report.


text:
Docter and Walters were selected to the All-Ivy League teams by the conference's head coaches (Gil Talbot).
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. – Women's volleyball senior captain Taylor Docter and sophomore Caroline Walters have been named to the All-Ivy League teams, as announced by the league office Thursday. Docter was tabbed by the conference's coaches as a first team selection, while Walters earned second team plaudits.
Docter finished the season ranked third in the Ancient Eight in points per set (3.63) and was fourth in kills per set (3.12) while led the Crimson in kills for a third straight year. The Los Altos, Calif., native posted a career-best 12 double-doubles and also set career-highs in kills per set, digs (264) and digs per set (2.93). Her 23 kills at Dartmouth on Sept. 21 represented a new single-match high, while her 20 digs against Holy Cross on Sept. 25 were the most in her career. Docter was named the Ivy League Player of the Week on Oct. 16 after averaging 5.00 kps and 2.57 dps while hitting .280 in wins over Cornell and Columbia and was named to the conference's honor roll four times. Additionally, the human developmental and regenerative biology concentrator was selected to the Capital One Academic All-District first team.
Docter will graduate in May as one of the most celebrated student-athletes in Harvard women's volleyball history. She is the first Crimson to be named to the All-Ivy League first team since Kaego Ogbechie '05 in 2004 and was also named to the second team as a junior a year ago. Docter ranks fourth all-time at Harvard in attack attempts (3,455), sixth in service aces (98), seventh in kills (980) and eighth in kills per set (2.67).
Walters had a breakout year at middle blocker and led the Ivy League with a .371 hitting percentage while ranking fourth with 1.06 bps. Her 111 total blocks rank sixth on Harvard's single-season list while her 82 block assists are eighth most in program annals. The sophomore registered career-highs in every statistical category, including a 14-kill performance at Brown on Nov. 10 and a pair of eight block efforts. Walters hit at least .400 on 14 occasions this season and totaled at least five blocks nine times, and was named to the Ivy League honor roll Nov. 6. This is the first All-Ivy honor of Walters' career.
Harvard has had at least one student-athlete named to the All-Ivy League teams in each of the last 19 seasons dating back to 1994, and this is the fourth straight year that multiple Crimson have been honored.


text:
Students in the S.J.D. program must enter with an LL.M. degree, must be in residence for two semesters, and take a minimum of ten units of graded coursework each semester, which must be approved by the supervising faculty member and Graduate Studies Committee. The choice of courses will be from among those generally offered at the Law School and will depend on the particular subject matter and course of study approved for each S.J.D. student.
Applicants should bear in mind that, due to curriculum scheduling and faculty availability, not every class listed is taught each year. This is most often true in the case of specialized seminars. The final schedule of law classes will be available shortly before the enrollment process begins in July. The law school academic year begins in the middle of August with a fall semester of 15 weeks. After examinations and vacation in December, classes resume early in January for another 15-week semester that ends in mid-May.
Upon successful completion of the residency requirement and performance in courses at a level substantially above the quality expected of J.D. candidates, the Graduate Studies Committee, following its favorable review of the candidate's course work and of the developed research proposal, shall constitute a doctoral committee. It shall consist of three faculty members, including the student's supervisor and a member from a department outside the Law School. Upon the successful oral defense of the research proposal before the doctoral committee, the Graduate Studies Committee shall admit the student to full candidacy for the S.J.D. degree.
Within two years of the completion of the residency period, unless for exceptional circumstances an extension is granted by the Graduate Studies Committee, a candidate shall submit, and successfully defend in an oral examination, a dissertation in the form of a monograph or series of closely related essays suitable for publication and constituting a substantial contribution to knowledge in its field.
The Law School will admit no more than two students in its S.J.D. class each
year. As this suggests, the admissions process is highly competitive. The
Graduate Committee will admit only the most highly qualified applicants who
complete all elements of the Application for Admission, provide clear evidence
of academic excellence, and demonstrate high potential for completing a
scholarly dissertation that constitutes a substantial contribution to knowledge.


text:
With the Great Power Outtage fixed and the holidays complete and 2000 points of Warhammer miniatures painted in a week finished, it is time to get back to the business of the comic.
This week I'm doing the strips in black and white but should also be posting some color character designs.
Audio Babe will be leaving Audio Land very soon and a whole new bunch of characters will be joining the crew. Stay tuned to get a sneak peak.
So play catch up now because the current story is on the fast track to completion and then we enter the new phase in the lives of all the Heroes of Audio Land!


text:
Free Content
FREE CULTURE is available for free under
a Creative Commons license.
For the full license, click here.
To make your creative work more easily available to others, click here.
This video (or .ogg) and this video (or .ogg) explain why this is so important.
As does this book:
Click to Download FREE CULTURE (PDF)
(also available in many other formats )
Culture by Lawrence Lessig
How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity
Hardcover | 5.00 x 7.51 in | 348 pages | ISBN 1594200068 | 25 Mar 2004 | The Penguin Press


text:
Obama heads to New Jersey and New York to talk about the economy then raise money… Once again, folks are asking: Is Obama too exposed? (The answer is yes, but in today's media environment, he probably has to be.)… DNC to blast what they say is the GOP/Tea Party Contract with America… It's going to be Fallin vs. Askins in Oklahoma's gubernatorial race… Profiling ID-1… And Rob Simmons says unequivocally that he's back in the Connecticut Senate race.
From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** The fundraiser-in-chief: After recently sharpening his campaign message against Republicans (he refers to them almost daily now as the "partisan minority") -- as well as acknowledging yesterday that we're less than 100 days until Election Day -- President Obama attends a pair of fundraisers this afternoon and tonight in New York City. Democrats are hoping their DNC/DSCC/DCCC money hauls are enough to protect their majorities in the House and Senate. Yet before donning his fundraising cap, Obama will talk about the economy in Edison, NJ, where he 1) will meet with small business owners to discuss the importance of Congress passing legislation to help small businesses, and 2) will make a statement to the press (at 2:20 pm ET). This will become a familiar pattern for the president's travel where campaigning and fundraising will trump official speeches.
*** Overexposed, again? Also today, Obama tapes his appearance on "The View." That appearance -- plus even his new video on Web MD explaining the health-care law and how to use HealthCare.Gov -- has once furthered a narrative that the president is overexposed. (If you'll recall, we had this same discussion last year after Obama went on Leno, etc.) There is a potential danger here, and it does highlight the fact that there really isn't another key spokesman in the administration to talk about the economy or health care. But as the White House reminds us, the media world is now so diffuse (TV, newspaper, Web, cable Twitter, Facebook) that Obama has to do more than his predecessors ever did. That's the reality. So while folks INSIDE THE BELTWAY believe he's over-exposed, and those folks that watch a lot of cable TV might believe he's overexposed, ask the working parent of two if they think the same thing. One other related point: The White House also recognizes that even while it's losing rhetorical arguments about the economy or health care, it can't give up talking about them. If it does give up, then it will not only lose the short-term battle but also the long-term war.
*** The GOP/Tea Party Contract: At 11:00 am ET, DNC Chair Tim Kaine, DNC Vice Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and other Democratic members will hold a press conference to introduce what they will say is the "Republican-Tea Party Contract With America." These Democratic leaders, DNC spokesman Hari Sevugan tells First Read, "will present the American people a handy 10-point blueprint for how the Republican-Tea Party would govern, based on actual positions taken and held by Republican-Tea Party members." The blueprint includes: repealing the health-care law, privatizing Social Security or phasing it out altogether, extending the Bush tax cuts for the well-off, repealing financial reform, and abolishing the Education and Energy Departments.
*** Today's deficit/debt meeting: President Obama's 18-member bipartisan deficit/debt commission meets at 9:30 am ET on Capitol Hill. Per a release, the commission "will hear from two witnesses -- Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and Barry Anderson, who recently served as head of the Budgeting and Public Expenditures Division of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)."
*** Last night's Oklahoma results: As expected, Rep. Mary Fallin (R) cruised to victory in last night's GOP gubernatorial primary to succeed term-limited Gov. Brad Henry (D). But there was an upset on the Democratic side, with Lt. Gov. Jari Askins edging Attorney General Drew Edmondson by fewer than 2,000 votes. Fallin vs. Askins ensures that the next governor of Oklahoma will be a woman -- the first time that's happened in the state's history. Fallin goes into November as the front-runner.
*** 75 House races to watch: ID-1: The Democratic nominee is one-term incumbent Walter Minnick. The GOP nominee is state Rep. Raul Labrador. McCain won 62% in this district in '08, and Bush won 69% here in 2004. Minnick voted no on the stimulus, no on cap-and-trade, and no on health care. Both Cook and Rothenberg rate the district as Lean Democrat. Just this week, Minnick became the second Democrat to call on Charlie Rangel to resign.
*** More midterm news: In Connecticut, Republican Rob Simmons -- after suspending his Senate campaign but then airing TV ads to announce that he's still on the ballot -- declared at forum last night: "I am running for the United States Senate"… In Wisconsin, "Republican Senate candidate Ron Johnson said … he hasn't decided whether to sell his BP stock, two weeks after he told reporters he would get rid of it."
Countdown to KS and MO primaries: 6 days
Countdown to CO and CT primaries: 13 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 97 days
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.