In today's Washington Post...
Mar. 12th, 2003 01:10 pmThey profiled one of my favorite books in life - Josephine Tey's The Daughters of Time (and yes, Cassie, I like it more than Brat Farrar, despite the lack of cute boys). Winston Churchill disagreed with Tey's conclusions about Richard III, but they certainly have to prove food for thought about perspectives - both literary (i.e. Shakespeare as a writer, period) and historical (Shakespeare as a writer in a Tudor (i.e. Lancaster-descended regime).
Then again, as
queerasjohn pointed out over the weekend in his post about the "butcher of Tianamenn Square, it's all a matter of spin anyway. Some congressman said over the weekend that all political protest (i.e. protest against the regime in power) is illegitimate and traitorous.
Well, of course it is... if you're Saddam Hussein, or the man who sent the tanks into Tianamenn. In other words, if it's traitorous to speak out against going to war against Iraq at this moment, and was likewise traitorous to speak out agains the Spanish-American War (hello, Mark Twain!), what is it when you're living in a democracy and speaking out against the decisions made by the government? In other words, would that congressman be so set against a French citizen who said that his government was losing face by not standing up with the United States?
Or would he invite him over, and ask him to bring some brie?
Then again, as
Well, of course it is... if you're Saddam Hussein, or the man who sent the tanks into Tianamenn. In other words, if it's traitorous to speak out against going to war against Iraq at this moment, and was likewise traitorous to speak out agains the Spanish-American War (hello, Mark Twain!), what is it when you're living in a democracy and speaking out against the decisions made by the government? In other words, would that congressman be so set against a French citizen who said that his government was losing face by not standing up with the United States?
Or would he invite him over, and ask him to bring some brie?