MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Sunday, December 21, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 35.0° F  Fog/Mist
Collapse Photo Bar

Garrison Keillor waxes idiotic

If it doesn't fit anywhere else, it fits here

Garrison Keillor waxes idiotic

Postby Fat.The.Gangster » Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:54 pm

Seems Mr. Keillor, he of three wives and several affairs, takes umbrage with gay marriage. A little disappointing considering his politics.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/20 ... ex_np.html


(sorry, I don't know how to post a link as text).

For more on this topic from another thread on another board, click here:

http://www.thestranger.com/blog/
Fat.The.Gangster
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:05 pm
Location: Easy Street

Re: Garrison Keillor waxes idiotic

Postby TheBookPolice » Wed Mar 14, 2007 1:23 pm

Fat.The.Gangster wrote:http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/03/14/keillor/index_np.html


Subscription required.

More text can be found at this link from the other site you mentioned.
TheBookPolice
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 8413
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East

Postby aaronetc » Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:29 pm

Wow, what a dick. Also, subscription not required -- just click the logo and watch the ad for all of 10 seconds.
aaronetc
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:06 pm
Location: On the Isthmus

Postby Chuck_Schick » Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:43 pm

I'm happy to be able to say I thought Garrison Keillor was a sanctimonious, deluded, one-shtick, doddering automaton for the AARP set long before he stuck his acrid hoof down his warbling, off-key gullet on this one.

I wonder what clever little gay-bashing skit he and his merry band of talentless drama queen castoffs has for us this week!

Hey Keillor: Woah! Be gone!

Ya cantankerous, philandering old fuck ...
Last edited by Chuck_Schick on Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Postby jjoyce » Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:44 pm

Dare I suggest that Keillor is attempting to be funny and is writing something that Dan Savage, himself, might write? Here's the 'offending' passage:

And now gay marriage will produce a whole new string of hyphenated relatives. In addition to the ex-stepson and ex-in-laws and your wifeâ??s first husbandâ??s second wife, there now will be Bruce and Kevinâ??s in-laws and Bruceâ??s ex, Mark, and Markâ??s current partner, and I suppose weâ??ll get used to it.

The country has come to accept stereotypical gay menâ??sardonic fellows with fussy hair who live in over-decorated apartments with a striped sofa and a small weird dog and who worship campy performers and go in for flamboyance now and then themselves. If they want to be accepted as couples and daddies, however, the flamboyance may have to be brought under control. Parents are supposed to stand in back and not wear chartreuse pants and black polka-dot shirts. Thatâ??s for the kids. Itâ??s their show.


Are gay couples off limits all of a sudden? I mean, I just heard a Savage Love podcast wherein Savage uses the word faggot no less than 50 times. Is Keillor forbidden a few attempts at humor himself?

For the past 20 years or so, the knock on Keillor has been that he has no business skewering Minnesotans with his "we're all in it together" schtick if he's trying so hard not to be one. My problem is I don't really think the material is that funny. This similarly qualifies.
jjoyce
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 12168
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 4:48 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Postby Thusnelda » Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:50 pm

I imagine he was trying for humor.

It blew.
Thusnelda
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2003 10:30 am

Postby TheBookPolice » Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:51 pm

Here's the problem: sterotypical /= actual.

Keillor begins his comment by stating that such a description of gay men is a stereotype, and then (in true straw man fashion) insists that this behavior must end. This begs the question: does he think that all gay men behave this way, or is it in fact just a stereotype?

He does this with "kids these days" too. It's just as irritating, but not as offensive.
TheBookPolice
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 8413
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East

Postby Fat.The.Gangster » Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:11 pm

Keillor's writing is not facile enough to accomplish either humor or satire in this instance. His colloquial vernacular is fine for his antiquated musings about slow Minnesotans from the Fifties, but in this instance and for this subject matter, he just comes off as simplistic , discriminatory, and ill-informed.

I also question the medium and forum through which he communicated this drivel. He never would have produced this story for Prairie Home Companion (though I think if the piece were indeed satire it might have come off better through voice inflection and pacing) so the choice of an online site frequented by individuals that skew younger than his radio audience seems calculated, if not misguided. Either way, I think it fails.
Fat.The.Gangster
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:05 pm
Location: Easy Street

Postby Fat.The.Gangster » Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:29 pm

jjoyce wrote:Are gay couples off limits all of a sudden?


It all depends on who is producing the commentary. Considering the vitriolic blather that masquerades as public policy these days, I think anyone who openly criticizes gay couples or gay parents needs to have experienced personally the crush of open and sometimes legislated hostility towards the lifestyle and its attendant choices. The distinction here, however, is criticism, not commentary. Keillor's piece, such as it is, is not really commenting on gay parenting but using one rote stereotype and comparing it to a fantasy of the nuclear family from the Fifties.

I don't think a pasty Minnesotan who was brought up a fundamentalist Christian and has subsequently been married three times, engaged in illicit affairs, and fathered several children through different women should be the conduit through which we or anyone receives accute social commentary, let alone criticism or enlightenment about gay marriage or parenting.
Fat.The.Gangster
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:05 pm
Location: Easy Street

Postby destryscholes » Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:54 pm

It's quite a stretch to call Keillor's article gay bashing. His point was about our kid-centric culture - "Nature is about continuation of the species -- in other words, children. Nature does not care about the emotional well-being of older people." In other words, get the fuck over yourselves already! Good advice for hyper-sensitive Forons.
destryscholes
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 11:03 am

Postby roadkill bill » Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:54 pm

Fat.The.Gangster wrote:I don't think a pasty Minnesotan who was brought up a fundamentalist Christian and has subsequently been married three times, engaged in illicit affairs, and fathered several children through different women....


Source, please?

For one thing, I always assumed Keillor was a Lutheran, like the prototypical Minnesotan he writes about.

His official biography mentions only 2 children - one in his first marriage, and one in his third. Not that unusual. Perhaps you could enlighten us as to where all this illicit affairs and "fathered several women through different women" comes from.

Not that it's impossible, just that I'd like to see the source. Otherwise it's all just rumor mongering.
roadkill bill
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1694
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2002 12:33 am

Postby Fat.The.Gangster » Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:44 am

destryscholes wrote:It's quite a stretch to call Keillor's article gay bashing . . . In other words, get the fuck over yourselves already! Good advice for hyper-sensitive Forons.


Yes, it is a stretch to call Keillor's article gay bashing, which is why no one did you slack pinhead. Maybe if you spent more time reading the posts and less time crafting reactionary tripe you might offer a little more to the quality of the discussion or learn something.

As to your words of advice, words well heeded, mate.
Fat.The.Gangster
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 358
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:05 pm
Location: Easy Street

Postby Madsci » Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:17 am

I never found Keillor to be funny or amusing.
Madsci
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:47 pm

Postby white_rabbit » Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:38 am

roadkill bill wrote:
For one thing, I always assumed Keillor was a Lutheran, like the prototypical Minnesotan he writes about.



WELS & Missouri Synod Lutherans can be quite fundamentalist, ELCA Lutherans tend to be pretty liberal, so I guess it depends on which synod he was raised in.
white_rabbit
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7487
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 11:44 pm

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:00 pm

white_rabbit wrote:
roadkill bill wrote:For one thing, I always assumed Keillor was a Lutheran, like the prototypical Minnesotan he writes about.

WELS & Missouri Synod Lutherans can be quite fundamentalist, ELCA Lutherans tend to be pretty liberal, so I guess it depends on which synod he was raised in.

For starters, both the Missouri and Wisconsin Synods deny evolution and believe the earth is only around 6,000 years old.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 20274
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Next

Return to Catch All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar