GADFLY

Back in February, I wrote a column in The Crimson that satirized the opposition to JK Rowling’s selection as Harvard’s Commencement speaker.

In the piece, I make a number of claims that are so absurd I was sure that even the most credulous reader would be forced to see the irony. Examples:

• “This is, after all, a woman who is remarkable for her ability to dupe children into thinking that all they need to face their demons are grit, courage, and a handful of dead relatives.“
• “Last year’s speaker, Bill Gates, waxed so poetic about “appalling disparities of health, and wealth, and opportunity,” that hundreds of graduates quit the lucrative jobs awaiting them on Wall Street and set off to change the world.“
• “It’s universally recognized that only a world figure—political or diplomatic, that is—could possibly be worthy of the lectern in Tercentenary Theatre and the Harvard doctorate that goes with it.“
• “What happened to Oprah, who changed the world by inventing a book club completely free of interpersonal contact? Or Hillary Clinton, who surely deserves to somehow follow in her husband’s footsteps this year? The list goes on, full of individuals who are much more worthy than a woman who thinks it’s okay to write 700-page kiddie-lit.”

For the record, none of these is factually accurate. (Except, perhaps, the first one.) But wait! Here comes the coup de grace:

• “Most crucially, Harvard seniors have every right to demand a Harvard-calibre speaker. Harry Potter—and J. K. Rowling—is just a flash in the pan. Writing bedtime stories is lame; just ask Tolkien and C. S. Lewis.“

A few months pass, I write a bunch of other columns, and I get ready to graduate. Then, in May, a freelance writer called Tristan Stewart-Robinson publishes the scoop of the century in The Scotsman. The headline? JK Rowling to speak at Harvard, but students say she’s a ‘flash in the pan’. Oy vey.

Here are some gems from Mr. Stewart-Robinson’s magnum opus:

• “Last year’s words of wisdom to graduates, from Microsoft boss Bill Gates, reportedly inspired a large number of students to opt for charitable work rather than Wall Street firms.”
• “Adam Goldenberg, a Canadian student who writes for the Harvard Crimson, the daily newspaper at the university, said: “Our commencement speaker tricked parents into letting their kids read books filled with sex, murder, and homosexual role models. Harvard seniors have every right to demand a Harvard-calibre speaker. Harry Potter – and JK Rowling – is just a flash in the pan. Writing bedtime stories is lame – just ask Tolkien and CS Lewis.“

Oh lord, please don’t let me be misunderstood.

Alas, the story had legs.

Keep reading →

A Harvard Summer School student was just stabbed in the chest, at almost the exact spot where the shuttle drops off commuters coming from the Quad.

Fortunately, Harvard remains a crime-free zone.

- ADAM GOLDENBERG

Here.

Just about the saddest thing I’ve ever read.

According to two sources close to the College administration, who spoke on condition of anonymity, plans are afoot to remove scads of College administrators from their historic headquarters in University Hall. Their office space will instead be consigned to the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, the umbrella body which includes both Harvard College and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. I report the story in a piece (my last as an undergraduate) in the Commencement issue of The Crimson, published this morning.

According to the two sources, FAS Dean Mike Smith’s decision to shuffle undergraduate affairs out of the College’s most central building is being hotly contested by the incoming Dean of the College, Evelynn Hammonds. It well should be. Certainly the growth of the College’s Offices of Residential Life, Advising Programs, and International Programs mean that space allocation will need to be rethought, but it is distinctly unclear that Dean Smith is giving the College administration’s symbolic centrality its due in his decision-making. Sending whole offices of the College administration across Massachusetts Avenue (to the Holyoke Centre) ought to sound a very bitter note for any ally of Harvard’s undergraduates.

It is also telling that Dean Smith’s plans have been kept strictly secret to date. It would hardly be surprising were a quiet announcement to be made in a few weeks, once alumni—and most of The Crimson’s reporters—have left Cambridge. For shame.

— ADAM GOLDENBERG

Two solid columns today in the NYT, both about Scott McClellan’s bombshell book. Both discuss the way Washington has reacted to it: railing against McClellan’s disloyalty to the president and ignoring the revelations—if you can call them that—about the administration’s willingness to jettison the truth for political expediency.

One thought keeps resurfacing in my mind through all this rage about McClellan’s “loyalty” issues: what about loyalty to the American people and the Constitution, both of which our government is sworn to serve above all else (even above party)?

I think they’re making all this “loyalty” noise to shift attention away from his damning charges, hoping that the distraction will resonate with the public, particularly those who might still be sympathetic at all to the president. A larger part of me believes the rage is genuine—and that explains a lot about the last eight—forty?—years.

— PETER C. D. MULCAHY

The sixth aspirant looked a little like Hilary Swank and had recently graduated from Harvard. “I was an English and American literature major,” she said. Banks asked her to pose like her favorite character from an American novel, but she froze and could not come up with a character to play. “Let’s try an animal,” Banks said helpfully. “Be . . . White Fang from Jack London.” The girl got down on all fours and growled at the judges.

That’s exciting. Any guesses as to who that was?

— PETER C. D. MULCAHY

Another wrinkle in the “appeasement” rhetoric.

— PETER C. D. MULCAHY

Aides to Mrs. Clinton said a transition back to Senate life was not a chief concern at the moment. “Senator Clinton is focused on running for president and being the nominee,” said a spokesman, Phil Singer.

Right Phil, sure. We all know that can’t happen. Why are we still pretending? The campaign’s spin reminds me of a certain minor celebrity from a few years back.

The sad thing is, in the five years that have gone by, many of Baghdad Bob’s once laughable statements are no longer so funny. Let’s hope this thing doesn’t go the same way.

— PETER C. D. MULCAHY

First Hagee, now Parsley. This stuff seems more offensive than the Reverend Wright sermons, yet the MSM isn’t pressing it nearly as a hard. McCain sought these men out though their views were widely known and praised them in glowing terms, but there’s hardly any controversy compared to the wall-to-wall Wright coverage. Why? Is he getting a free pass? (Fun fact: Hagee calls attacks on him “baseless.”)

Opinions welcome.

— PETER C. D. MULCAHY

Hillary Clinton compares her struggle to seat Florida and Michigan delegates at the Democratic convention to the abolition and civil rights movements.

Yikes.

Keep reading →

Obama and McCain are both amenable to campaigning together, traveling the country and debating in a town hall format in the general election.

It’s an interesting idea and reflective of this new, conciliatory politics which both candidates espouse. There’s a civic ideal in there that’s appealing. McCain’s people proposed it, though, and so I can’t help but wonder whether it’s a strategy to somehow minimize Obama’s fundraising advantage. Admittedly, it could just be a good proposal without ulterior motives, but in politics you can (should) never rule out a cynical ploy.

— PETER C. D. MULCAHY

An interesting piece written by a Yale 1L on the lack of nice people at top colleges. Is this one of those things that everyone notices but won’t mention? Feel free to share your experiences.

— PETER C. D. MULCAHY

The Pennsylvania primary has been called for Clinton, 54-46 with about half of districts reporting.The media has its own narrative which is, of course, full of holes. Here they are: Keep reading →

“I think that they played the race card on me,” Mr. Clinton said without elaboration. “We now know, from memos from the campaign that they planned to do it along.”

“Played the race card”? Seriously?

I can’t believe how out of touch Bill Clinton has appeared throughout this campaign. “Playing the race card” was an OJ trial buzz-phrase.

I also can’t believe he’s playing the “playing the race card” card.

As someone born in the mid-eighties — hazily remembering the golden Clinton era while living the harsh reality of the Bush era — I have always looked at Bill Clinton with relatively uncritical admiration. Let’s just say that the scales have fallen from my eyes.

— PETER C. D. MULCAHY