CSotD: The Critical Necessity of Pudding
Skip to comments
While we’re remembering 250 years ago, it was about then that Samuel Johnson wrote “My old friend, Mrs. Carter, could make a pudding as well as translate Epictetus from the Greek, and work a handkerchief as well as compose a poem.”
Whatever the quality of Elizabeth Carter’s cooking and sewing, the quality of her scholarship is astonishing, both on its own and “for a woman,” which may be why Johnson admired her well-rounded personality.
I’m pointing it out because there are people who think being able to translate Epictetus is noble while enjoying sports is stupid, but being well-rounded has always been admired, with terms like “Renaissance Man.”
Nobody is required to like sports, certainly. No more than they are required to like Shakespeare, the ballet, Jackson Pollock, the Amazon rainforest or trimming a hedge.
But it is a poor intellect that doesn’t at least sample as much of life as possible. If you can both make a pudding and translate Epictetus, so much the better for you, for the world, and for the people lucky enough to know you.
Anyway, the problem with “hydration breaks” is not that they exist — particularly given current temperatures — but that they are too long. If you’re going to play the game in quarters, make that the rule. Otherwise, grab a drink in 60 seconds and get back on the field.
Rules change, and they ought to, as long as there are good reasons. Since I only watch futbol every four years, I had to ask my son about things I’ve seen in the current World Cup that I’d never seen before, including the unusual red card that disqualified the top scorer on the American team and made him ineligible for tonight’s game against Belgium.
Turns out there’s a new rule that treading on an opponent’s ankle is a major violation, since it can cause a career-ending injury. And they now have instant replays by which violations can be spotted, which is what happened to Folarin Balogun. That second part is problematic; sports have long lived by the principle that, if the ref didn’t see it, it didn’t happen. Not anymore.
But the principle that still ought to apply is that the President of the United States does not pick up the phone, call the head of FIFA and get special treatment for his star player. That’s not in the rules and it’s not good sportsmanship.
Here’s the thing: There are all sorts of serious issues for which the world could hold us in contempt, like our Iran misadventure, our support for fossil fuels, or our illogical international economic policies, but there’s something special about interfering with the World Cup, because it’s unnecessary and petty and stupid.
Same explanation as a schoolyard bully. We did it because we wanted to. What choo gonna do about it?
It’s one more nail in the coffin of our national reputation. We’re getting known for having a corrupt government in which everything is available for the right price, and if you don’t care about sports, you ought to care about that.
I don’t know if Lee Judge can make a pudding, but in addition to drawing political cartoons, he’s a sportswriter. Well-rounded people make good commentators.
Anyway, I hate having the rest of the world think we’re a bunch of corrupt sellouts, mostly because I’ve long since come to the same conclusion.
I don’t mind admitting that we are a work in progress, but I hate like hell having to confess that we are a work in regress.
I am also frustrated by being old enough that much of my life is considered history. It reminds me of a time when, as a youngster, I was making some confident remark about World War II and my mother said, “Well, you have to remember that, at the time, we didn’t know who was going to win.”
I try to offer something similarly cautioning to younger people today, and, since I’m twice the median age, a whole lot of people qualify as younger.
Some of them are listening, and are starting to speak up. For instance:
Juxtaposition of the Day
When it comes to talking about things like climate change, immigration and Gaza, Aussie cartoonists are plain-spoken folks, so it’s little surprise that they don’t hide their contempt for AI slop masquerading as art, either graphic or literary.
Speaking up is a first and critical step. The next is being heard.
Right now, there are lawsuits about AI from publishers who feel ripped off, but civil suits are rarely as thrilling as episodes of Law & Order and they get buried in the business pages of papers that still have business pages.
And the same publications suing for compensation when their material is scooped up for AI use, are using AI for illustrations instead of hiring artists. Don’t mistake them for allies.
I was in the middle of the online publishing debate 35 years ago, when those executive fatheads were all excited about getting clicks, whatever those were.
There is indeed no fool like an old fool! These were the same old fools who scoffed at Craigslist while it was siphoning off a third of their revenues and who had to have their secretaries print out their emails.
Y’know: Experts!
I sat in a board meeting as recently as 2009 in which the publisher waxed enthusiastic over the number of hits one of our reporters was getting on her blog when it was obvious that she was just repeatedly clicking the link herself.
As for AI, Hudson and Katauskas cut through all the corporate bafflegab: Stealing is stealing and theft is theft and, as Woody said, “Some will rob you with a six-gun and some with a fountain pen.” Or a computer.
Here’s something on the topic from Semaphor, and don’t miss their piece on how the FCC is successfully making sure no loyal Americans stumble across unapproved viewpoints. They don’t have to fight with the courts over the First Amendment. Just a threat makes Corporate cowards turn belly-up.
Dunno how it’s all gonna come out, but I know how it will if nobody speaks up.
We need people willing to make sensible, convincing arguments.
And pudding.
Mike Peterson has posted his "Comic Strip of the Day" column every day since 2010. His opinions are his own, but we welcome comments either agreeing or in opposition.
Comments 12