Category Archives: English

Monica’s Back. In time for Halloween.

English, Gender, Hillary Clinton, History, Ilana Mercer, Pop-Culture

Talk about a throwback culture. The bullying lobby has made whining a national pastime. This group has some cheek calling out Monica Lewinsky for setting back their cause. What cause? Thou Shalt Not Offend? Here are some bully headlines from Drudge:

BULLY GROUP TO LEWINSKY: TAKE YOUR STAINED DRESS HOME!
‘She’s setting us back years’…
‘She doesn’t know what she’s talking about’…

Nothing could make this scribe listen to what Monica has to say today. However, here’s the column written in March of 1999 for Canada’s North Shore News. It probably appeared in the Calgary Herald as well, but I cannot quite recall. It seems a lifetime away. Have I been in the trenches that long? The insights are still good, the writing overwrought (being brutally self-critical is the first rule of writing).

MONICA THE MENACE
©By Ilana Mercer

After watching Monica Lewinsky’s TV debut, I realized who in all this was the real hero. The man who stood bravely between the public and this caricature of a woman is no other than finger-in-the-dyke, Kenneth Starr. It is the independent counsel we must thank for delaying the unleashing of the histrionic Monica.

Menaces like Monica are a product of the times, as is the TV-pimp, Bawbawa Walters. These sorry prototypes are carefully nurtured by the education system. Girls are raised to believe that “like” they deserve everything “and stuff.” That empowerment means they can abandon reason and realistic self-appraisal because they are “totally great.” Feelings rule. Venting and pouting are the only ways of being, and if a guy doesn’t return your calls, President or “whatever,” he’s a jerk. Above all, your sexuality, the true meaning of which evades these shallow sisters, is your shrine second only to your self-esteem.

Monica, of course, blames her woes on a “low self-esteem.” What else? Her demeanor, however, was anything but demure. Her admirers chose “self-possessed” to describe her brazen countenance, although “arrogant” is more apt. If anything, this girl suffers inflated self-importance with a dose of grandeur. Monica threw tantrums when the president of the United States shied away from blowing his sax over the phone for her. And the “pres.,” says Monica, should have broadcast their “relationship” to the world had he any decency. From where Monica is perched, the president’s men had no right to come between her and her lover. This is a woman whose chunky self-esteem is a match only to her keister.

Next, Monica says “sorry.” Fully 66 percent of those polled thought Monica’s apology to the First Wife and daughter was a sincere one. What the public now accepts as an apology is another sick sign of the times. Monica said she was contrite yet proceeded to peel-off layer by layer every scab that ever formed over the sorry affair. This exercise in expiation she carried out in view of millions of people. Apologies have, indeed, become nothing but Oprah-moments, where victims and perpetrators collaborate, under the media’s gaze, to belittle the meaning of loss and injustice.

The reactions in the media to Monica are a useful litmus test for the quality of commentary in the press. The Canadian National Post came tops, consistently assigning wry descriptions to the “bubble head.” Second was the New York Times, referring to the interview as “… a giddy Cosmo version of self-realization, a tale told in the psychosexual language of magazine covers that urge their readers to own their sexuality.”

The Globe and Mail, and the Vancouver Sun vied for a position on the lowest of rungs. Gaseously effervescent was the Globe and Mail’s John Allemang’s string of superlatives: “all-consumingly sensuous, frank, lucid, articulate, focused,” blah, blah, blah. Even her voice, “High, gentle and firm,” gave this man the hots. The Vancouver Sun upped the ante by dignifying Monica’s book with a review.

The reviewer called the book “delicious,” and offered a sample of Andrew Morton’s lumpen prose, showcasing these linguistic vacuities: Monica is analytical, sharp, brilliant, with a photographic memory … ad nauseum. Morton, who told Princess Diana’s “story,” is popping up under every rock with details about the genesis of Monica’s “pain,” which all lead to no other than Torry Spelling’s birthday party snubs. Spelling has a lot more to atone for than a bunch of dreadful films.

Monica’s heft is no longer upon us, although others will step forward to fill the only impression she ever left on the cultural stage, to paraphrase Sir William Shwenck Gillbert’s witticism. When they do, be mindful that girls like Monica don’t get betrayed; they simply star (no pun intended) in their own destructive passion plays. Monica shared her stain-filled affair with anyone who would stand still long enough to listen. And Monica selected her cast, including the sneering Linda Tripp and “Bomber Bill.”

©Ilana Mercer
A version of this article appeared in The North Shore News
March 9, 1999

UPDATED: Levin Claims Liberty’s Language (Levin/Mainstream Media & Object Permanence)

English, Neoconservatism, The State

It’s not saying much, but Mark Levin is better than most radio talkers in that he crafts thoughtful commentary daily, rather than resort to taking calls, or to frivolous banter with bimbo producers. It’s, however, truly bizarre for “The Great One,” as Sean Hannity has dubbed Levin, to claim to have originated the term “statism,” coined by, I believe, Ludwig von Mises. Via Ludwig von Mises Institute:

Statism is a political ideology where the central state, rather than the people, are the ultimate source of authority and power.[1] Statism tends towards increased central planning in the economic sphere and a curtailing of civil liberties, which may be deemed necessary by those in power to achieve social or militaristic goals. The term statism is derived from the French word etatism, a term which was preferred by Ludwig von Mises as he believed it expressed the fact that the ideology did not originally emerge in Anglo-Saxon countries but rather was later adopted by them.

It would be comical were it not true, but, in similar vain, Levin could be heard the other day, laying claim to popularizing the use of the term “civil society.”

Plain dumb.

Here is just one use of liberty’s language, in 2003: “… paleolibertarians care first about the effects of the state on civil society.”

Another: “To liberals, the U.N. is the embodiment of civil society.” Here.

Google “civil society” at the ilanamercer.com Articles Archive, and the search will spit up over two pages.

UPDATE (9/26):: Levin/Mainstream Media & Object Permanence.

Most good libertarians use “civil society” and “statism” without second thought. Perhaps Levin has figured that good libertarians are marginalized enough to ignore … Mainstream media generally believe that unless they personally have arrived at certain eternal truths—these truths and their champions do not exist. In psychology we’d say that they lack object permanence, a facility a baby acquires in his first year. What is out of sight doesn’t exist.

Language Patriotism & The ‘Shangri-La Of Socratic Disinterest’

America, English, Media

I’m forever surprised as to which of my columns will appeal to readers. Much to my surprise, “Killing English by Bill O’Reilly” went down well. I believe the coda clinched it. Or, maybe it was the change of pace and the break from the political cesspool that endeared this column.

The title, incidentally, alludes to Bill’s many “Killing This; Killing That,” “co-authored” books.

The “Shangri-La of Socratic disinterest” is how Canadian commentator Rex Murphy deliciously dubbed Mr. O’Reilly’s method of inquiry.

Wrote (another) Bill:

Dear Ms. Mercer,

I am a confirmed liberal, but need to keep track of the ‘opposition’, so often read your columns at WND.

I am enchanted, if you will, by your latest. One of the current usages now in vogue among sportscasters is “verse” rather than versus….makes me crazy…willful ignorance.

Thanks so much,
Bill W.

This from JOSEPH W.:

You wrote: “The brilliant Richard Burton exulted in his love of English. ‘I am as thrilled by the English language as I am by a lovely woman,’ exclaimed the great actor.”

Ilana: I love English so much that I REFUSE to learn any other language; object to the teaching of other languages in school.
English is the most commonly spoken language on earth; more people speak it as a first or second tongue than any other. English has a speacial status as the international language of commerce, of freedom, of democracy.
Come to the country my ancestors settled in 1642 and learn English…that’s what we speak here.
English is all I need, if someone wants to learn a foreign language, let them take it up like other people take up a hobbie or craft. At least O’Reilly presents so new words to listeners … even if better educated folks like yourself have to correct him!
Thanks for being a champion of our native tongue!

Joseph R. W. II

And from my kind editor at Quarterly Review, a superb writer himself:

Brilliant writing Ilana
Leslie

Killing English By Bill O’Reilly

English, Founding Fathers, History, Literature

“Killing English By Bill O’Reilly” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

The brilliant Richard Burton exulted in his love of English. “I am as thrilled by the English language as I am by a lovely woman,” exclaimed the great actor.

Bill O’Reilly, however, kills it—the English language, that is. The TV personality has a segment on “The Factor,” where he introduces his listeners to English words that he supposedly uses, but whose pronunciation he often botches. Botched this week was the verb “cavil,” pronounced by Mr. OReilly as “kevile,” emphasis on the last syllable. Evel ‘Kevile’!

Mr. O’Reilly once introduced his viewers to the noun “chimera.” The “ch” he enunciated as you would “ch” in “chimp.” It is pronounced as a “k.” Listen.

Conjugation doesn’t come easily on the host’s “Talking Points.” These are festooned with errors like, “Laying around,” when he means “lying around.” Too many American writers have a problem with the verb to “lie.” Why? You’re lying on the bed, you lay on the bed last night, and you will lie on it tomorrow. And by the way, a politician can both “lie” through his teeth and be made to “lie” down on The Rack. They’re a nimble lot.

In the early 2000s, when Mr. O’Reilly’s column was featured on WND, he would make this same conjugation error. I was sufficiently piqued to drop him a polite note. He failed to reply. The mistake, however, was quickly corrected. Myself, I thank my readers profusely when they save me from myself, as they often do, and take this opportunity to ask that they keep their eyes peeled for future faux pas.

Another common error in enunciation is “macabre.” The Americanized dictionary supports the native habit of saying “macabra.” Sorry. The “re” in “macabre” is silent.

Still on enunciation: “PundiNts.” Greg Gutfeld and Hillary Clinton, among many, share the habit of inserting an “n” between the “i” and the “t” when pronouncing the word “pundit.” It’s not there. …

… Read the rest. “Killing English By Bill O’Reilly” is now on WND.