So this whole Poetry of the Palestinian Resistance thing is getting to me. And not just because I'm not exactly down with it's politics. Or that it's just a pretty fucking ridiculous subject for an English class. It's just that, well, considering what the title is and the warning about it, then what the hell is the class for? Isn't class supposed to be about learning, discussion and debate? Basically, this class is gonna be just a bunch of people sitting around all agreeing with each other, getting into arguments only when there's a debate about whose more pure about the cause.

But isn't the point of higher education to get you to think for yourself?

Anyways, found this thing I wrote way back when. It was like the first thing I put on blogger, but for some reason, it's no longer there. I think this kind of sums what I'm trying to say about the whole thing….

"So me and the writing group (excuse me, my writing group and I) went to go see Sherman Alexie last night. Sherman is a Native American author with whom I knew nothing about but went to go see on the promise of drinks before and after. He was pretty cool (especially when we wound up having dinner with him and he bought our drinks for us) and his stuff was pretty funny and interesting. There was one thing that bugged me about the evening, however…..

At some point, during the Q & A session, Sherman went on a rant about the lack of a minorities and minority views in the entertainment industry. As his rant reached it's inevitable crescendo, some in the audience began to applaud in agreement. Not that there was anything wrong with what he said, because he is right, but by applauding, what's the point?

The session was held in this alternative bookstore in the Mission, the name of which escapes me in my hungover state of mind, but it was one of those alternative type book stores specializing in Third World Literature, anarchist manifestos, "I'm a member of an oppressed minority" memoirs, and various other politically correct subjects. The audience was made up mainly of the crunchy granola types, the type with whom I can almost smell the patchouli even though I wasn't aware if anyone was even wearing any. In other words, it's the kind of crowd with whom not a single person would disagree with Sherman's rant.

And that's my problem with it. It would be one thing for Sherman to say something like that in, say, Mississippi or, hell, San Jose, and there's nothing wrong with him saying what he said where he said it, but it is a serious case of preaching to the converted. And yet the audience felt like responding to it as if by making this brave statement- this earth shattering revelation- and applauding to it, their applause would resonate all the way to Hollywood and make Jerry Bruckheimer burst into cold sweat and renounce his billion dollar mansion and credit account at the Heidi Fleiss Whorehouse.

Which is so not gonna happen. So why applaud?"

Make sense?

And yes, it is basically an attempt to get something up there that used to be, but isn't, but should be cause it's got a couple of funny lines in it.