Has anybody read about this whole Norman Mailer/Dennis Miller imbroglio?

After Mailer wrote an editorial in The London Times suggesting that the war in Iraq was undertaken to pump up the pride of Americans in general and white males in particular (I'm gleaning this, I didn't read it the first time around), Dennis Miller wrote a truly nasty response on the Op-Ed page of The Wall Street Journal. Mailer's response was on Page Six.



Two things occurred to me immediately:

1) Mailer is a veteran.

2) Mailer writes his own material.



That's not to say that Mailer isn't daffy, he often is. But at least we can judge his arguments, because he makes them. Assuming that Miller actually sat down and wrote the Op-Ed, just him and the page (as opposed to him, a dictaphone, the page, and a couple of the usual crew brought in for punch-up) it's still somewhat troubling that the best he can do is call Mailer a has-been. This from a man whose crowning achievement was a truly fine stint on Weekend Update--which IS an accomplishment, I'm not being bitchy, but let's all agree it ain't no Pulitzer.



Here's what sticks in my craw about this, and Miller in general: sprinkling cultural references all over your stuff like some sort of magpie with a year or two of JuCo and a jones for autodidactry doesn't make what you say any smarter. It's not satire, it's Robin Williams with "Wordpower" tapes. (See how easy this is? Blech--there's a difference between satire and ad hominem, and Miller's gift is for the latter, not the former.)



Over his career, Mailer's been often outrageous, often intemperate, and often wrong, but at least he's forthright and trying to communicate. Is Miller? I don't think so--I suspect he's looking to get paid; stay hot; increase the visibility of the brand; keep up with Michael Moore and Bill Maher--"I got it! I'll be the PRO-war political satirist!" Now that it's all over but the attrition, of course. As Dennis might say, "O tempora! O mores!"