“the great Nabakov (presumably it is he)”

Certainly it is he.

Some great reading in the other links and proof positive of the rude health and diversity of the Australian blogosphere.

cheers,
Derek Barry

That’s hilarious.

However, if we’re a collective (hold hands and get in a circle, sisters), it becomes a shared effort that we all should share the blame and kudos for.

Now, let’s talk about what’s bothering us today. Me first, since I’m the only girl involved in this one ML.

Well, you know……the patriarchy.

The house style for ML attempts to confine editorial comment to very gentle ribbing at most, in an endeavour to appeal to readers of all political stripes…

And also because it’s now a collective effort by authors of all political stripes. We don’t want every post to be greeted with a barrage of demands that the contributor who wrote such-and such be identified. And if Jason, or some other right wing fanatic who happens to be on the team, takes a swipe at my beloved Kim Jong Il, I don’t want my leftist constituents blaming me for it.

On the other hand, someone has to be accountable for errors and distortions.

One possible system would be that individual contributors could express opinions but would have to initial the relevant paragraphs. The editor would be answerable for everyting else, and would check, modify or delete at his discretion, anything with the potential to upset someone.

I think my comments accurately (if very briefly given the limitations of the ML format) summarise the thrust of your arguments on the Santoro case. As I said, I’d be happy to correct any clear misrepresentations you point out.

Nor did I accuse you of dishonesty either, just a degree of partisanship, a comment which I think is well justified by the two posts to which I was referring. I may well still have a certain heavily qualified preference for the ALP over the Libs, I wouldn’t even try to deny it. But I’d expect to be slated for partisanship if I mounted the sort of threadbare defence of a Labor pollie’s dodgy behaviour that you exhibited over the Santoro affair.

That said, I was out of line including strong editorial comment like this in a Missing Link post. The house style for ML attempts to confine editorial comment to very gentle ribbing at most, in an endeavour to appeal to readers of all political stripes as a publication that highlights good blog writing irrespective of its ideological flavour. My comments run foul of that objective. I should have put them in a separate post of my own. I suspect I may still be harbouring some residual anger over your treatment of Tim Lambert over his global warming post in BBP06, which I regarded (and still regard) as extremely unfair and over the top. Accusing someone of serious dishonesty (as you did to Lambert, in my view without justification) is in a sledging league well above a fairly gentle chiding for partisanship.

I guess I just have to get used to being in the position of being accused of dishonesty when I support the Liberal Party, and only being objective when I criticise it!

Ken used to be a Labor MP. Why wasn’t I told this?

Ken is responsible for the “Graham” bits (should we make this clearer?) and I was responsible for linking your piece about the film festival.

I think there are many good Australian films: The Boys is extraordinary and rather terrifying movie (scariest ending I’ve ever seen), and an interesting take on disaffected Australian masculinity. Idiot Box and the other films of David Caesar like Mullet and Dirty Deeds are terrific.

I loved Crackerjack, Romper Stomper, Australian Rules, Picnic at Hanging Rock, Better than Sex, Lillian’s Story, Babe, Strictly Ballroom, Moulin Rouge, Look Both Ways, The Well, blah blah blah. I could go on and on so I will: Breaker Morant, Gallipoli, Lantana, Cosi, Bingo, Bridesmaids and Braces, Black Robe (was produced in Australia), Muriel’s Wedding, The Piano (also produced in Australia), Shine, Dead Letter Office, Love Serenade etc etc

Tons of good stuff.

Ken Loach has made some interesting films (Kez and Ladybird, Ladybird come to mind). Both those films made me weep, however, as a person from a working-class background, his constant positioning of the poor as victims is a bit dull. I must admit to being a fan of the British formula film, particularly is it includes Hugh Grant.

By the way, for those who liked Shaun of the Dead, the makers of that film have got something new coming out any day.

America, in my opinion has a lower hit rate (percentage-wise) than both Australia and Germany. A big production dog is still a dog. But America makes many more films, so for the discerning cinephile, there’s still much to see from the US.

Ken Loach is one of a very small number of British film-makers that does interest me. The others are Mike Leigh and Michael Winterbottom. I wouldn’t want to watch two or three Loach films in a row, but I love his gritty social realism. So much British cinema is throw-away formulaic mediocrity these days, so as far as I’m concerned he’s a luminary (even if his films are SO dark).

I find many Australian films embarrassing (if that’s what you’re referring to with ‘cultural cringe’). Not many film makers have the guts to make something well without compromises that spoil the film. 2006 was an exception, with seriously good stuff, most notably Alkinos Tsilimidos’ Em 4 Jay (hardly anyone saw it on cinematic release, but it has a DVD release in June) and Rolf de Heer’s Ten Canoes. Rowan Woods’ The Boys was also an excellent example of fearless film-making by an Australian. But films like these come along on average only every three or four years.

I have no idea whether you still have active links with the Liberal Party. I haven’t had any with the ALP for over a decade. I’m judging by the two posts of yours to which I linked. Both consist of the sort of implausible partisan defence of the indefensible for which bloggers like Tim Blair are justly famous (albeit mercifully without his signature juvenile sarcasm). I don’t think you can reasonably expect to maintain a reputation for detached objective analysis (assuming that my impugning of it is your gripe) if you write successive posts as blatantly partisan as this.