1,000th Visitor Also First Hate Mailer?
It’s a two milestone day! First, I reached 1,000 visitors, and second, I received my first hate mail via comment to a post! Woo-hooo!
Okay, okay, the comment is pretty tame, but it’s still a waypost of some sort, is it not?
The comment was in response to this post expressing dismay over the selection of Oliver Stone as director for the first big budget 9-11 film. Here’s the comment, verbatim, except for the ****, of course:
Oliver Stone is more than inapt to direct this movie. I think your issue with him is that he isnt a neo-con like yourself. let them make the movie and b**** about something that matters in the world and not who is the director of a movie. Scott in miami out
Um, okay. Google “define:inapt”, and here’s what you get:
awkward: not elegant or graceful in expression; “an awkward prose style”; “a clumsy apology”; “his cumbersome writing style”; “if the rumor is true, can anything be more inept than to repeat it now?”
Forgive the snark, but the commenter’s use of the word “inapt” was too ironically apt to ignore.
B**** about something that matters in the world?
Few things matter more than terrorism these days, and any film about 9-11 must necessarily be about terrorism. You can’t divorce a film from its content. This movie, for better or worse, will go a long way toward defining the historical view of that day.
Already, memories have faded. Can you really recall, really dredge up the horror you felt as you watched slow motion footage of one of the planes simply disappear into the tower just before multiple floors of the building exploded into gigantic orange and black discs of fire? Can you really still feel the same bitter ache in your gut that you felt when you realized the small specks dropping along the silver facade of the tower were people — men, women, fathers, mothers — who had made the terrible choice of death by cement over death by flame? Can you really still recall the magnitude of your disbelief when the blankets of billowing smoke cleared to reveal that the towers were not simply ablaze but gone?
Can you really recall your heart stirring to righteous anger upon seeing footage of cheering muslims, dancing in the streets in celebration of our pain?
Perhaps a little. But pain and anger subside. Wounds heal. Memories fade. They continue to dissipate, scatter, grow faint each day as we get on with our lives. They transition into history.
Few will re-view the actual television coverage of that day. Instead, they will rely on historians’ summaries of the event captured in books, films, and other media. And history is defined as much by historians as by the histories they record.
The contest to define the character and import of 9-11 is already underway. On 9-12, we were in one accord, bound together by a simple, clear fact: a sinister band of evil people wanted to murder us and we needed to stop them at any cost. But as memories have faded, hearts have healed, and costs have come due, we have become more susceptible to outrageous claims and cloudy thinking. Our love affair with nuance has muddied the waters. Will historians capture the clarity of the 9-12 view of 9-11 or will time dilute and confuse its meaning?
The future depends on the history we create today. Not just the events of today, but the way we today memorialize the events of yesterday.
And few things in this world matter more.
