Monday, September 12, 2011

Who reads American Conservative Magazine?

And who comments there? My friend sent me an email last night admiring Kathleen's The Day Rod Was There post and simultaneously suggesting that the list be updated including the new Rod-centric details he posted here. I had already read that bit of inadvertent clownishness, but I checked in today for the comments since he had specifically requested them. The first one sort of popped up at me:

mccavity, on September 11th, 2011 at 10:32 am Said:

I lived in the city but was out of town visiting family. I watched it on TV.

When the first tower was hit I thought it was an accident.

When the second tower was hit I thought “THIS IS THE PRICE WE ARE PAYING FOR ISRAEL”.

On this day of remembering where we all were, and what happened, if is very important to remember WHY it happened.

Rod Dreher probably won't delete this comment. He only deletes comments if he disagrees with them or if he finds them to be offensive.


  1. Of course, yesterday we got, what, the 20th iteration? He just couldn't stop himself! I get the distinct feeling Dreher referred to my 2006 post before composing yesterday's....just to make sure he elided inconsistencies like whether he saw the tower fall or not.

  2. Seriously, the extreme detail Dreher feels compelled to narrate, repeatedly, year after year, of his 9/11 experience is just bizarre. I've never come across anyone else narrate 9/11 so insistenly, so frequently and in such a strange fashion. It's almost as if he is trying to persuade himself that he was there, that he feels so disengaged from what is going on around him that this sort of list-making is required when he recalls it.

    It's incredibly self-aggrandizing too. Dreher says his apartment wasn't "configured" to see the river, as if he had a 20th floor view but it just happened to be facing the wrong direction. But then Dreher goes on to say his living room was in the basement (!), in which case his apartment wasn't configured to see daylight either. Whatever, dude.

  3. Having a basement living room that was "not configured" to see the harbor is like a dream I had recently, in which I opened and walked through my closet door, only to find myself in the interior of Cowboys Stadium.

    P.S. I also liked the priceless "I turned and joined the crowd headed towards Brooklyn to protect them." and, of course, the "Later that morning, I stood in line at Long Island College Hospital to give blood." Topped off by the title: WHERE WERE YOU ON 9/11/2001?

    As in, "I bet you weren't doing what I was doing, huh? Protecting and serving. Huh? Huh? Huh?"

  4. I get the distinct feeling Dreher referred to my 2006 post before composing yesterday's....just to make sure he elided inconsistencies like whether he saw the tower fall or not.


  5. Pikku -- re your P.S.: Oh my gosh, how can you stand to read this stuff?!!

    You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din. (OK, that may have something to do with the fact that I'm not a man at all...)

    Sorry; getting silly. It's been a long day.

  6. My good Pauli,

    The term "admiring" is, of course, your interpretation. I myself would use the term "appreciating": one seldom admires a court transcript, but one many times may have occasion to appreciate its authoritative account of events.

    What I wrote was

    My good Pauli,

    With a new old congregation assembled in time for this 9/11 anniversary, the good Rod Dreher is offering at his new AmConMag digs what may be a new latest version of his response to 9/11/01.

    As chronicler of the many different Rod 9/11 narratives, your friend Kathleen might wish to add this to her collective history so that it remains complete. One never knows what truths future historians may seek.

    H. M. Stuart

    Given the disturbing nature of Mr. Dreher's multiplex elective narratives of the same unforgettable event - multiplex elective first person narratives of the same journalist Dreher, by the same journalist Dreher himself each time - I believe we all have reason for apprehension if journalism can become nothing more than a nihilistic, elective, choose-your-ending video game. Though perhaps this is ultimately why such offerings are called stories.

    Good Kathleen, you may very well be right that, aside from the obvious calendar reasons, the good Dreher fielded that post as much to tweak you and as a honey pot to survey readership (as our good Pauli has done here) as any other reason.

    But, in the honeymoon of his return to blogging, I also think it was offered, particularly in the way that it was staged on the blog page, for the same reason Republic Pictures ran those suspenseful trailers for the thrilling adventures of Commander Cody: Sky Marshall of the Universe in the 1950's, to weld those new to Dreher or otherwise needing rehabilitation permanently to their seats, eyes like saucers:

    “They’re saying on the street that a 747 hit the other tower!” Julie called from upstairs. I ran upstairs annoyed at the people on the street, thinking that they were panicking and seeing things. As soon as I opened the door and saw the south tower on fire, I knew that it was all true.

    “This is terrorism,” I told Julie. “I’m going to get as close as I can.” I kissed her and ran out the door, headed for the towers. Read more…

    While others were running down, brave firemen were running up. While others were running away, brave Dreher was running toward.

    Given the multitude of accounts of Dreher by Dreher, though, I appreciate, as should all, being able to go to Kathleen for the authoritative transcript.

  7. It's all very cinematic. Dreher running across the bridge (back! back to his family!) cries out for slo mo. Then as the music swells Julie will call to him out the window (at this point the Dreher apartment will be perched directly over the East River). Cue the gigantic floating face of archbishop Dmitri, which suddenly appears in the sky and hovers over them beatifically.

  8. The American Conservative readers seem to have a bee in the bonnet about the existence of Israel.

  9. BTW HMS, you sound as if you own several bow ties.

  10. Yeah, K, that comment (which was awesome, BTW, and made me lol) reminded me of a something Ducky from NCIS might say crossed with a Groucho soliloquy--due to the absurd subject matter.

  11. Cue the gigantic floating face of archbishop Dmitri, which suddenly appears in the sky and hovers over them beatifically.

    Then Abp. Dmitri lectures them about how donuts with sprinkles are the most Christian ones.

  12. I am a man, Pauli, not a puppet.

    I will not click on the sprinkle link. Because what could it possibly say that I would need to read?

    I will not click.

    Even though, I mean, most Christian donuts?

  13. Thank you, Kathleen.

    I must confess that, while to date I have been remiss, in the future I shall in return strive to envision what you are wearing as you write as well.

  14. My good Kathleen,

    Now it becomes creepy, when I return the attention you extended to me first?

    Very well, let us mutually agree not to fantasize about one another's attire, then.

  15. My good HMS, we admired your first comment to this post, but we did not appreciate your next two. So let us consider quitting while we are still (slightly) ahead.

  16. My good Pauli,

    My apologies. Such discussions of attire certainly stray far afield from and do little to advance the central point you make in your post itself.

  17. OK, I'm weak. I had to find out about the sprinkles.

    Oh my. Sure, it may look like a playful thing to a child. But if it falls into the wrong hands (i.e., Dreher), it can turn into a dangerous Crunchy Con Manifesto bullet point. . . .

  18. The terms "fantasize" is, of course, your interpretation, HMS.

  19. Roddy is so quick to condemn the Roman Catholic Church but look at what is happening in the Orthodox Church in America...his new Church..
    Will Rod condemn this? I'm Orthodox too but I condemn child abuse no matter what robes its dressed up in..come on Roddy...speak!