Why
I Read or Refuse to Read “One Small Voice”
This might be a very
good question if it did not have an answer. Without an answer it
would make excellent material for Mssrs. Cornell or Reichenbach.
However, this query must step down from that pedestal before
attaining its height, because there is an answer. I read “One
Small Voice,” because in this column and articles by the same
authors, going back to “Catch-22”, I have found a philosophy with
which I can identify. (I just realized I had better start working
the extra information in here if this is all to be one paragraph.
Last date: January 23, 1972 if you could call it a date. Actually I
have considerably atrophized and am writing more to say why I read
“One Small Voice” than to win a WAW contest.) That philosophy is
if you cannot say anything nice, say something argumentative and make
it sound nice. (However, if the prize is won, I, as any gentleman of
refinement would, will accept it.) As I interpret “One Small
Voice,” it attempts, and succeeds, at getting across the point and
laying low its opponents not by hitting below the belt, but by
hitting in the head. In some instances, of course, no goal will be
scored with some people, because there is nothing vulnerable up that
high, but such trivialities need not bother me as a reader. And so,
thus, I read. And laugh.
No comments:
Post a Comment