Comments on: Norman Mailer in War of Words with Dallas Morning News Reporter

By: Michael Zeleny

Michael Zeleny — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:25:00 +0000

Esther Wu hits the trifecta: Asiatic plus fat and ugly.

By: SB

SB — Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:58:00 +0000

True, Eric. Mailer also doesn’t help his case by sending his statements to gossip columnists at the Post and Daily News.

By: Eric Eggertson

Eric Eggertson — Sat, 09 Jul 2005 16:51:00 +0000

If Mailer can’t be bothered to rebut a charge of racism in a printable form, it leaves his original statement to speak for him. In the absence of a good explanation, it sure sounds racially insensitive to me.

Once again, “no comment” is seen to be not a very effective way to make your point.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 03 Jul 2005 11:51:00 +0000

One thing that surprises me is that nobody has brought up the fact that Mailer is himself Jewish, and as a Jew, he should know about prejudice and bias and discrimination. Why has the media politely left this part of the story out? Mailer, a Jewish-American writer, raps Kakutani, a Japanese-American critic (she was born in the USA, too, her mom was born here too. Her Dad came from Tokyo) by calling her “Asiatic” and a one-woman kamikaze” [WWI suicide pilot from Japan]!!! That is so terribly racist on Mailer’s part, why has no one spoken of this in the media? Jewish Mailer should know better! It wasn’t so long ago, back in the day, when people spoke of Jewish critics as “_________” and “__________” and “_________________.” Right? So shouldn’t sweet Norman understand this and humbly apologize, even at age 82, and say: “sorry for using ethnic and racial epithets, Michiko, I was wrong.”

Imagine if some critic referred to Mailer as a ”token kike”, or a ”Hymietown two-bit Shylock novelist”? People would be incensed.

We should be incensed over what the old man said about Ms Kakutani, too. Wrong is wrong.

Come on, Norman, own up!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 03 Jul 2005 11:45:00 +0000

A poster named Ted wrote this:

Mailer’s misgivings and mistrust of Kakutani’s methods and motivations are well founded. She is a bright woman, perhaps the smartest girl (or boy , as the case might be) in Advanced English who, though knowing all the facts concerning a novel, shows little evidence that actually enjoys reading. Her criticisms of Mailer are all rather pat, and cannot, as Leonard is able to, locate genius in all the huffing and puffing Mailer has done in his writing life. Her intent might to be major force in the literary history of her time, but she is not a critic, really, but merely a reviewer, a consumer advocate, one who judges
books by their pound value rather than their taste.