Piety in action
Time has passed. Clocks have ticked. The sun has set and then risen again. Meals have been eaten and digested, tv shows have been watched, teeth have been brushed, dogs have scratched, water has flowed under the bridge. Time has passed and people have urged Madeleine Bunting to answer the many criticisms her article has received. No answer has been forthcoming.
All this really is quite interesting. I knew Bunting was a determined apologist for religion and that she was not very good at making her case – but that was all I knew. It has now been forced on my attention that she’s really a fairly unpleasant character. She is, at least, willing to call someone a long string of harsh names on a public forum and then refuse to reply to dissenters. She has sunk herself in my esteem. She has not behaved well. She is not a good ambassador for her religion.
‘water has flowed under the bridge.”
And the water stinks to high heavens because of all the rubbish which has been thrown into it by Bunting.
But, like all those who litter, there is no sense of responsibility on their part towards other people.
They leave their calling cards behind and to hell with all and one.
Clean up your act Maddy!
Yes, she is getting a fairly comprehensive kicking on Cif. But I’m surprised that you are surprised at her approach. That’s Maddy. She ain’t honest.
Why am I surprised…well I knew she was woolly of course, but I didn’t know she was so…this way.
That’s just more evidence for a theory of mine: that most people who have an image of niceness are bastards, and most people who have an image of being unpleasant are at least decent and at times kindly. They say that Nietzsche, who preaches priorizing the self over others and the will to power, was an extraordinarily gentle and kindly man. The Dalai Lama is probably a tyrant with his servants and sexually harasses his secretaries.
Ha!
Yeah it’s not exactly that I thought Bunting was nice – but that I thought she probably thought of herself that way. It seemed to go with her presentation of self in general – the soft fluffy hair, the mild expression, the girlish voice, the woolly thinking, the going to work for Demos. As you say – an image of niceness. I thought her self-image was such that she would be passive-aggressive rather than just plain aggressive. Live and learn.
It’s all very entertaining, I must say. A real gift.
With apologies for repetition and cross-posting, here is the comment I left on CiF:
I have been a reader of Ophelia Benson’s Butterflies and Wheels for several years. I admire Benson’s writing because it’s clear, cogent, rationally argued, and passionate. She suffers no fools, and she cuts down woolly rhetoric efficiently. That’s not to say she’s always right in some universal sense; none of us are. But she is an honest commentator, and a reflective one. Madeline Bunting, by contrast, seems to specialize in cheap rhetorical ploys that are, when you listen carefully, really quite nasty. Anything to avoid having to engage – really engage – a challenge to her ideas. I don’t know Benson in person (though I correspond with her and comment on her blog), and I’ve never met nor spoken with Bunting. I have only their writing as a means of forming an opinion. To my eye, Bunting is fundamentally dishonest, scattershot in her thinking, and prone to inappropriate, catty behavior. Don’t mistake that for passion; it’s not the same thing.
I listened to the Nightwaves program, and could barely believe my ears. Here are the first thoughts I left at Benson’s blog:
By the end of the program – after Bunting had pulled the too-obvious stunt she’d clearly been waiting to pull, I wrote:
You don’t (and you shouldn’t) have to take my word for it. Listen to the program yourself, pretending you don’t know the principals, and contemplate honestly whether Benson sounded “strident and shrill.” For goodness’ sake, she could barely get a word in edgewise.
Now I read this CiF rant by Bunting, and it’s even more unbelievable. Cross-posting again from a comment I left on Benson’s blog:
In deference to the Guardian’s frowning on strong language, I haven’t reproduced the last sentence of my comment. It uses a word you’re not likely to hear in polite company, outside of a kennel.
@ amos: Well, I don’t know if he’s rough on his personal assistants, but I do hear that the Dalai Lama is a horrible tipper.
Didn’t Madeleine Bunting fall out with Demos? Can’t remember much of the detail of the story…
Actually, I recall an interview between Bunting and Dawkins which left me wondering whether Bunting is in fact religious at all, or whether she merely thinks that her own brand of communitarian left-social conservative politics could best be advanced in an essentially religious climate. All else aside, I’ve never actually seen Bunting talk of her *own* religious beliefs anywhere. Maybe, to be fair, she thinks that’s nobody else’s business but I do wonder…
Wow, talk about owned!
She resigned from Demos because – according to their press release “her vision for Demos is incompatible with that of the trustees”, a bit like the “musical differences” cited by musicians.
I’m just guessing, but you have someone, Bunting, who was probably a pretty, sweet little girl, the favorite of teachers and adults in general. Not extraordinarily intelligent, but being the favorite, she always got good grades and having the confidence in herself of someone who is always the favorite, got ahead in the world of journalism, without too much talent or brains. Always superficially nice and sweet towards those with those in power and ruthless towards rivals or those without power. A pattern learned in grade school. Being essentially a hypocrite, Bunting would tend to defend religion, since religion foments hypocrisy: she would find kindred souls among the clergy, where outward benevolence is often combined with complete ruthlessness. I may be wrong, but I think that I know the type.
Just have to chime in with a “Wow” about the CiF comment thread. MB and her crew sounded rather pathetic, frankly.
I especially like the sonofrockhead who was INSULTED by the requirement he read the book he is dismissing.
Hi! I sometimes have posted as Doc M here in the past. Well done, Ophelia! I’m completely disgusted at Mad Bunty’s rants. She is deeply strange. After her last article on the Ryan Report, I had hoped she might be on the brink of changing her views, but no…
Brian – the Dumbarton Rock-troll is an old foe of mine. He’s of Irish descent, and regularly accuses me of being rabidly anti-Papist (the women in my mother’s family suffered a lot from being raised Catholic so I know what I’m talking about!) I’ve also pointed out that I’m equally anti- all other patriarchal, misogynist and homophobic religions, but he never seems to notice my comments on things like Islam and Ultra-Orthodox Judaism…
Hi Silverwhistle! I always relish your comments at C is F.
Yeah…MB just keeps going lower, then lower, then lower. I too thought she might build on her moment of sanity after the Ryan report, but no. Another soul lost…
Just quickly, my copy of DGHW arrived yesterday, and am very much looking forward to reading it this weekend.
amos,
“I may be wrong, but I think that I know the type.”
Yes, you may be wrong, but I think I know the type, too.
OB: “I always relish your comments at C is F.”
Thanks, Ophelia! Mind, I’m thinking of taking a wee break from it. I’m particularly hacked off with Andrew, who may be better at responding than Mad B, but seems to delight in twisting what you say out of shape to suit his own agenda.
I take breaks from it most of the time, S. I share your puzzlement at the Guardian’s taste for The Bunting School.