Just let me make a request…If that commercial resonated with you in any sort of positive way, if you actually would derive some joy from such activity, please do the following: 1) Take note of my photo (and Rosie’s) on the “Persona” page of this website; 2) Make any and all efforts to avoid coming into contact with us—we don’t want to talk to you.

Okay, that was a little harsh. But I guess it’s just my way of saying that Opensewer fervently, enthusiastically, without reservation, proudly, eagerly, passionately, earnestly, excitedly, industriously, avidly, ardently, zealously, fanatically and feverishly supports Buy Nothing Day, which is today.

It's a curious paradox that the faith of this group compels it to seek approval from a religious body that treats it with such contempt. I wonder if they've ever heard that old Groucho Marx joke -- clearly they ain't interested in belonging to a club that would accept them. NY Times login: opensewer; password: iswatching.

To pull a quote from the article, "The cabaret law itself is absurd. It's totalitarian. Two years ago the only places it was illegal to dance were Manhattan and Afghanistan. And now you can dance in Afghanistan..."

Personally, I think the right to gather and dance is pretty fundamental, up there with free speech and assembly - it's a communal experience that, at its best, is transcendent and spiritual. But the dancing community has come under attack a lot from government lately.

And as Emma Goldman famously said, "If I can't dance, I don't want to be a part of your revolution."

Lastly, the entire point of my blog was to diss the pageant contestants who don't seem to have a clue about the stats of the violence but rather, are going for the glorious Miss Universe Title. I can't respect women - or anyone involved - like that.

So how surprised should we be that there is anger when an insult is perceived to have been made to a powerfully religious group's god or prophet? Similarly, is it so unbelievable that there is violent hostility to religious missionaries (in Lebanon)? Is it any crazier than the belief that drives the missionary work?

We European-Americans, us enlightened, rational folk, should remember our own history of fighting for souls, of the Crusades, the 30 Years War, and the Christian lead genocide of our land's first inhabitants. It's not that long ago. Free enterprise may be our gospel and might bring the internet to Lagos, but what does it do for their souls?

We have our own jihad instigators on this land of the free, too. And sometimes you can't tell them from our enemies.

So far, I find Richard Goldstein’s take on M&M’s current fame to be the most in line with my notions on the subject—I wish I were as articulate:

"What does it mean when our most powerful public reveries are dedicated to male dominance and female submission? This is the crucial question posed by the triumph of Eminem—one most critics won't touch. Instead, they ratify the consensus, making it legit. Male dominance, the populism of fools, becomes something to celebrate. And when culture is on the same page as politics, you've got hegemony."

"In the 1920s, John B. Watson, a president of the American Psychology Association who dreamed of motherless baby farms, warned: 'When you are tempted to pet your child remember that mother love is a dangerous instrument.' Sounds a little crazy these days, but we have a man who tortured monkeys to thank for changing this attitude.

Finally, let's talk about the real issue here, which really amazes me: Chicks dig him.

Whether you're with him or against him, bunches of articles here, here and here. Enjoy.

-- That's Yann Martel, the Canadian writer, oozing ego by way of explaining the inspiration behind his $75k-Man-Booker-Prize-winning novel, Life of Pi, which recounts the adventures of an Indian boy shipwrecked with a tiger. Scliar's book, published in Brazil in 1981 (and now out of print), told the tale of a Jewish boy shipwrecked with a panther. Ring any bells? Here's some more choice Martel:

"Oh, the wondrous things I could do with this premise. I felt that same mix of envy and frustration I had felt with Mishima's The Sailor Who Fell From Grace With the Sea, that if only I had thought of it I could have done something great with it. But — damn! — the idea had been faxed to the wrong muse.... I didn't really want to read the book. Why put up with the gall? Why put up with a brilliant premise ruined by a lesser writer."

Such bombast might be forgiven in a writer like Nabokov (whose muse never barked up the wrong fax). Creative juices are mysterious juices, and it's hard to say at this point if Martel is guilty of anything but a cretinous lack of humility. But if you're going to win awards for the "inventiveness" of a borrowed premise, and then provide source details that don't add up, it might help if your novel wasn't such a bore.